Slashdot Mirror
Rovio's Desperate Push For 'Angry Birds' Movie (venturebeat.com)
An anonymous reader writes:Last year Rovio "cut 213 jobs, affecting all departments except those working on the film and its related projects," remembers VentureBeat, describing their effort to make a movie about three outcast birds on an island of happier birds who all meet in an anger management class. But "Since Rovio funded the entire film, the directors didn't have to answer to an executive committee or a board of trustees..." reports VentureBeat, quoting director Clay Kaytis as saying "We had to make ourselves happy... We were making the films for [ourselves] instead of for a larger entity that expects something in return."
After working for four years from a script by Jon Vitti (a writer for both The Simpsons and The Office), and funding a marketing onslaught that lasted nine months, Rovio finally saw their Angry Birds movie open in this weekend's #1 spot, according to the New York Times. "Most of the 'Angry Birds' financial risk fell to Rovio, the Finnish video game company, which paid $173 million to make and market the movie. As such, Rovio will receive the bulk of any profit."
In China, McDonald's released special Angry Birds burgers with red or green buns...which at least one patron complained made the buns look moldy.
After working for four years from a script by Jon Vitti (a writer for both The Simpsons and The Office), and funding a marketing onslaught that lasted nine months, Rovio finally saw their Angry Birds movie open in this weekend's #1 spot, according to the New York Times. "Most of the 'Angry Birds' financial risk fell to Rovio, the Finnish video game company, which paid $173 million to make and market the movie. As such, Rovio will receive the bulk of any profit."
In China, McDonald's released special Angry Birds burgers with red or green buns...which at least one patron complained made the buns look moldy.
They risked and won, now would they hire those employees back?
...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
...stuff that matters.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
If you look at the cast list; it's actually quite the sausage party: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt19...
Kids are into minecraft now and Angry Birds interest seems to have waned significantly
In China, McDonald's released special Angry Birds burgers with red or green buns...which at least one patron complained made the buns look moldy.
No, Mr. Crabs, it's not tainted meat - it's PAINTED meat!
#DeleteChrome
Of course, females don't get angry. They are the delicate and dainty species. If females ruled the world, there would be no war or violence.
Otoh, blacks do get angry, but it's only because the white man is holding them down. So I'm not sure if that counts.
It was surprisingly good. They actually had pretty reasonable explanations for why the characters have the abilities in the game (or as much as a movie about a bunch of sentient flightless birds and green pigs could have.)
Why does a mobile software shop even have 213 jobs to cut? What are those people doing?
I am probably not their target audience since I have no kids, no smart phone and have never played the game but I wasn't planning on seeing it anyways. It is good to see an independently produced movie make good money though. How long till Di$ney buy them up for a brazillion $'s ?
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
How about an Etch-A-Sketch movie? That sounds just about as exciting.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
I work in West Hollywood. Angry Birds has enjoyed a media blitz here courtesy of the industry at large. its just something that gets done for all films. it can be written off on studio taxes. its surprising to see something like this make #1 though? It certainly speaks to a very talented writers group.
what does not make sense is to go it alone, fire 200 people, and push to deliver a film solely by yourself. Unless,you're taking a page from some of the more cutthroat entities of US Capitalism. Yes, in the short term, doing this can net you a few million in revenue taxed at a very favourable US rate. However, you canned most of your game staff so now what? This was just one film. Blockbuster teams like Weinstein and Warner crank out 4 sequels a year and thats sometimes with recurring losses baked in. those sequels exist only to sell toys and shirts and food. Unless you plan to focus on franchising which takes way more money sunk into branding and advertising, im afraid you just sold the company down shits creek. Or did you want to be a film company? Was this an attempt to get around huge industry margins for films like those out of marvels wheelhouse? Those are unavoidable and it speaks to corporate greed if you did cartwheels to explicitly avoid players in Hollywood.
So yeah, whoever you worked with, it largely wasnt Hollywood. The films marketing consists of a billboard on la brea with a cryptic phrase and a billboard on la cienega with three birds and a charred facade but no mention of the film, its opening date, or even that its a film...
Good people go to bed earlier.
The real test of a movie is how well it performs in the first and second weeks after launch. Word of mouth and all that. Some films like How To Train Your Dragon can recover from a weak opening and show extraordinary strength down the road, but that doesn't happen very often.
The Tomatometer rates Angry Birds at a Rotten 43%. Zootopia, Fresh, at 98%, The Jungle Book, Fresh, at 95% ---- and. if you have taken your kids out to see Zooptopia and The Jungle Book, there isn't much of anything else out there for them right now.
Disney doesn't need Angry Birds.
Not when it is adding originals like Zootopia, Frozen, and Wreak-It Ralph to its animated cannon and vivid live-action remakes of films like Cinderella and The Jungle Book. Not after it after added Pixar, The Marvel Cinematic Universe, Star Wars and Indiana Jones to its roster.
Congratulations to The Angry Birds Movie becoming the new most seen Finnish movie after the previous record holder 2005's Star Wreck: In the Pirkinning.
Number 1 opening weekend, $39 million. It not like they are one of males who is inevitable going to be the loser for president.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
In China, McDonald's released special Angry Birds burgers with red or green buns...which at least one patron complained made the buns look moldy.
Um, they ran out of the special Angry Birds buns an hour before you arrived and ordered your burger, so the green color... yeah. You probably shouldn't have eaten that.
Rovio should have gotten someone like David Lynch to direct.
