First of all, the profit channels of movies are not rich enough. At present, in China, the main profit channel of movies is still the box office, which accounts for more than 90% of most movie revenues. As you know, a movie with an investment of US$ 65.438+million is hard to make a profit without a box office of RMB 200 million in China. However, domestic films with a box office of 200 million yuan, even in the current market, are still not easy to achieve for most China films.
In addition to the box office, online video can earn a little money (far from TV series), and the sales of broadcasting rights of TV channels (mainly CCTV 6) can also be regarded as a contribution; In addition, the income of American film industry accounts for a large proportion, such as audio-visual sales, pay-on-demand, pay and free TV, overseas copyright sales and derivative products. , has not really become a scale in China. These will undoubtedly increase the risk of fund investment.
Secondly, the standardization and standardization of film production: in fact, it is essentially a human problem. One argument I don't like very much is to discuss the incompetence and shamelessness of China filmmakers. To be sure, filmmakers in China generally lag behind Hollywood, but there are also many knowledgeable and talented filmmakers in China. The problem for film practitioners in China is that they are too fond of managing their films through traditional, relatively "circle" interpersonal relationships and people-oriented and workshop-style ways. This traditional thinking forms a barrier and protective film, that is, anyone who tries to destroy the existing system will pay a huge price. What is not satisfactory is that among the major domestic film and television institutions, Huayi Brothers is the most professional and the closest to Hollywood standards, and even Bona Film, which is listed in North America.
At present, domestic investors, even some old film funds in China, seem to be tolerant of this phenomenon in order to pursue high profits. Of course, as far as I know, they believe in brands, teams and achievements. However, at present, there are no more than five directors with stable box office appeal in China, and even if they invest in their films, it is difficult to ensure the profitability of the department (Flower of War, 1942, etc. ), not to mention other directors and teams. A healthy film fund, whether to choose a team, of course; But more importantly, we need to establish a perfect system. While ensuring the freedom of the creative team, we should improve the producer responsibility system (not the director responsibility system), and improve the financial system through strict supervision and guarantee mechanisms to ensure that every penny is spent in the right place. There are too many gaps between this system and the current barrier model to be filled, and a group of new people of insight are needed to solve the problem.
I often tell others that the most ideal investment film production process should be "movies belong to movies; Finance belongs to finance. " However, in this process, there must be people who know both movies and finance, as a bridge and channel for communication between producers and investors, in order to break the current "conflict of interests" between them. If you put this in China, the problem will come; China is not short of people who understand film and finance, but he has profound attainments in both aspects, and few people are willing to do this job. Moreover, it is not easy to change the thinking of filmmakers who have long been accustomed to traditional crafts. If we copy the western standardization system stiffly, it will inevitably cause great friction; It will take time to train a group of filmmakers who are familiar with the western model and truly form the mainstream operation mode of the film circle. Many people are doing this now, but it is far from a relatively mature stage, let alone the harvest season.
Third, it is the support of other industries and policies besides the film industry. Of course, great progress has been made in this regard. For example, there is no shortage of cinema resources in China, and there are many professional distribution and marketing teams. But even this would not be enough
For example, in recent years, the domestic industry has been discussing the feasibility of film completion guarantee or film completion insurance. For the film completion deposit, please refer to how the film completion insurance is realized in China. Among them, Raymond Wang and Yi's answers are not repeated here. The importance of film completion insurance lies in that the system can greatly protect the interests of investors and producers at the same time. This system has become the default rule of many foreign film production companies and investors, so that many directors' teams or investors will not sign the agreement before the producers confirm the purchase of film completion insurance. It is very difficult for foreign film funds accustomed to this mode to suddenly come to China, a relatively irregular market. The establishment of film completion insurance system requires not only the cooperation of insurance companies, but also a thorough understanding of the concept of film completion insurance or finished film guarantee by domestic producers. This goes back to the second point about standardization and people.
Moreover, the profit channel mentioned in the first point is not only a problem of the film industry. At present, the proportion of people in China who are willing to pay for online movies and TV plays is very low (millions are hundreds of millions of netizens). When I was chatting with some friends yesterday, I also mentioned that some people might be willing to pay for explosive movies like A Journey to the West, but if the scope is expanded, fewer people will be willing to pay. In this case, more often, online video companies and film copyright owners talk about buyout fees, not profit sharing. What about the cost of the buyout? The online video copyright price of most movies is mostly in six figures, which may only be the price of one or two episodes of some popular dramas (because TV dramas are obviously much more helpful to video websites), far less than the price of some popular variety shows. For a film project that costs tens of millions, such a return is just a drop in the bucket. As for pay-per-view movie channels, overseas copyright sales, the development of derivatives and derivative industries, copyright protection and many other aspects, there are too many places that need the cooperation of other industries. Not even the film media and the film review system, let alone comparing Hollywood. Indeed, even our neighbors Japan and South Korea are far ahead of us.
