Romance And Cigarettes

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Romance And Cigarettes

    As someone who has posted time and again about my puzzlement at the difficulty in independent filmmakers getting distribution (puzzlement because I don’t view the production of >$5M films as a risky venture**) I take the treatment of ‘Romance And Cigarettes’ as a sign that the future of independent filmmaking is bleak if not already dead.

    If a film, directed by John Turturro, executive produced by the Coen brothers, starring James Gandolfini, Susan Sarandon, Kate Winslet and Christopher Walken, and well-received by festival audiences can’t get distribution, then how can anyone without A-list connections hope to ever do it?

    Romance And Cigarettes was produced by the United Artists wing of MGM, who were then bought out by Sony, who promptly killed the film. They wouldn’t release it, and wouldn’t even screen it, which means Tuturro couldn’t even count on free advertising in the way of newspaper reviews. Sony is offering the US rights to the film for $3M, but no one will buy it (the logic being, if Sony didn’t want it, why would I?).

    Mel Gibson has bought the foreign rights and already made most of his money back, before dvd.

    Anyway, as I’ve asked many times before here, where are the new Harvey Weinsteins of the world? You can’t lose money on a 3 million dollar film. It’s impossible. So why is no one fostering these films? I’m not saying it’s Sony’s duty, but then why do they insist on buying up the catalogs of companies who do care just to kill them?

    Anyway, here is the associated NY Times story:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/02/movies/02lidz.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&ref=movies&a dxnnlx=1188741917-LqdGICLmW9dFSsMQDOe0iA

    It has a somewhat happy ending. Adam Sandler, who is currently shooting a project for Sony, has stepped in and flexed his muscle on Tuturro’s behalf.

    As a result, Sony has agreed to show Romance And Cigarettes for one month at New York’s Film Forum, thus getting it some press and allowing it avoid that ‘straight to dvd’ stigma.

    If there is anyone in NYC interested in seeing this with me (the film itself sounds just weird enough to be interesting) please let me know, I would love to go.





    **as long as there is a great script, I mean. Good actors will usually work for scale if you do.
    Last edited by kintnerboy; 09-02-2007, 08:29 AM.

  • #2
    Re: Romance And Cigarettes

    Maybe it's not getting theatrical distribution because the film is okay, not great, but okay. I liked it but wouldn't have wanted to go and see it in the cinema. I can't see it as a big hit theatrically so I see why it's gone straight to DVD.
    Blog: http://writinglounge.blogspot.com
    Email: kidcharlemagne108[at]yahoo[dot]co[uk]

    "What is your greatest ambition? To become immortal and then die." - Breathless

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Romance And Cigarettes

      It got a theatrical release on the Art House circuit in the UK - I missed it, unfortunately, when it hit my town.

      One of my favorite Turturro movies, BOX OF MOONLIGHT, written/directed by Tom DiCillo, only got a one week run in London (at one, or two places) on its release which was a crying shame. Caught that one though.
      "I blame Le Kilt. If the hot or not thread is anything to go by, we all assumed areola were against the rules. It's a slippery nipple, um, slope." - BROUGHCUT

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Romance And Cigarettes

        What happened to the movie totally sucks but it does seem like a hard sell. A musical in which James Gandolfini gets an elective circumcision? Pitched as "'The Honeymooners' meets 'The Singing Detective,'"? To make back $3 million it would need to gross what, $7.5 mil to cover the theater's take, and the cost of prints and marketing?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Romance And Cigarettes

          I think I understand what you guys are trying to say, but you're completely missing (or ignoring) the point at hand.

          First, the point here is not whether it will be "a big hit-. There are other reasons to make films besides profits. The Coen brothers have never had a big hit. Woody Allen has never had a big hit... (And no, the film would not have to gross 7.5 million to makes it's money back. $3 million dollars is easily earned from tv broadcasts and dvd rentals / sales). I'll say it again. It is IMPOSSIBLE for quality films made for under $5M to lose money.

