Culture Hollywood Is Cranking Out Original Movies. Audiences Aren’t Showing Up. - New movies based on fresh ideas are fizzling at the box office

By Ben Fritz
April 13, 2025 2:17 pm ET

1744720148344.webp
Director Christopher Landon with Meghann Fahy, who stars in the thriller ‘Drop.’ Photo: Bernard Walsh/Associated Press

LOS ANGELES—When director Christopher Landon introduced his new thriller, “Drop,” before its premiere at the Chinese Theater on Hollywood’s Walk of Fame, he had a warning for the packed auditorium.

“It’s really hard out there for an original movie,” he said, urging everyone who liked the Universal Pictures release to “scream it from the rooftops” and on social media.

“Drop” opened this weekend to an estimated $7.5 million domestically, one of two new movies based on fresh ideas that fizzled at the box office. The other was Disney’s “The Amateur,” a spy thriller adapted from a little-known 1981 book, which opened to an estimated $15 million.

After years of gripes from average moviegoers and Hollywood insiders alike about the seemingly nonstop barrage of sequels, spin offs and adaptations of comic books and toys, the film industry placed more bets on original ideas.

The results have been ugly.

Nearly every movie released by a major studio in the past year based on an original script or a little-known book has been a box-office disappointment. Before this weekend’s flops were Warner Bros. Discovery’s“Mickey 17” and “The Alto Knights,” Paramount’s “Novocaine,” Apple’s “Fly Me to the Moon,” Amazon’s “Red One,” and the independently financed “Horizon: An American Saga Chapter 1” and “Megalopolis.”

1744720153948.webp
Jack Quaid in ‘Novocaine.’ Photo: Paramount/Everett Collection

Jason Blum, who produced “Drop” and built his company Blumhouse largely on original horror franchises, said audiences’ preference for known properties has made it harder to release original movies in theaters, “even though that’s where some of the most exciting and risky storytelling still lives.”

Need for advertising​

Getting people into theaters more frequently is a priority for a movie industry still recovering from the pandemic. Box-office revenue in the first three months of this year in the U.S. and Canada was the lowest it has been, excluding the pandemic, since 1996.

1744720215915.webp

t the CinemaCon industry convention in early April, theater owners said they welcome more original films, but only if they are backed by robust advertising campaigns. Building buzz for a new film in a media environment fractured between YouTube, TikTok, streaming and sports is tough, particularly when it is an unknown title.

“We’re opening films that have almost zero awareness,” said Bill Barstow, president of Main Street Theatres, a small Nebraska-based chain.

Many consumers are content to wait until an original motion picture is available to rent online a few weeks after its theatrical release or to stream on a service like Netflix in a few months.

‘Creating new franchises’​

The only films succeeding in the current environment are those with built-in audiences, like “A Minecraft Movie,” which was released in early April and has grossed more than $280 million domestically. And these days, even franchises can be far from a sure thing. Long-running series such as Marvel and DC superheroes and live-action remakes of Disney animated classics are showing their age and proving unreliable at the box office.

Studios say they have little choice but to make more original movies they hope will buck the odds.

1744720252960.webp
‘A Minecraft Movie’ has grossed more than $280 million domestically. Photo: Warner Bros/Everett Collection

“Telling original stories and taking risks is the only path toward creating new global franchises,” Bill Damaschke, Warner Bros.’ head of animation, said at CinemaCon.

Some of the increase in original film releases is attributable to Amazon and Apple, which are building film businesses with few well-established franchises. One of the biggest bets on an original film from any company this year is Apple’s “F1,” a June release starring Brad Pitt as a race-car driver.

Amazon hyped 11 coming movies to exhibitors at CinemaCon, of which six were originals. Among traditional studios, Warner Bros. is taking the most risks on originals, with big budget films from directors Paul Thomas Anderson and Maggie Gyllenhaal.

Hollywood’s next original release comes Friday with Warner’s “Sinners,” a horror movie starring Michael B. Jordan. Next month even Marvel, home to Hollywood’s biggest franchises, is taking a gamble with “Thunderbolts,” about a super team brand new to all but the most devoted comic-book readers.