The fourth point is the development direction of the film fund itself. I have answered in other answers before (will 3D martial arts films become a new film genre? ) have mentioned something similar:
Since the 1990s, apart from Xiaogang Feng's comedies, China's local films have basically lacked similar film brands with stable output. The advantages of this kind of film brand are that it is very easy to form a standardized and industrialized model and form a stable commercial value with the help of loyal supporters and brand effect; Any mature film market is bound to have such products. The disadvantage of Feng's comedy is that if one day dies, the brand will be finished. However, brands such as 007 series, Marvel Comics, DC superhero series, Conan Doraemon and other Japanese national animation series will not affect their commercial value even if the whole creative team is completely changed. The reason why Xu Laoguai would rather give up some qualities, completely change the starring lineup, and also shoot "Feng Shen Long Wang"; To some extent, it is also testing the market trend. A mature film fund should not be a good team and project found all over the world; Investing in a chick romance today and participating in a 3D sci-fi movie tomorrow may be profitable for a while, but it won't last long. A healthy system should establish a series of genre films and movie brands with stable output. The best example is tyler perry's movies. What this guy does is to make one or two comedy movies with a fixed cast every year to tell the story of the black community. The investment cost is between 5 million and 20 million dollars, the quality is relatively stable, and the box office output is constant at about 40 million to 50 million dollars. Of course, there was a big bang. For example, in February 2009, Madea in Prison in tyler perry grossed more than $90 million. There are also times of economic recession. For example, this summer's "tyler perry Gift" only received $9 million. However, since 2005, 14 films have been produced in this series, and a fixed audience, a fixed cinema resource, a reliable production team and an effective publicity model have already been established. The profit forecast of such a film project is not difficult to estimate, and it is easier to establish a relatively stable cooperation model in the direction of investors. Similarly, there are the Japanese Kikujiro series, the chainsaw series that made Lions Gate famous, and the upcoming fifth ghost album series.
I know that some North American film funds do not invest in fixed production teams, but will invest in films they are familiar with. Thrillers, action movies, comedies and romances all have some special film fund-oriented investments and operations. Because the mode of these films is relatively fixed, the film quality is guaranteed, the budget is controllable, and there are stable audiences, it is easy to establish suitable distribution channels.
So why do many people in the film industry always shout that what China lacks is not box office blockbusters or numerous "art films" at home and abroad, but small and medium-sized genre films. Because in a mature market, they are the main force in the film industry. They are the real operating basis of the production company, because this series of films can have a stable income and can also cultivate suitable talents who can take on big responsibilities. James Wan, who was very popular these two years, was not a director or producer in Saw in his early years.
Back in China, why is it not easy to develop genre films at present? First, lack of money, too many investors are either willing to invest in low-budget movies to try to build another Thailand or Northwest China, or they are staring at big teams and blockbusters, for fear that they will not be able to make a box office without a cost of 200 million. Now that there are funds abroad willing to do it, we are back to the previous problem, lack of people. For each type of film, directors need a large number of production teams and publicity teams who are familiar with this type of film, which is the training and practice of a large number of people. Further down, the training system of employees in China is mentioned. I really can't tell you why, so let's consult some real practitioners in the industry.
Summarize the above. Why is it difficult for foreign film funds to invest in China films at present? First, the profit model of China film market is single; Secondly, the film production system in China has not been standardized. In the final analysis, it is the consciousness of people in the film industry; Third, the supporting facilities of other industries other than movies are not yet mature; Fourthly, the healthy development direction of film funds and the targeted development of film brands and types are not mature in China. Of course, there are other reasons that can't be expressed for the time being. The above problems are not unsolvable, and even many are already on the way to improvement; But everything takes time and accumulation.
As a non-film industry practitioner, I only talk about these issues from the perspective of an outsider, and I know there are many mistakes and omissions; But the above is also my personal concern about the development of China's film industry in recent years, and the summary of consulting practitioners and teachers in my recent work. If there are too many shortcomings, I hope teachers can give me advice.
I recommend reading this article by a good gay friend who lives for his dream: How long is American film technology more advanced than China?
Interests: My organization and I are still running a film fund project to invest in Hollywood movies.
Let's take a moment to introduce some film fund projects I am running, which can also be used as a reference for answering. (If you need to reprint, you don't need to copy the following). If the Zhihu team finds the following inappropriate, I will also delete the cooperation.
The project cooperates with Hollywood film companies specializing in action movies and thrillers; Therefore, targeted investment is also the above two types of movies. At present, the teams that have been determined to participate in this film fund project are as follows:
Mark Canton, the producer of 1 300 Warriors will be the producers of the first five films;
2. William Morris Enterprising Entertainment (WME), the second largest brokerage company in Hollywood, will be the casting director of this film and provide some key production team members.
3. One of the two major shareholders of the production company includes Mr. Allan Zeman, who is also known as "the father of Lan Kwai Fong" and was the chairman of Hong Kong Ocean Park.
4. The production company has previously produced a series of action movies including Jason Statham, Jeff langer, jean-claude van damme and other action stars, as well as a series of medium and small budget thrillers including Mystery Story.
Models with investors include:
1. Fixed annual rate of return, as well as the priority of capital income (also known as inferior priority);
2. All films will purchase film completion insurance;
3. Based on fixed income, investors' back-end income is relatively small;
4. If the investor does not withdraw from the film copyright, he will continue to get the profit share of the film according to the agreed proportion; If you choose to quit early, you can also ask the fund to buy out all the copyright income rights at a suitable price;
5. Regular financial reports and conference calls for film projects; The right to supervise filming at any time on the set;
6. The names of investors will be included in the list of filmmakers. Investors can have a say in major decisions of film production, but avoid getting involved in specific details.
When we design the whole fund scheme, we try to reduce the risk of investors; At the same time, it is expected that it will be easier to control the film production process and provide relatively stable income by investing in familiar film types. At the same time, as far as possible, investors are moderately isolated from the film production process. The expectation is still that "movies belong to movies and finance belongs to finance."
There is also a dividing line.
Finally, I want to say something idealistic: I am not a film major; Just because I really love movies. I have seen at least thousands of movies since I was a child, and almost all the books related to movies that the library can borrow have been read in universities. It is said that I actually asked for the opportunity to participate in this film fund project. Personally, I hope to take this opportunity to get in touch with the film industry more deeply. Some people may say, "It is a heroic act to invest foreign films with China people's money. But from the negotiation of this project to now, from my contact with some people in the industry, I know that this mature system of Hollywood is worth learning and learning from. Of course, I also look forward to getting familiar with this system through this operation and study; And maybe in the future, I can come back and do something for the film industry in China.