Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New Riddick Movie Made Possible By Games?

Posted by Soulskill on from the this-is-why-gamers-are-scarier-than-bikers dept.

Hugh Pickens writes "Scott Harris writes on Moviefone that the economics of Hollywood are often baffling, as DVD sales, broadcast fees and merchandising tie-ins balance against advertising costs and pay-or-play deals to form an accounting maze. The latest example is the untitled sequel to The Chronicles of Riddick, released in 2004 to a slew of negative reviews and general viewer indifference. Despite its hefty $105 million budget, most of which was spent on special effects, the film topped out at a paltry $57 million domestically. So how can a sequel be made if the movie lost money? The answer has to do with ancillary profits from revenue streams outside the box office. While the combined $116 million worldwide probably still didn't cover distribution and advertising costs, it likely brought the film close to even, meaning DVD sales and profits from the tie-in video game franchise may have put the movie in the black. In addition, Riddick itself was a sequel to Pitch Black, a modestly budgeted ($23 million) success back in 2000. Extending the franchise to a third film may help boost ancillary profits by introducing the Pitch Black and Chronicles of Riddick DVDs and merchandise to new audiences, meaning that the new film may not even need to break even to eventually turn a profit for the studio."

12 of 160 comments (clear)

  1. Radical Fucking Concept by PakProtector · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe we could spend another 23 million on the third film, like they did on the original, and instead of all those flashy bullshit effects ADD SOME FUCKING INTERESTING, COMPELLING, WELL WRITTEN PLOT?!

    --

    Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
    man: no entry for woman in the manual.
    "Qua!?"

    1. Re:Radical Fucking Concept by Cryacin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly. Does anybody remember seeing a movie called the Cube?

      Wow. Just wow. What a cool concept. Not going to spoil it for those that haven't seen it, but who would have imagined that a single set. Yes. A single set could be used to produce a compelling, edge of your seat movie plot, and on the budget of an oily rag and a used stick of gum.

      Contrast this with its sequel. Cube 2 - hypercube! High budget, and loads of crap.

      I really thought pitch black was an awesome movie, even if loosely based on the Asimov novel Nightfall. Unfortunately, the sequel didn't measure up to the first movie, but it was entertaining nonetheless.

      Call me a die hard old school kinda guy, but I miss *good* science fiction. As in science fiction that contains plausible science, and good social commentary, not this whole fantasy style Avatar kind of science fiction movie.

      Surely I don't stand alone.

      --
      Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
    2. Re:Radical Fucking Concept by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Riddick being a badass was fine. Riddick being a Magic badass fighting other magic badasses with magic magic magic....

      No.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    3. Re:Radical Fucking Concept by fractoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh! Yes, this, exactly! Riddick was a True Neutral tough guy in a gritty Aliens-esque universe. There was nothing wrong with that. Why the hell does the sequel have him as a ninja shaman fighting against quasi-zombie vampire religious goons? What made them think it was a good idea to turn him from an extremely capable ex-con into a cliche'd "last living survivor of an ancient and powerful uber-race"? Bleh.

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    4. Re:Radical Fucking Concept by cbhacking · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While I agree with the general gist of your comment, I find your beef with Avatar a little ridiculous... you want *more* hard science and social commentary? Heck, 90% of the criticism of Avatar that I've heard is that the social commentary is a little heavy-handed (I disagree, but then I spent most of the movie on the edge of my seat in excitement - I barely even noticed the social aspects until afterwards, which is what I think was intended).

      "Plausible science":
      Slower-than-light starships that take 6 years to reach Alpha Centauri, and have lots of little touches like giant heat-radiation fins.
      Room-temperature superconductor (unobtanium) is the most valuable material known (one of the critical points not mentioned on-screen, but well documented in supplementary material).
      Said superconductor (including mountains largely composed of it) floats when placed in a strong magnetic field.
      Only very brief periods of full darkness on a moon orbiting a gas giant.
      Human-breathable airspaces are pressurized above the external atmosphere, limiting internal mixing of gases in the case of a breach.
      The jungle is *full* of insect life.
      Low gravity allows for huge flying lifeforms and immense trees.
      Consistent language with syntax and grammar.