Source (Archive)
 
Alright let's take a look at these flops like we're trying to pick one at the theatre:
DROP: it's like Phone Booth where someone is held hostage via a phone call and forced to do things. Interesting premise, too bad the setting is a woman in a restaurant being forced to kill someone.
THE ALTO KNIGHTS: Robert DeNiro in yet another wop crime movie, without Sorcese to direct.
THE AMATEUR: CIA copaganda featuring white terrorists.
MICKEY 17: boy i sure do want some Worst Korean to tell me all about how capitalism bad. 'Moon' already did the clone thing, too
NOVOCAINE: he can't feel pain which somehow makes him good at fighting. This is just capeshit with a really lame X-man, the kind that would be the janitor at Professor X's mansion.
FLY ME TO THE MOON: possibly the best film on the list, although 'historical romantic comedy drama' is usually not a good sign. Also a space race movie set entirely in the 'background' of a lunar mission can go either way.
HORIZON: definitely something I will like, but I am an inveterate Western-watcher. Normal people may not have the stomach for FOUR Kevin Costner vanity projects. Also the amount of Native bullshit may hurt these movies.
MEGALOPOLIS: come on, man, you can't blame audiences for this one

Two movies I'd care to see, unless one of the really bad-sounding ones happens to have stunning visual work and/or acting in it. Bad news Hollywood: original IPs that suck have always historically flopped!
 
"The Amateur" - a book adaption. Not original idea.
"Mickey 17" - decent premise ruined by overt TDS.
"Red One" - more Dwayne Johnson slop
"Megalopolis" - Coppola masturbating behind the camera for almost three hours. Plus more TDS.

These movies aren't Unforgiven, Blade Runner, The Godfather, Gone With the Wind, Psycho, or Heat.

These are shitty movies. No one cares journo.
 
There's some other things that people don't discuss much that have ruined film

- Botox, surgery, skin care have ruined any movies about the down trodden or that take place before 2015. It completely throws you out. Some examples are the series Love and Death. It takes place in the 1970's but the main female role is played by Elizabeth Olsen who has botox out the ass, lip fillers, and lid/face lifts. No woman in the 70's looks like this. Or the new movie Saturday Night about the first episode of SNL. (It sucks) Im watching thinking what is the problem here, and I realize oh, these actors are supposed to convey degen writers from smoked filled rooms in 1975 but they have the hydrated moisturized skin of millennials.
-CGI. Studios rely way too much on it, and in order to make it look realistic you have to have things be this off putting color pallet that's muddy but colorful. It's gross. All the charm is gone. Bring back props, seriously
- The prolific nature of film. You could watch a movie a day and still not see every good movie that was made between 1920-2010. Many people I know have opted out of modern cinema/tv and are getting in to old shit. It has better pacing, visuals, and less pozzed story telling.
- Story telling for the sake of telling a story is gone now. Almost everything is made with an agenda.
- Hyper cuts. Most movies/tv do this hyper cut thing where every shot lasts less than 2 seconds. Nosferatu and Wednesday are examples of this. It's super jarring and anyone over the age of 30 hates it.

In 2010 the following movies came out - The King's Speech, The Social Network, Winter's Bone, The Fighter, 127 Hours. All of those movies fucking rock, are rewatchable, and have iconic moments. That was only 15 years ago. What the hell happened? Having even one movie half as good as those these days would be a reach. I seriously don't understand how we went downhill that fucking fast. Oh and other movies that came out that year? Black Swan, Inception, and Tangled. Even the slop was pretty captivating.
 
Jason Blum, who produced “Drop” and built his company Blumhouse largely on original horror franchises, said audiences’ preference for known properties has made it harder to release original movies in theaters, “even though that’s where some of the most exciting and risky storytelling still lives.”
@Party Hat Wurmple
You have Megan 2 coming out this year, an original IP made by you guys, that's guaranteed to probably make money.
The irony in what Jason Blum said is that Megan is basically a derivative of the killer doll trope and artificial intelligence becoming sentient trope, essentially taking the plot from the Child's Play remake.
 
