Absolutely not. You are way off base.
For a movie to be profitable, it must earn more than it cost to make and distribute. The key to this is to find a story to tell that is entertaining and interesting. Then add a good director, good cast, good editor, good cinematographer, etc...
2007-01-04 23:48:11
·
answer #1
·
answered by kja63 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Good luck in your studies. It does seem that movies which tend to have some sex, violence and crude language, do better at the box office. Sadly, it's like supply and demand. If society supports it, then it becomes available. There are other factors that should be noticed, for instance, what major event is going on in a region at the time. I can remember during war time, films about war were hits. Also, interesting is the age groups that flood the box offices to see the type of movies you mentioned. I guess it tells us something about our society and the picture isn't always pretty.
2007-01-04 23:59:06
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is no need of Sex Violence or Crude language for making a movie box office hit. It may get a boost in the first few days, but with the theme, good story and presentation and acting will get good audience in long run and make a movie hit and unforgettable.
2007-01-04 23:49:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by Prakash 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, not at all. Look at profitable oscar-winning films such as Life is Beautiful. Admittedly the film is primarily about war, but very little of it features in the main of the film. If anything this film is anti-sex/violence/crude language. It's a very beautiful film set in very ugly scenario but it manages to keep the ugly side of things out of the film. Other examples that springs to mind are A Beautiful Mind, As Good As It Gets and Sideways.
2007-01-04 23:53:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by Wafflebox 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not necessarily but if the movie in question has lousy production, story,cinematography etc.,then those mentioned might make it sell. What is profitable are movies for general patronage but mostly for children. I remember this movie about all chickens as cast (with Mel Gibson as a voice over). No sex, violence,crude language but it made multi million dollar profit.
2007-01-04 23:51:06
·
answer #5
·
answered by mareko 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't think the movies need to contain any of this to make money. Disney has done it for years and their movies don't contain these elements.Granted they don't reach all audiences they do bring in lots of money. Kids and kids at heart always appreciate a break from the violence, sex, and crude language. Good luck hope my opinion was helpful for your dessertation.
2007-01-05 03:42:28
·
answer #6
·
answered by july8_02 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, of course if there is s/v/bad language then it pushes the age restriction up, making it more "adult" to watch.
It's a pity when that kind of thing succeeds over a good storyline. I don't agree that movies mirror our society - I know very few people who behave in the way portrayed. In fact, I think the low standards actually reinforce the idea that bad language,violence and sex are acceptable and part of our normal life. It's not.
Would I want to see a movie that is sanitised? No. But I don't want to see one either where there is gratutious sex/violence/bad language.
2007-01-05 00:31:56
·
answer #7
·
answered by True Blue Brit 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The theory is not true. Shrek 2 is one of the highest grossing movies of all time and has no sex, violence or crude language!
2007-01-05 00:01:20
·
answer #8
·
answered by oceanic_815_lost 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Depends. March of the Penguins has sex and violence but was seen as a family movie.
Many of the Ivory period piece movies of the 90s were tame but they did well at the box office.
2007-01-04 23:54:34
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
u dont always need sex and violence (in blair witch, you cant see anything, for instance, but there was a buzz around the movie, just like snake on a plane, which is not that violent and the sex is more a spoof of airplane, what a reference!)
crude language? i dont think it help selling and it s so common
2007-01-04 23:48:16
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