Categories
Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
Film music budgets are shrinking
General Discussions » Film music budgets are shrinking (Posts 1 to 17 of 17)
-
- CommentTimeDec 12th 2007
From Variety:
It's hard out there for a studio music chief. Budgets for music in films are shrinking, and execs are being forced to get creative by using unknown artists, eschewing soundtrack deals and eliminating music supervisors.
"We're being squeezed from all sides," says Robert Kraft, president of Fox Music. "The studio wants us to do more with less, and the agents want money for their clients. I used to say, 'This is the offer,' and they'd respond, 'Oh, you can do better.' Now, more and more I'm saying, 'This is all I have.' "
Veteran studio execs note that music budgets are typically around 1.5% of a film's overall budget, down from 2.5% just a few years ago.
Currently, an average music budget for a mainstream film would be $800,000 to $1 million; a franchise film would get $1.8 million to $2.5 million; and a film at a studio's specialty arm, such as Paramount Vantage or Fox Searchlight, typically puts aside $250,000 to $400,000 for music.
The decline in funding for music can be blamed on a number of factors, insiders suggest, including the overall ambivalence toward the record industry, the lack of interest by the record labels to create soundtracks, and an unwillingness by the studios to shoulder collateral expenses that often come with soundtrack pacts, such as artist videos.
Plus, getting an A-list artist's expensive song into a film to help spur awareness is no longer a top priority (for the most part) for either the labels or the studios.
"The days of the big end-title song as a marketing tool -- from the film studio perspective -- are gone," observes Kathy Nelson, president of film music at NBC Universal. "Sometimes you have to call in a lot of favors and be very creative because the budget just isn't there. It's ironic, because the one thing that more often stays in the mind of moviegoers after they've left the theater is the music."
Nelson notes that she also saves money by sometimes not hiring music supervisors -- the foot soldiers on a film -- and handling internally a film's music needs.
Partially in response to the smaller budgets, big-name composers who typically earn more than $1 million for their efforts on a film are also working for less.
James Horner recently agreed to a high six-figure payday for his work on Miramax's Holocaust tale "The Boy in the Striped Pajamas." Similarly, Hans Zimmer and Danny Elfman lowered their usual seven-figure fees to six for "Frost-Nixon" and "Hell Boy," respectively, according to insiders. (The composers' reps did not respond to phone calls.)
"A-players want to keep their creative juices flowing, so they'll take on a project they believe in for less money," says Mitchell Leib, president of music and soundtracks for Disney, who declines to comment on fees.
"Fortunately, they're at a place in their career where they are not driven solely by finances."
Even newcomers are feeling it. "I never felt restricted, but even though this is my first film, I knew I had limited resources for music," says singer-songwriter Sondre Lerche, who wrote and performed the music in the film "Dan in Real Life."
"It helped that I did a lot of recording in my bedroom."
http://www.variety.com/article/VR111797 … 9&cs=1 -
- CommentTimeDec 12th 2007 edited
Wow... they accepted a six figure salary. Poor, creative souls...
Sorry, couldn't help it, that was my first reaction (as, I'm sure, plenty of other's will be :P).
However, this might very well become a threat for the filmmusic industry... or a blessing. Restriction often forces people to be more creative, thus going back to 'the good old days'... though it might also result in the usage of more temps, less original score music writing... -
- CommentTimeDec 12th 2007
I would be concerned if a noticeable trend was to lower film's production cost all over the spectrum... but there isn't. In fact, films are more and more expensive each year, partly due to the high demand of high-quality special effects, but also due to actors' exorbitant salaries and studio overheads.
I'm sure studio costs and musician costs have risen as well.
That this comes -apparently- as a surprise to studios is a bit puzzling to me.
If anything this sounds like a prelude either from the music industry to get an even bigger slice of the cake as well, or one of the studios to cut out orchestras again and go with full electronics.
