It’s like in a music video when the artist suddenly pulls out the new Samsung explosive device, and your heart sinks a little.

Not only is it necessary for even decent movies to be packaged within some IP, they also seem to rely on selling ad space within the movie itself.

Very bleak.

  • Gaybees@artemis.camp
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think you’re focusing too much on the ROI and and not the distinction between projected ROI and a guaranteed one. They can expect to make a return, but the cannot do so with any degree of certainty. Whereas with a sponsored segment, that is guaranteed money before the movie even opens.

    And you’re correct, good movies have been made under capitalism. Good movies are also made with sponsored segments. I’m arguing that they’re good despite the pressures of capitalism, not because of it.

    I mean look at Elemental, huge, expensive production, one of the biggest animation houses in America with a history of incredible and influential work, huge media and ad campaigns and yet… it was a flop (at least domestically). I’m sure they expected to make a lot more money than they did.

    The true evil is often banal.

    • imaqtpie@lemmy.villa-straylight.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      The distinction between projected and guaranteed is irrelevant when you’re projected to make a billion dollars. The Barbie IP, paired with the cast and crew, was an absolute juggernaut from the beginning.

      You’re correct in that everything ultimately stems from capitalism, but in this particular instance, certain producers could have made less greedy decisions and the film would have been better for it.

      That’s what this discussion is supposed to be about. You’re kind of talking past OP.