--- In [email protected], "Stu" <buttspli...@...> wrote: > > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > Stu, is there anything general you can say about > > the percentages in a show's budget? Like how much > > is spent on "star power," how much on writers, and > > how much on actual production? > > A film budget is broken into two parts. "Above the line" and > "Below the line". The "Above the line" group are the producers, > actors, director, and writers. The "Below the line" are the > crew and production costs like camera rentals, stages, location > fees, and so on. Generally in Hollywood the "Above the line" > costs are slightly more than 50% of total. > > For the most part the writers get screwed and much more money > will go to big a name actors because a high paid actor can > bring a project more money and publicity. There are a few good > books on this subject. Adventures in the Screen Trade: William > Goldman is a pretty good one. > > One of the reasons British remakes are the fashion these days > is that they don't have to pay a writer development fees to > come up with something new. Much easier to license a British > show and a pay a writer a few weeks work to adapt it.
Thanks. That helps to clear up some things I've often been curious about. > > As shown by the fate so far of "Kings." One of the > > most interesting shows I've seen come from mainstream > > television in years, and it's toast. Then again, no > > one seems to have watched it, which shows the if the > > audience prefers to eat shit, few are going to try to > > serve them more nourishing meals. > > I tried watching Kings and lost interest quickly. Seemed > very "Bush era" once we moved passed it. Seemed very *Shakespearean* to me. And the times and courtly intrigues he wrote about would have fit very well into the Bush era. > > On the other hand, Dollhouse survived. That's encour- > > aging. I liked it. > > I didn't like the premise of Dollhouse. The situation > was sort of a high tech whore house. That's probably why I liked it. :-) I don't know whether you've been following things around here, but my new role on FFL is Satan. According to some, anyway. :-) > Saw "The Soloist" yesterday and really enjoyed it. I > liked Joe Wrights other movies like Atonement and Pride > and Prejudice, this film had some really nice musical > moments that got abstract. The story of the reporter > and the homeless guy had a lot of heart. It takes you > into a world one rarely gets a glimpse at. Robert Downey > and Jamie Fox were really good. I have a copy of this, but haven't gotten around to watching it. I'm a big fan of both Downey and Fox, and I expect it to be good. Good to see you back here, contributing some balance back into the mix. I more than under- stand why Curtis is taking some "time off," but his presence and sense of balance is sorely missed.