          But in order to avoid the 'direct to dvd' label, films need to have a theatrical release. Also, direct to dvd films will not be reviewed by national critics (costing them credibility) will not make it onto any year-end 10 best lists (free advertising) , and are ineligible for awards.

          Second, the cost of prints and advertising to release this film in 12 cities would be, what, $100,000 ? Big deal. The NY Times feature probably just sold 10,000 tickets, and it was free. If the movie doesn't do well, cut your losses and prep the dvd. If it's a sleeper hit, it's found money. Again, zero risk.

          James Gandalfini made another film this year (also for Sony, the same company squashing Romance And Cigarettes). It was called Lonely Hearts, and it was a huge box office bomb. Releasing it was a big risk (it was not screening well), yet Sony went right ahead and did it anyway. Doesn't make sense.

          Anyway, my point here wasn't to invite you to criticize Romance And Cigarettes. I was just pointing out that opportunities for independent filmmakers continue to dwindle. I keep thinking that this is a message board for future writers and directors who might care about the marketplace, but I'm usually wrong.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Romance And Cigarettes

            Originally posted by le kilt View Post
            It got a theatrical release on the Art House circuit in the UK - I missed it, unfortunately, when it hit my town.

            One of my favorite Turturro movies, BOX OF MOONLIGHT, written/directed by Tom DiCillo, only got a one week run in London (at one, or two places) on its release which was a crying shame. Caught that one though.


            Box Of Moonlight was great. I also liked Walken in Scotland, PA.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Romance And Cigarettes

              Originally posted by kintnerboy View Post
              First, the point here is not whether it will be "a big hit-. There are other reasons to make films besides profits. The Coen brothers have never had a big hit. Woody Allen has never had a big hit... (And no, the film would not have to gross 7.5 million to makes it's money back. $3 million dollars is easily earned from tv broadcasts and dvd rentals / sales). I'll say it again. It is IMPOSSIBLE for quality films made for under $5M to lose money.

              But in order to avoid the 'direct to dvd' label, films need to have a theatrical release. Also, direct to dvd films will not be reviewed by national critics (costing them credibility) will not make it onto any year-end 10 best lists (free advertising) , and are ineligible for awards.

              Second, the cost of prints and advertising to release this film in 12 cities would be, what, $100,000 ? Big deal. The NY Times feature probably just sold 10,000 tickets, and it was free. If the movie doesn't do well, cut your losses and prep the dvd. If it's a sleeper hit, it's found money. Again, zero risk.
              I completely sympathize/empathize with you but I'm not sure it's true that indies are doing so bad these days. But it is more difficult overall for indie filmmakers to get distribution not because of anything bad the studios or distributors are doing but because audiences are shying away from 'ordinary' or 'small' movies on the big screen and are watching this stuff on DVD or movie channels or online. Although box office has climbed the past three years, this has been driven mostly by blockbusters and strong mainstream genre work.

              You say the Coen Bros and Woody Allen have never had big hits, but there's a difference between how you see these artists and how the industry sees them. The inside clique of the industry comprises a bunch of people you don't usually meet, the insurers and bond guarantors and others, and then the studio insiders. Everyone on the industry is rated by these people and a lot of their work is risk assessement, whether it's a $5m film or a $200m. Coens and Allen keep getting work and distribution because: they always deliver within budget and on schedule. These criteria feature very high on the list when a filmmaker is being considered. Then of course, do the films make a return on the investment and again with these guys, yes.

              I'm not sure why you feel it's impossible for quality films under $5m to lose money because they do it all the time. The term quality is too subjective but for argument sake, plenty of 'quality' films do not interest a wide audience. Quality doesn't always equal commercial, and it's a commercial proposition however you look at it. Many low budget films are not even fit for a limited DVD release. Using your $3m example, yes it would need to gross $7.5m before the books would start to balance, and prints and marketing are more expensive than you state.

              Similarly, direct to DVD is a commercial decision, not a creative one, and while it may lack prestige it's where a lot of films manage to break even, whether or not they had a theatrical release.

