Why are some movies held back for so long?

Kaylum · 09-10-2002, 01:35 PM

if a movies is finished and ready for release; why do some studios hold them back for years? wouldnt it be better just to release them and at least make something off of it sooner rather than later?

im talking about things like pluto nash (originaly advertised for release in summer 2000 not released till summer 2002), and knock around guys (advertised summer 2001, filmed before XXX and yet, still on coming soon now for fall 2002), or the bourne identity (filmed prior to oceans 11 and yet, not in theaters till after O11 was already on DVD...)

the list goes on, anyway im just curious. oh and while we're on the subject, whats the longest held back film that you know of? im thinking its probably the last texas chain saw movie, filmed in like 1992, reviewed by critics in 1994-95 and not actually released until, what like 96 or 97 or something?

ShamusChad · 09-10-2002, 02:09 PM

Shadowbane...uh..err..you said movies. my bad

Vard · 09-10-2002, 02:09 PM

LOTR: Return of the King!

Samus Aran · 09-10-2002, 02:41 PM

Actually if Shadowbane is released in February, the new due date. It will be in beta for the same time Ultima Online and Everquest was, 2 years.

Szlia · 09-10-2002, 05:08 PM

Well... I can easily see a lot of reasons... the first one being obviously trying to release the movie at the best possible time, that is when people got to the theatres and when there is not a too big concurrence.

Another one can simply be that that movie is so bad that releasing it will cost more money than leaving it on a shelf (considering the incredible cost of film copies that might happen pretty often)

Or it can be some legal stuff holding the movie (an actor suing the studio or some rights that are contested for exemple).

The movie can also get lost if the production company bankrupt and its whole catalogue is bought for 1 dollar by another company that doesn't check what are the unreleased movies in the pack.

Some movies can also be produced and shot but simply not find a distributor (that's the case for many independent movies who get seen in festivals or retrospectives but are never released).

See? that's a lot of reasons already and I am sure there can be a lot more

Now as long delayed movies.... King Lear by Jean-Luc Godard is a serious contestant. http://us.imdb.com/Title?0093349 it was shown at the Cannes Film Festival in 1987 and got released for the first time early this year

The reason is that it was 1) pretty bad 2) Produced by Golan Globus that went bye-bye before the could sue Godard because they felt cheated on their money. Needless to say it stayed in cans for a long while until someone recently noticed it never got released, tracked it down, bought the rights to whoever had the Golan Globus catalogue and released it

I am telling all this by memory alone btw so it might have happen a bit differently but that's the general idea

Synd D`nys · 09-10-2002, 08:18 PM

Sometimes a studio will hold back a movie to capitalize on the buzz generated by an actors performace in the movie they make following it.

A perfect example is Legends of the Fall. It was held back several months so that it could be released after An Interview with a Vampire even though it was completeled well before Interview had begun principal photography.

Knockaround Guys probably fell into this catagory. It would be very logical to assume they wanted to wait til after that piece of crap "XXX" raked in it's $150+ million.

09-10-2002, 01:35 PM	#1 (permalink)
Kaylum <>X<> Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: FL Posts: 193 -1 Internets	Why are some movies held back for so long? if a movies is finished and ready for release; why do some studios hold them back for years? wouldnt it be better just to release them and at least make something off of it sooner rather than later? im talking about things like pluto nash (originaly advertised for release in summer 2000 not released till summer 2002), and knock around guys (advertised summer 2001, filmed before XXX and yet, still on coming soon now for fall 2002), or the bourne identity (filmed prior to oceans 11 and yet, not in theaters till after O11 was already on DVD...) the list goes on, anyway im just curious. oh and while we're on the subject, whats the longest held back film that you know of? im thinking its probably the last texas chain saw movie, filmed in like 1992, reviewed by critics in 1994-95 and not actually released until, what like 96 or 97 or something?

09-10-2002, 05:08 PM	#5 (permalink)
Szlia Conquest Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Switzerland Posts: 4,612 +5 Internets	Well... I can easily see a lot of reasons... the first one being obviously trying to release the movie at the best possible time, that is when people got to the theatres and when there is not a too big concurrence. Another one can simply be that that movie is so bad that releasing it will cost more money than leaving it on a shelf (considering the incredible cost of film copies that might happen pretty often) Or it can be some legal stuff holding the movie (an actor suing the studio or some rights that are contested for exemple). The movie can also get lost if the production company bankrupt and its whole catalogue is bought for 1 dollar by another company that doesn't check what are the unreleased movies in the pack. Some movies can also be produced and shot but simply not find a distributor (that's the case for many independent movies who get seen in festivals or retrospectives but are never released). See? that's a lot of reasons already and I am sure there can be a lot more Now as long delayed movies.... King Lear by Jean-Luc Godard is a serious contestant. http://us.imdb.com/Title?0093349 it was shown at the Cannes Film Festival in 1987 and got released for the first time early this year The reason is that it was 1) pretty bad 2) Produced by Golan Globus that went bye-bye before the could sue Godard because they felt cheated on their money. Needless to say it stayed in cans for a long while until someone recently noticed it never got released, tracked it down, bought the rights to whoever had the Golan Globus catalogue and released it I am telling all this by memory alone btw so it might have happen a bit differently but that's the general idea __________________ -retrosabotage-

09-10-2002, 08:18 PM	#6 (permalink)
Synd D`nys The root of all evil Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Hockeytown, U.S.A. Posts: 548 +0 Internets	Sometimes a studio will hold back a movie to capitalize on the buzz generated by an actors performace in the movie they make following it. A perfect example is Legends of the Fall. It was held back several months so that it could be released after An Interview with a Vampire even though it was completeled well before Interview had begun principal photography. Knockaround Guys probably fell into this catagory. It would be very logical to assume they wanted to wait til after that piece of crap "XXX" raked in it's $150+ million. __________________ EverQuest free since 7/03

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

09-10-2002, 02:09 PM	#2 (permalink)
ShamusChad Limey Bastard~ Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 684 -7 Internets	Shadowbane...uh..err..you said movies. my bad

09-10-2002, 02:09 PM	#3 (permalink)
Vard Banned Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 174 +0 Internets	LOTR: Return of the King!

09-10-2002, 02:41 PM	#4 (permalink)
Samus Aran Sons of the Storm Heal Bitch Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 771 +1 Internets	Actually if Shadowbane is released in February, the new due date. It will be in beta for the same time Ultima Online and Everquest was, 2 years.