      OK, some of that is largely just a "did their homework" sort of deal, but there's more. I'm not claiming that the movie required no suspension of disbelief, or that there aren't any holes in the explanations, but it's still a good cut above the majority of science fiction, especially in video.

      "Good social commentary":
      Doing the right thing for your people vs. doing the right thing as a person (patriotism vs. morality).
      Science vs. business.
      Greed as a controlling factor in behavior.
      Property rights vs. access to resources.
      How we treat those we deem primitive, savage, or alien.
      Environment vs. industrialism.

      I could go on a lot longer with this, or flesh out any of those points much more. Suffice to say, there's a lot of good reflections on humanity in there... maybe not quite as much as District 9 (as another recent example) but it certainly wasn't lacking.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
  2. Why all the negativity in the article? by insanecarbonbasedlif · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So some people didn't like the movie? I did, and I know many people who do to. I personally am interested in a third movie for the movie's sake. If you didn't like the second one, don't pay to see the third. You don't have to see movies you don't like. Riddick rocks and anyone that doesn't think so can just ignore it.

    --
    Just because I doubt myself does not mean I find your position compelling.
  3. This would be "Riddick 4". by Pantero+Blanco · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Chronicles of Riddick WAS "Riddick 3".

    1. Pitch Black
    2. Dark Fury
    3. Chronicles of Riddick

  4. Advertised budget != Actual budget by Hadlock · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Anyone who has watched the film industry knows the published budget number have nothing to do with the actual budget. They published 107 million? Actual cost was probably closer to 50 million. Producing such a movie today would probably cost 30 million (what did an episode of BSG cost by the 5th season? 1 million per hour?). Most of the budget is going to be Vin Diesel's fee, after that it's just production cost and advertising. The published cost of the movie will be 100 million again, for tax reasons

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
  5. Re: The Riddick Franchise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I guess you do keep what you kill.

  6. The Chronicles of Riddick by Aceticon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "The Chronicles of Riddick" was a great action movie with a dark Sci-Fi/Fantasy background - in fact it might be quite a unique mix of genres: certainly the (Futuristic Black-Magic) background to the story is way off anything else Hollywood ever made.

    That said, it's not surprising that those that first saw "Pitch Black" and then went to see "The Chronicles of Riddick" as a sequel were disapointed: to put it simply "Pitch Black" was a finelly tuned Horror-Action movie while The Chronicles was more of a Rambo style action movie (chewing gum for the brain) Sci-Fi/Fantasy movie with an anti-Hero as the main character (although Riddick as a character was much more developed in the second movie).

    Personally I thoroughly enjoyed both movies in different ways, although this might be because I first saw "The Chronicles of Riddick" and then went looking for "Pitch Black" instead of the other way around so I didn't saw the second movie in the
    expectation it would be a continuation of the first.

  7. New movie made possible by *really good* games by jparker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Attention every IP holder looking to create licensed games: the reason this worked is that the game was truly excellent. (PC 90, Xbox 88 http://www.gamerankings.com/browse.html?search=chronicles+of+riddick&numrev=3&site=)

    Bad games suck long-term value out of the IP and into short-term profits; great games add enduring value to the IP. I've made games with licensed IP before, and I'm almost certain to do so again, so I care about this sinking in. There are lots of reasons that movie games are usually poor, but one of the biggest is that the license holders think that the added value of the license will make up for a rushed job*. The license will sucker some people into buying, but there's a big cost to that. Please, Hollywood, find a way to work with us so that we can both make great product. There's more fun (and more money) for everyone that way.

    *Why is the job rushed you ask? That's the biggest problem with movie games - differing production cycles. Movies have a really long pre-prod with ~3 guys on it, followed by production in something like 1 yr. Games (good, big, AAA ones) want around 6 months pre-prod with ~10 (plus ideally engine dev with 10-20). Then it's 18-24 months of full production, and you can see where the problem comes in. Especially when the game usually needs to wait to design key assets/areas until they can see what the movie is doing.

  8. Re:Ooh a sequel! by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Star Wars what? There are only 3 Star Wars movies. Star Wars, Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi.

    La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La La