The irony in what Jason Blum said is that Megan is basically a derivative of the killer doll trope and artificial intelligence becoming sentient trope, essentially taking the plot from the Child's Play remake.
I don't feel any sympathy for the studio who made 10 Paranormal Activity movies, 7 Purge movies and a TV series, and 7 Insidious movies with a reboot on the way.
 
"The Amateur" - a book adaption. Not original idea.
"Mickey 17" - decent premise ruined by overt TDS.
Mickey 17 is a book adaptation as well. (The novel is Mickey 7) I haven't read it, but the blurb on Wikipedia doesn't suggest the TDS-y plot and there's a direct sequel if the book turns out to be better than the movie. I'm kind of curious to know if the girlfriend having drug fueled sex with the extra Mickey is in the book or if the filmmaker added it in.
 
Mickey 17 is a book adaptation as well. (The novel is Mickey 7) I haven't read it, but the blurb on Wikipedia doesn't suggest the TDS-y plot and there's a direct sequel if the book turns out to be better than the movie. I'm kind of curious to know if the girlfriend having drug fueled sex with the extra Mickey is in the book or if the filmmaker added it in.
I'm willing to bet 100 bucks that wasn't in the book nor was she black
 
There is a scene where the guy grabs a gun in a deep fryer. There is no way to suspend that much disbelief. Pain is not just in your head. It is an indication of damage. While not being able to feel damage might help you in like...a fight where someone punches you in the stomach if you submerge your hand in a deep fryer filled with at temperature oil what you are pulling out is not going to be useful.
I remember there was an old movie about a guy who can't feel pain, and it had a scene of him inspecting his body for bullshit damage (scratches, sores, etc) which could get infected and kill him. It did it damnedest to show that, given that a bullet can kill you all the same whether it hurts or not, the inability to feel pain was a massive disadvantage even in taking revenge or whatever he was doing, not to mention in daily life.

No woman in the 70's looks like this.
And they don't have 70s physiognomy, what was considered attractive back in the day.

We have a similar problem with modern Great Patriotic War (WWII) movies in Russia, all the actresses are whores and all the actors are demifaggots, they don't belong on the front and they don't belong in a movie other than Backdoor Sluts 9.
 
one of two new movies based on fresh ideas that fizzled at the box office. The other was Disney’s “The Amateur,” a spy thriller adapted from a little-known 1981 book,
The Amateur (2025) is a fucking remake, you lying journo. There was a 1981 film starring John Savage and Christopher Plummer.

Not hard to look up, since the original movie is also called "The Amateur" for fucks sake.
 
NOVOCAINE: he can't feel pain which somehow makes him good at fighting. This is just capeshit with a really lame X-man, the kind that would be the janitor at Professor X's mansion.
Didn't Yu Yu Hakusho directly shit all over the idea of "Can't feel pain" being an advantage?
 
Talk about having backed yourself into a corner. When you put out garbage and propaganda you permanently burn a lot of people. Yet at the same time what audiences want seems to be different to what they say they want and I think that is caused by two distinct groups being conflated together. The people who want more original movies tend to have a much higher bar or much more specific criteria for a given genre for what would make a movie "good" for them compared to the average consoomer that will watch whatever slop is put in front of them. It's why Avengers: Endgame grossed ~$2.8B as the 22nd movie in the MCU over a span of about 11 years. They were averaging two major superhero movies per year and the 22nd one in that series one of the highest grossing movies of all time.
People really don't mind sequels and remakes, but you've gotta have a significant enough amount of time between the original and the sequel/remake so people don't perceive it as rushed out or too close together. Take the Avatar sequel. First one came out in 2009, sequel came out 13 years later in 2022. Top Gun is another example. First one was in 1986, second one was in 2022, 36 years later.
The ultimate unfortunate truth is there's a lot of NPCs out there and they see [RECOGNIZABLE THING/BRAND] and go watch it. Compound that with the fact that remakes and sequels are much easier to conceptualize (already established characters, settings, lore, etc.) and therefore are usually less effort to create. It's easy to see why it's so ubiquitous.
 
Last edited:
Back