It's happened before, so we'll have to suffer through a number of years of synth-driven scores (which should be a lot better now than in the late eighties, though!), and then we'll move back into the orchestral score.'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn -
- CommentTimeDec 12th 2007
Two of the three examples listed though, are relatively small scale films aren't they? I know Frost/Nixon has a major director, but it can't have a Da Vinci Code-size budget, so it wouldn't be reasonable for Zimmer to get a Da Vinci Code-size fee, would it?
More of the story seems to be about the use of songs. Boo hoo. -
- CommentTimeDec 12th 2007
Songs!
They meant actual songs!
Yeah, I read it, but my preoccupied mind automatically translated as "end titles suite".
But they're talking about songs... mwahahahahaaaaaa!!!!
Oh, sorry. I meant "awwwwwww".'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn -
- CommentAuthorGrimble Gromble
- CommentTimeDec 13th 2007
Just another phase in the history of film scores. If I were a cartoonist, I'd sketch an image of John Williams reading that article with a caption saying "that's too bad for them."I'm your Piper at the gates of dawn. -
- CommentTimeDec 13th 2007
I too believe it's a phase, it will go away. Nothing to see here people.Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders. -
- CommentAuthorfranz_conrad
- CommentTimeDec 13th 2007
A good way to cut costs would be to explore the idea of small ensemble / solo instrument scores again. One composer, one performer, simple resources. Cheap as chips.A butterfly thinks therefore I am -
- CommentTimeDec 13th 2007 edited
I totally agree Michael, in fact i proposed something like that - if you recall - against the huge load of crap that was the "big disaster sound" wanna-be of Wiseman's "Flood". But you correctly (admittedly) contradicted a point as to the producers / filmmakers actually not wanting such as sound accompanying their visuals; so there. How do we override this?Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders. -
- CommentAuthorfranz_conrad
- CommentTimeDec 13th 2007
Pitchforks and trojan horses, my friend. We shall overcome.A butterfly thinks therefore I am -
- CommentAuthorJoep
- CommentTimeDec 13th 2007
franz_conrad wrote
A good way to cut costs would be to explore the idea of small ensemble / solo instrument scores again. One composer, one performer, simple resources. Cheap as chips.franz_conrad wrote
A good way to cut costs would be to explore the idea of small ensemble / solo instrument scores again. One composer, one performer, simple resources. Cheap as chips.
True. Especially with certain films it's incredible how much money they spend. I was involved in a comedy that got a score written by someone with barely any budget, with a few players and worked incredibly well. Of course for large action films they might want to have a big orchestra, but it's sometimes ridiculous how they utilize the same sized orchestra for a comedy that could be scored indeed with small ensembles or whatever. We Dutch men know how to score efficiently -
- CommentTimeDec 13th 2007
The Dutch know how to be efficient cheap asses.Kazoo -
- CommentTimeDec 13th 2007
This means, more power to Santaolalla!
(And something that is purely logic)Kazoo -
- CommentTimeDec 13th 2007
Bregt wrote
This means, more power to Santaolalla!
(And something that is purely logic)
yeah!!!!!! SANTAOLALLA FOR PRESIDENT!!!!Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders. -
- CommentTimeDec 13th 2007
The only composer I trust with a small ensemble is Ry Cooder.
For the rest: IF YOU CAN'T HANDLE 120 PIECE ORCHESTRAS AND A 300 HEAD CHOIR, GET THE HELL OUT OF DODGE!
The bigger the better!'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn -
- CommentTimeDec 13th 2007
Elmer Bernstein used 20-30 piece orchestras or so for many (if not most) of his scores. And many of those sound a lot bigger than the 120-piece orchestras favoured by most of today's younger composers. Aaahh, the benefits of a decent education. -
- CommentTimeDec 13th 2007 edited
True that.
How many composers topday actually know how to use a really large orchestra.
Ofttimes it sounds like small arrangements...with more instruments doing the same.'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn
1 to 17 of 17