Rethinking the Future of Filmmaking: Embracing Originality in a Risk-Averse Industry

In an era where the movie industry is increasingly dominated by sequels, reboots, and adaptations, a former studio executive has shed light on the alarming decline of original, studio-backed projects. David Beaubaire, a veteran producer, has conducted a comprehensive study that reveals the stark reality facing filmmakers and audiences alike.

Uncovering the Dearth of Original Studio-Backed Films

The Shifting Landscape of Film Development

The film industry has long been a high-stakes gamble, with development processes that can take years and cost millions of dollars. However, Beaubaire's study has uncovered a troubling trend: original studio-backed projects now account for a mere 10% of the total films released or slated for release between 2022 and 2026 by major studios.

This shift is not limited to a single studio or individual; it is a systemic problem that has taken hold across the industry. Beaubaire's findings suggest that the "fear and danger" of a pet project becoming a flop often outweighs the potential benefits of a hit, leading studios to become increasingly risk-averse and conservative in their approach to film development.

The study examined 505 films from major studios, and the results paint a concerning picture. While some original projects, such as Paramount's "The Lost City" and "One Love: Bob Marley," or Universal's "Cocaine Bear," have found modest success, the majority of the remaining films were either sequels, adaptations, or acquired from specialized divisions or festivals, with pre-attached talent and directors.

The Challenges Facing Indie Studios

The study also looked at the role of independent studios, such as A24 and Neon, in the development of original content. While these distributors have had some success with internally developed projects, such as Neon's "Cuckoo" and A24's Best Picture winner "Moonlight," the report suggests that most indie studios are not designed for intensive in-house development.

Instead, these smaller studios often acquire projects that have already been nurtured and financed elsewhere, such as Neon's acquisition of the hit horror-thriller "Longlegs" and the upcoming "The Monkey." Similarly, other indie distributors like Magnolia, Bleecker Street, and IFC Films have found success by picking up films from festivals and other external sources.

Beaubaire argues that this model may not serve the next generation of visionary filmmakers, as the lack of studio-backed development opportunities could hinder the emergence of the next J.J. Abrams or Quentin Tarantino.

Exceptions to the Rule

While the overall trend is concerning, Beaubaire does highlight a few exceptions to the rule. He singles out companies like Blumhouse, Illumination, and Pixar as smaller studios that have successfully cultivated original franchises and established strong brand identities.

In contrast, Beaubaire notes that Disney, the industry's dominant force, has not launched a new, original live-action franchise in two decades, further underscoring the industry's reliance on familiar IP and risk-averse strategies.

Seizing the Opportunity

Beaubaire and his company, Sunset Media, see this shift in the industry as an opportunity to make a difference. They are committed to financing and developing original ideas, allowing them the time and resources to mature and flourish.

Beaubaire believes that while there is still a place for tentpole films and IP-driven projects, audiences are craving originality. He argues that by focusing on the product before the platform, studios and independent distributors can better serve the needs of filmgoers who are hungry for fresh, innovative stories.

As Beaubaire aptly states, "People complain there's nothing to see. We should go back to [originality]." His study serves as a wake-up call for an industry that must adapt to the changing tides of audience preferences and the need to nurture the next generation of visionary filmmakers.