I think that's a bit backward. It's more likely that those who choose whatis released when want the ability to say "nominated for six Golden Globes" or ride the Oscar nomination of an actor/actress. Movies like "Cold Mountain," "Mystic River," and "Lost in Translation" aren't going to get the viewers that an epic like "Lord of the Rings" will, and critical acclaim doesn't go as far in June as it does in December-February.
D
At 06:56 AM 1/5/2004 -0500, William Dickens wrote:
Sure it does if you think that high box office movies are also likely to be prize winners! Everybody wants to release their film at Christmas, but unless it is really really good you know that you are going to play second fiddle to the good movies. Thus you release at some other time if you aren't going to do well at the box office. - - Bill
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 01/05/04 01:14AM >>> But this wouldn't explain the clustering of *plausible prize-winners* (many of which are not big grossers) around Xmas.
----- Original Message ----- From: William Dickens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Saturday, January 3, 2004 9:55 am Subject: Re: Oscar Political Business Cycle
> I thought the explanation for the grouping of releases around > holidays was that that was when the box office was biggest. Why > release movies at any other time? If you have a movie that isn't > that great you release it at another time when the competition > won't be as strong for first run box office. > - - Bill Dickens > > William T. Dickens > The Brookings Institution > 1775 Massachusetts Avenue, NW > Washington, DC 20036 > Phone: (202) 797-6113 > FAX: (202) 797-6181 > E-MAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > AOL IM: wtdickens > > >>> Bryan Caplan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12/31/03 02:07AM >>> > The Political Business Cycle story has not fared well empirically > in recent years (though Kevin Grier has done interesting work on > Mexico's PBC). But it seems overwhelming in the Oscars. It seems > like roughly half of the big nominees get released in December. > What gives? Is there any way to explain this other than Academy > voters' amnesia? > > I guess there is a small intertemporal benefit - if you could win > Best Picture of 2004 with a January 2004 release, or Best Picture > of 2003 with a December 2003 release, the present value of the > latter prize would presumably be higher. But can that one year's > interest (presumably adjusted for a lower probability of winning > due to tighter deadlines) explain the December lump? > > >