              I support your cause, but the fact is too many people underestimate what makes a quality film that audiences will like. Too many people want to be filmmakers just because they want to be filmmakers and have their moment in the spotlight, but they have nothing to say, no deep feeling about anything including the craft itself. But in a free society who's to say they shouldn't make films. But crap films have always been made and the industry has always had the task of trying to filter out work with commercial potential.

              There's something else a lot of people don't see. Most film shoots end with the director and others happy with what they've got. Mostly they go into post on an upbeat note. Little do they know. People have had the most horrendous awakenings in post production. All that cool stuff, those brilliantly delivered lines, smooth camera moves, cool jokes and reactions, tense moments - they've suddenly all turned to crap. Nobody knows why, the editor is being blamed, but he/she manages to shift blame to the writer, then the lead actor is the problem, then the focus puller, then the writer again.... In summary, there's an intuitive sense of the craft that too many filmmakers don't have and will never understand they don't have. Even the best filmmakers take a tumble now and then and the rest of us can expect that and more.

              I don't mean to sound cynical (I am) but it's difficult to see how else the industry could work. It's the nature of the people it attracts, it's the nature of what they produce, and it's the nature of how audiences respond.
              "Friends make the worst enemies." Frank Underwood

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Romance And Cigarettes

                Both the Coen brothers and Woody Allen both get their financing from outside the USA (despite the fact that the Coens keep their budgets under 10M and have never lost money.)

                I will agree that the surge in box office is being driven by blockbusters and strong mainstream genre work. Since that's all that's getting produced, it would kinda have to be.

                I don't know what kind of marketing campaign you're thinking of. A 35mm film print costs around $1,000. The rest could be spent on small newspaper ads. Most indie film promotion is done (for free) on the internet. That's where I find out about new films.

                And you skipped right over the most important point in my post.
                If the risk-assessment gatekeepers you speak of keep such a tight rain on the industry that established, award-winning directors can't get distribution for low budget, low-risk films, how do bigger budget, ill-concieved, non-commercial films by unknown directors (I'm talking about Lonely Hearts here) get pushed right through?

                It just seems like part of the way Hollywood protects it's own (ie. Keeping outsiders from threatening their jobs) is by keeping everything secret. Perpetuate the myth that filmmaking is so difficult and complex that it can only be understood by a select few. Perpetuate the myth that all films lose money (and unless you can afford a forensic accountant, that myth will persist).

                Instead of sharing information that could be helpful, keep the bar for entry set high.

                Thank god , i suppose, for anti-trust laws, or the studios would still own the theaters.

                That's all from me on this subject. It's actually quite boring. The good news is, Tuturro succeeded in getting his film into at least one theater. I am going to go support it.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Romance And Cigarettes

                  Just so I got the formula right:

                  > To make back $3 million it would need to gross what, $7.5 mil to cover the theater's take, and the cost of prints and marketing?

                  Double the budget (theater owners typically taking 50 percent) and add 1/2 the budget for prints and marketing?

                  I'd like to see this if/when it hits DVD.
                  Last edited by beejay; 09-02-2007, 07:20 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Romance And Cigarettes

                    Originally posted by beejay View Post
                    Just so I got the formula right:

                    > To make back $3 million it would need to gross what, $7.5 mil to cover the theater's take, and the cost of prints and marketing?

                    Double the budget (theater owners typically taking 50 percent) and add 1/2 the budget for prints and marketing?

                    I'd like to see this movie if/when it hits DVD.
                    Don’t say if!… it will be on dvd soon enough.

                    As far as budget vs. gross goes, this to me falls under the heading “a little knowledge is dangerous” in the sense that everyone thinks they are an expert because they know that studios and theater chains split the ticket sales 70/30 in the first week, 60/40 in the second week, and 50/50 thereafter. That way if a film bombs right away, the studio gets a bit more of their investment back.

                    So anyone with an internet connection can go over to Box Office Mojo and figure out how much a film has “made”…

                    Except that’s not true (which is why I say it’s dangerous).

