The
Dysfunctional Family-Film Business
By
far the best return on investment comes from G-rated films.
So why aren’t more made?
By Grainger David
January 20, 2005
If
Hollywood were run like a real business—instead of,
say, like a clubby, insecure, award-crazy, star-groveling
high school—where things like return on investment mattered,
there would be one unchallenged, sacred principle that studio
chieftains would never violate: Make lots of G-rated movies.
That's
right, kids. One Hollywood maxim is becoming increasingly
clear with every passing holiday season. No matter how you
slice the movie business—by star vehicles, by budget
levels, by sequels or franchises—by far the best return
on investment comes from the not-so-glamorous world of G-rated
films. The problem is, these movies represent only 3% of the
total films made in a typical year.
Take
2003, the last year for which
Motion Picture Association of America statistics are available.
Of the 940 movies released that year, only 29 were G-rated.
Yet the highest grossing movie of the year, Finding Nemo,
was G-rated.
On
the flip side are the R-rated films, which dominate the total
releases and yet bring easily the worst return on investment.
A whopping 646 R-rated films were released in 2003—69%
of the total output—but only four of the top 20 grossing
movies of the year were R-rated films.
This
trend—G-rated movies are good for business but underproduced;
R-rated movies are bad for business, and yet overdone—is
something that has been driving economists batty for the past
several years. "This is probably the main thing we've learned
about the movie business over this decade," says S. Abraham
Ravid, a finance and economics professor at Rutgers Business
School who has done three statistical studies of the ratings
problem between 1999 and 2004 (one was titled "Are They All
Crazy or Just Risk Averse? Some Movie Puzzles and Possible
Solutions"). "We can't find evidence that stars help a movie,
and we can't find evidence that bigger budgets increase return
on investment. But we do find that G-rated films consistently
outperform all other types of films." Economist Arthur De
Vany at the University of California at Irvine agrees. "G
films dominate everything. They have higher returns at lower
risk. We called that an arbitrage opportunity for Hollywood,
which is basically a risk-free transaction." Says Ravid: "If
I was going to start a studio, it would make only family films."
The
benefits of G movies go beyond the box office, which accounts
for only about 20% of a film's earnings. With merchandise,
DVD sales, and video rentals an increasingly important part
of the business, consider this: When you adjust for inflation,
seven out of the top-ten-performing rentals of all time are
rated G. The other three are PG.
In
light of those numbers, Hollywood's stance sounds a little
bit like Ford saying, "Markets be damned! We're dramatically
increasing the production of little orange two-door coupes—because
we like them the best!" True, you obviously can't fill an
entire slate with cartoons, but there does seem to be a logical
argument that Hollywood is neglecting this market.
If
Tinseltown hasn't quite found G-movie religion, at least PG
films are coming back into favor. Five of the top-ten movies
at presstime were PG or G—Lemony Snicket's A Series
of Unfortunate Events, The Polar Express, National Treasure,
Christmas With the Kranks, and The Incredibles—and
another, The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie, was No. 11.
By year-end, it appears that half the top-ten-grossing films
will be G or PG.
Some
companies are starting to go out of their way for a PG rating.
Nina Jacobson, president of Disney-owned Buena Vista Motion
Pictures Group, cites National Treasure, starring Nicolas
Cage. The movie was produced by Jerry Bruckheimer, who is
known for R-rated macho action movies like Con Air,
The Rock, and Armageddon. Recently, however,
Bruckheimer has been churning out titles like Remember
the Titans and Pirates of the Caribbean. National
Treasure "was a movie that could have gone either way,"
Jacobson says. "There was a little one-liner in the film where
Cage's sidekick jokes that in jail, he's going to be 'Passed
around like a pack of cigarettes.' It didn't service the story,
and we decided to cut it." The film got a PG rating and, despite
lackluster reviews, opened at No. 1—a spot it held for
three weeks.
One
major change to look for is an increase in live-action family
films. Though animated films have tended to be more successful
(just look at the unbroken streak of Pixar hits), they also
cost more and take longer to make. Lately Disney has focused
on movies such as The Princess Diaries and The Rookie.
"We're trying to expand the definition of what a family film
can be, in order to reach a broader audience," says Jacobson.
For next year Disney has lined up Herbie the Love Bug
and The Chronicles of Narnia. Bruckheimer's next film
is Glory Road, a true-story basketball movie. Warner
Brothers has Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, while
New Line is betting on a fantasy series called His Dark
Materials in 2006. All those projects are signs that Hollywood
is catching on—a little. As the legendary mogul Samuel
Goldwyn reputedly observed, "It is better to sell four tickets
than two." Oh, and it doesn't hurt to sell the DVD either.
|