Veksner: The Hollywoodisation of Advertising
October 14 2013, 3:54 am | | 1 Comment
By Simon Veksner,
Head of Ideas,
Naked Communications
Hollywood now generally makes either big-budget spectaculars, or much cheaper indie fare, with very little in the middle.
And I reckon advertising is going the same way.
1 Comment
I respectfully disagree with this article and with the statement that 10-100 million films are almost nonexistent. Hollywood is returning to making more films at this price range than they have in many years. While tentpole blockbusters are alive and well, more 10-100 million are being made than ever and its affecting the less of the smaller indie films, horror films aside.
Also in the commercial space, at least in the US, we are seeing the biggest budget TV ads decreasing while content pieces increasing in budget and scope.
A look at an abbreviated list from this year alone of hollywood feature budgets shows a tremendous amount of films falling in the 10-100 million range.
Sandra Bullock’s The Heat – 43 Million
We’re The Millers – 37 Million
The Conjuring – 20 Million
Identity Thief – 35 Million
Grown Ups 2 – 80 Million
Despicable Me 2 – 76 Million
Now You See Me – 75 Million
Lee Daniels’ The Butler – 30 Million
This Is The End – 30 Million
Olympus Has Fallen – 70 Million
42 – 40 Million
Planes – 50 Million
Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs 2 – 78 Million
2 Guns – 61 Million
Mama – 15 Million
Safe Haven – 28 Million
This list goes on and on.
I’m hopeful and encouraged by work that has come across our desks as of late. More focus on funding integrated projects properly and more realistic/healthy live action budgets in general. There are brands still looking for no money freebies and I’m seeing more prod co’s than ever turn that work down, and rightfully so. No one should work for free or lose money to produce a project for another corporation.
Advertising is a business. Its not a charity. Just because its a creative industry doesn’t mean it should be free. Its not art. Its advertising.