                    Producers get their production budgets by pre-selling foreign rights, tv rights, dvd rights, ancillary rights, and that info’s all private. No one knows who made what.

                    All of Kevin Smith's movies have bombed at the BO, yet he keeps getting funded because he sells so many dvd's. How many? No one but Harvey Weinstein knows that.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Romance And Cigarettes

                      By the way, regarding the Coen bros, I was going to quote this from the article in my original post but I forgot.

                      "Basically we told John, 'Use our names and see where it gets you,' - said Joel Coen. His brother, Ethan Coen, said that was the extent of their involvement. "Honest to God we did no work,- he said. "But since the movie turned out great, we're prepared to take the lion's share of the credit. We're not complete ignoramuses.-

                      Which to me sounds like a diplomatic way to distance themselves from the movie. It's not exactly a Coen Brothers film.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Romance And Cigarettes

                        Originally posted by kintnerboy View Post
                        As far as budget vs. gross goes, this to me falls under the heading “a little knowledge is dangerous”
                        Yeah, agreed. I was using the "must make 2.5x the production budget to break even" rule but obviously nobody really knows all of the numbers involved. Still, the point stands that a $3 million movie doesn't need to show a $3 milllion gross on Box Office Mojo to break even. There are more costs involved.
                        Last edited by P.G. Bauhaus; 09-02-2007, 08:56 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Romance And Cigarettes

                          Originally posted by P.G. Bauhaus View Post
                          By the way, regarding the Coen bros, I was going to quote this from the article in my original post but I forgot.

                          "Basically we told John, ‘Use our names and see where it gets you,’ ” said Joel Coen. His brother, Ethan Coen, said that was the extent of their involvement. “Honest to God we did no work,” he said. “But since the movie turned out great, we’re prepared to take the lion’s share of the credit. We’re not complete ignoramuses.”

                          Which to me sounds like a diplomatic way to distance themselves from the movie. It's not exactly a Coen Brothers film.

                          You’re right. I never meant to imply that they made it. It’s just that they know what BS the business is, so they’re trying to help Tuturro out any way they can. Same with Adam Sandler (who worked with Tuturro in Mr Deeds).

                          Sometimes, the only way you can get anything done is by strong-arming a studio.

                          Coppola refused to make Godfather 2 until Paramount agreed to finance The Conversation. When you have clout, you have to exploit it.

                          I just wish more people would do it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Romance And Cigarettes

                            Here is a recent article from the Village Voice, about the current state of independent film distribution in NYC:

                            http://www.villagevoice.com/film/0735,kaufman,77624,20.html

                            It seems that lots of independent theaters are going by the wayside, being replaced by Starbucks and condos, but apparently there is something even odder going on that I didn’t know until now.

                            A couple of “independent” theaters in New York are actually in bed with cable tv companies (the IFC Center with Cablevision, and Landmark Theaters with HDNet) who use the theaters to premier ‘day and date’ films from their respective tv channels.

                            That’s some kind of new business model where a movie is released on tv, dvd and in theaters all at the same time, to maximize advertising exposure.

                            Which sounds like a good thing, except that the theaters don’t have a choice in the matter. They have to exhibit the films, even though many aren’t up to the quality of other studio films. The theater managers are mad because sometimes more deserving films get bumped out to appease the large media corporations.

                            Good gravy. What’s next?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Romance And Cigarettes

                              Landmark and HDnet are both owned by Mark Cuban who is bad news for independent films in my opinion. His way of supposedly helping indie films is by "allowing" filmmakers to buy screening space in Landmark theaters. It's basically what has always been known as four-walling, wrapped up in the warm and fuzzy name "Truly Indie." It's nothing but a vanity press for indie filmmakers and shifts all of the risk onto filmmakers themselves with the exhibitor offering no promotion in return.

                              http://www.markcubanhasnoclothes.com/index2.html

                              http://www.mcnblogs.com/mcindie/arch...uly_indie.html

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X