Gilligan's Island Hits the Big Screen

[Deadcat]

One word.......

Why?

Did I miss something? When did the writers go on strike again? Is there really not an original idea left in Hollywood?

I love me some Gilligan's Island. I had the Gilligan shirt and hat and was often called Gilligan growing up because I was goofy and skinny. But how can this possibly be good. I can only see a tragedy that insults the original show's legacy. I see Duke's of Hazzard, Starsky and Hutch, and an assortment of other bad remakes.

Ugh!

[PocketPasser9]

There's an old saying that there's nothing new under the sun. I think Hollywood has really gotten to that point. It's going to get more and more increasingly rare that we anything truly original coming out in the theaters anymore, I fear.

[Bengals1]

The problem with Hollywood is not lack of ideas; it's out of control production costs.

Most movies nowadays cost upwards of 60+ million to make. Toss in the additional costs of printing film, distribution costs, marketing and licensing, advertising etc... and basically you have to double the original cost to put out a movie. So in reality a 60 million dollar movie costs the studio 120millon to put out.

How many movies make over a 100 million? Yes, DVD rentals and sales offset some of that and sales to foreign markets and Pay TV also alleviate some of those costs but the bottom line, and Hollywood is all about the bottom line, it’s hard for most films to make a profit.

With that in mind, Hollywood has become wary of taking chances. It’s simply easier and carries less risk to produce a film that comes to the studio with a built in audience and a proven track record. If you’re pitching a Gilligan’s Island movie you can use the fact that it’s been on TV continually for more than 40 years. Millions have already seen it and are familiar with the characters and plot. It’s been successful in another medium (TV) and has in essence, a built in audience already. The curiosity factor alone will give it a huge opening weekend.

Now waiting in your outer office is another pitchman who wants to make a movie about a group of bomb squad soldiers in Iraq starring a bunch of unknowns caught up in an unpopular war about which several other costly movies about have already bombed.

Which movie idea are you more likely to throw your precious resources behind?

No Country for Old Men, There will be Blood, Babel; all won numerous awards and were critical successes. None made over 100 mil. Star Trek, essentially a remake of the original TV series, raked in the bucks. It will no doubt spawn numerous sequels that done properly, will make millions more for the studio for years to come. Merchandising for the films will be a huge profit generator also, bringing in untold additional millions most of which is pure profit for the studio.

The franchise is in essence, a cash cow for the studio that will pour millions of dollars into its coffers and make everyone who has anything to do with its release look good and make the studios bottom line soar. Hurt Locker and other “Indie” films like it win awards, make little or nothing at the box office and cost the studio that produced it millions in lost revenue. Since it won a best film at the Oscars it will probably break even in the end with the additional DVD rentals and sales such a win brings with it. But I guarantee it will NOT make a profit for whoever released it.

I know it’s not pretty to contemplate but Hollywood and the movie biz is just that, a business. And studio heads whose movies don’t make money don’t remain studio heads for very long. Just like coaches that don’t win games don’t remain head coaches for very long, unless they work for Mike Brown of course…..

[Deadcat]

But in contrast to Star Trek, which was a good movie, you have GI Joe, Snoopy, and tons of other crappy regurgitated ideas that just flat out sucked. I agree Hollywood needs to be smart in choosing it's movies, which makes me question even more, why Gilligan's Island? Really? Really?

[Bengals1]

But in contrast to Star Trek, which was a good movie, you have GI Joe, Snoopy, and tons of other crappy regurgitated ideas that just flat out sucked. I agree Hollywood needs to be smart in choosing it's movies, which makes me question even more, why Gilligan's Island? Really? Really?

GI Joe stunk, it also made money. Transformers 2 was garbage, it was also the highest grossing film of the year. (Avatar was released in 2010)

[jmble]

Actually, Mr movie man, Avatar opened in December of 2009....

[Bengals1]

Actually, Mr movie man, Avatar opened in December of 2009....

Yeah, I thought about that after I typed it but I didn't feel like going back and making the correction since it didn't out gain T2 till after the new year. So my point was and is valid.

[Bengals1]

Oh, and just to prove a point, we're set to begin filming MI-4 this summer with yep, you guessed it, TC himself back in command of the MIF. Apparently his string of flops since leaving Paramount have caused him to bury the hatchet with Viacom CEO Sumner Redstone.

See you at the movies kids.....