No, better than that: they should have hired Alejandro G. Iñárritu, the guy who directed Birdman. That would have been a nice tie-in and a more interesting movie.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Wait a minute, I was just able to enter "Alejandro G. Iñárritu" and all the cool little foreign hats on the "n" and the "a" showed up! Did something fundamental change at Slashdot? Have the Slashdot owners been meddling with the primal forces of nature?
You are welcome on my lawn.
Sorry, but there's a ton of bullshit above, and you- you just need to be called out on it.
The films marketing consists of a billboard on la brea with a cryptic phrase and a billboard on la cienega with three birds and a charred facade but no mention of the film, its opening date, or even that its a film...
Oh jesus, seriously? There's a giant billboard on Highland and Hollywood and it's pretty damn clear it's a movie and that the 20th was the opening date. In fact most of the dozens of billboards make that pretty clear. There are billboards all over LA that refer to "the movie" and highlight the opening date. Go on, look at 'em!
The films marketing is just a confusing billboard on la brea? are you fucking kidding me? There are giant buses everywhere around LA and SF too apparently. And that's just the tip of the marketing iceberg. Sony spent $100m according to the article on marketing!
Strike one.
Next, your criticism of "pushing a film by yourself" (and partnering for distribution) as a strategy, well, it's *exactly* how Pixar got their start. They self-produced and distributed through Disney all the way up to about 2006. So again, you don't know what you're talking about..
Strike two.
Yes, in the short term, doing this can net you a few million in revenue taxed at a very favourable US rate.
What does that even mean? You're implying something, but I have no idea what. Worldwide box office receipts are taxed in the country where it is earned, for one thing. Both in sales tax for the person who buys the ticket, and then the distributor pays income taxes-- in some countries like China the government takes a percentage of the distribution itself. Then the distributor is taxed in their country as well when they take the money home. So if Rovio is making money (they are), and they're based in Finland, they'll pay Finnish corporate taxes. Sony will too for box office profits in accordance with their agreement with Rovio. Whoever owns merchandising and other licensing rights and sequels etc. will pay taxes as that makes money across the planet as well.
So.. like, what the hell are you even talking about? Sounds like Rovio put their own skin in the game and now they get to benefit from that. Where's the problem/stupidity and what's the tax break you're referring to?
Blockbuster teams like Weinstein and Warner crank out 4 sequels a year and thats sometimes with recurring losses baked in. those sequels exist only to sell toys and shirts and food.
Wait-- what do you mean by "those movies"-- Weinstein doesn't crank out sequels-- they've had the "Arthur" movies and Hoodwinked Too and that's the only sequels I can think of. Weinstein and WB may make movies to sell toys and shirts (and Food? Huh? You mean tie-ins like Batman themed cereal?). But anyway-- so does Rovio and Rovio does it much more aggressively. Or have you not seen Angry Birds toys, plushies, clothing, etc everywhere you look? Maybe you don't have kids. Hell, I don't have kids and I STILL see those stuffed red birds everywhere.
There is no lack of AB franchising so I seriously don't know what you're talking about.
This is like strike three.
? Was this an attempt to get around huge industry margins for films like those out of marvels wheelhouse? Those are unavoidable and it speaks to corporate greed if you did cartwheels to explicitly avoid players in Hollywood.
This is the most nonsensical part of your post. Making a film OUTSIDE of the Hollywood studio system translates into "corporate greed" ??? What in holy fuck are you talking about? You're suggesting you have to go through the Hollywood corporate system to avoid being corporate?
Never mind the fact
Reminds me of Square, hopefully they'll fair better than Final Fantasy.
This hast to be best result ever. 1 in how many million of millions?
You sound like someone who's intimately familiar with the movie project. A Rovio employee maybe..? :-)
Anyway, very good points there. It's usually rare to se AC's modded up, but I hope you get the necessary bump go counter that awkward rant by GP.
111 million overseas and 39 in USA. Overall, they will probably make double of what they invested. Not bad for a CGI cartoon startup.
Surely they had to know that simply spinning off one variation after another of the same game wasn't going to last forever...
I took the family to see the movie and it was entertaining. Every time I saw the commercial, I kept thinking they needed to have this movie come out 3-4 years ago when the Angry Birds craze was at its zenith. If the movie would have come out then, they would have made a ton (more) money. I guess since it's been in the works for 4 years it was way too far done to cancel it.
What kind of world are we living in where some shitty game you play on your phone gets made into a movie you have to go to a theatre to pay to see?
Some people give me dirty looks when I say that humans are getting dumber, not smarter, but then something like this comes along and proves just how right I actually am.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
You got the link wrong: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1700841/
You're a ridiculous person. If think white and black people hate you equally.
Is it no longer PC to be angry?
We're just supposed to accept all the shit that happens in life, and take happy pills or something?
I'm serious. This is so hypocritical. We can market "angry" birds because it's convenient for them to be angry to make the game storyline work, but then when we're successful, we have to whitewash it, so that the anger is contained and all PC.
Do you think they would have been half so successful with "mellow" birds? WTF?
This world is so full of PC bullshit.
Is it a third rate company? I've not played Angry Birds in a while (I quite when I managed to nuke it and lose my progress), but I though it was a very well done game.
I would guess the poster complained because
while Angry Birds was a very well done game
actually nothing much has happened since (except for a few glorified additional level packs).
Rovio really looks like a single-trick pony.
On the other hand, given the tendency of all the major AAA studios to only exclusively release titles like "Cash Cow Franchise, episode VIII" and not take the slightest risk trying something new or different, Rovio doesn't seem that much abnormal to me.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]