Development Slates Shrinking As Film Remakes, Sequels Dominate

Developement Hell Hollywood Freeze

Budgets have shriveled so much even superhero funding is hard to come by

The art of the pitch is fast disappearing in the movie business. No longer can a nimble storyteller pop loglines like “Godzilla meets Dr. Dolittle” or “Bulworth marries Catwoman” and depart with a fat fee.

In fact, development budgets have shriveled so much that even superhero funding is hard to come by. While studios are eager to keep pushing their metallic metrics — “Man of Steel” or “Iron Man” — the specter of another “Green Lantern” hovers darkly. Warner Bros. has effectively spent the budget of another “Harry Potter” in trying to jostle DC Comics characters back to life or to bring the much-cancelled Justice League into the big leagues.

Thus, even a revered storyteller would think twice about spinning the outline of a drama or comedy to an ADD-afflicted development team. As one high-priced writer told me, “Even if they like your idea, they’ll probably ask me to knock out a free draft.”

On one level, the studios’ wariness is understandable. Five years ago I got my hands on the development slate of a major studio. By 2013, only three of the 50 projects on the list had found their way to production.

Development once held the key to a studio’s future. Stars and filmmakers were under contract and most studios even had a writers’ building to house artisans laboring on the screenplay assembly line.

In recent years, however, studio development teams have become scattershot in their approach. Here are random loglines of current projects: There’s “Earth Dick,” in which an alien race thinks it’s found a savior from planet Earth, only to discover he is really an actor who plays superheroes. Then there’s the high-concept story about a man who saves a stray cat after it’s hit by a car, only to discover he now has nine lives. And the girl who hires a dog trainer to re-program her boyfriend, only to find — I’ll spare you the details.

Hoping for safer ground, some studios prefer to redevelop projects that have been made before. Trouble is many, like “Psycho” or “Sabrina,” don’t fit the recycling formula. Not even David O. Selznick could get a “Gone With the Wind” sequel to work.

Based on conversations with four top production executives, here’s the way development strategy lays out at this moment:

Development slates have been compressed, meaning fewer projects, reduced writing fees and lower expectations from top management. “For a $40 million development budget, you keep the younger executives and filmmakers happy, and pray for an occasional winner,” says one exec.

“We are shortening the gap from the page to the stage,” reports another, meaning his studio has lost its enthusiasm for projects that drift through multiple drafts over several years in development hell. Studios increasingly are making one-draft deals with writers. The first try delivers or the project is cancelled.

“Projects can’t pick up momentum at my studio unless a director becomes attached, and it has to be a director that our studio urgently wants,” comments an executive from yet another studio. Picking up “elements” is all the more difficult because most studios have abandoned housekeeping deals for directors, producers or even stars.

In commenting on all this, executives don’t want to be quoted, as though underscoring that “development” has become a dirty word. Studio hierarchs enjoy talking about hits; they’re even willing to chat now and then about fi lms in production (providing they’re not overbudget.)

As for development — well, it’s all about nurturing talent, not nurturing box office. And what’s talent got to do with the bottom line?

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 7

Leave a Reply


Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. JR says:

    Excellent column. The great irony here, though, is that the development process was never a friend to creativity, the opposite, in fact. More potentially great films were strangled by non-artists than we will ever know. So to see it fade away is encouraging in the sense that we won’t miss the destructive toll it took on nascent projects, but it was also a source of employment that has yet to be replaced.

  2. Ashley duke says:

    Could this usher in the inevitable death of creativity and hollywood itself? I guess a few big budget flop remakes, prequels & sequels will tell.

  3. LOL says:

    Very enjoyable article. Peter Bart is right, American movies are stupid and dumb. I saw the trailer for some Warner Bros. flick called PRISONERS which looked interesting on the basis that it was about characters in a believable situation, but truth is that it looks kind of formulaic as well. There were loads of crap movies like that in the ’90s when I was a kid because you still had a star system in which audiences flocked to movies in which favoured actors appeared. With that kind of system, story and character still had a degree of importance, but nowadays it’s all about brand recognition.

    We need an Arab Spring in Hollywood!

  4. EK says:

    Email screens are bombarded daily by trade news postings of this literary acquisition, that actor’s attachment to something, this director being named for a project, these writers being hired to fashion a project and on and on. If you tracked all of this stuff a very high percentage of the pictures will never get made or, if they do, it will take years to accomplish. Although old-fashioned development deals aren’t prevalent in the form they once were, and pitch meetings are more negotiations than concept-driven, the development process is indeed alive and well. It just works differently nowadays. The past is just that and the future bodes well in the multi-platform universe that’s ever enlarging.

More Biz News from Variety