 |
| This isn't a very upbeat piece, I'll admit, so how about an image from one of those Jim Henson Wilkin's Coffee commercials that always brings me joy? |
First of all, here are some fun facts about Skydance head David Ellison, who now owns Paramount Pictures and Warner Bros. Pictures:
David Ellison was paid $63.5 million in 2025. Every dollar had to go to him, as 1,000+ Paramount jobs for the proletariat were eliminated.
The royal families of Saudi Arabia will have a significant financial stake in the new Skydance that owns Warner Bros. The Saudi Arabia Public Investment Fund that's pouring $10 billion into Skydance has been linked to allegations of human rights abuses. Appalling anti-Semitism has run rampant in government-approved school materials, while LGBTQIA+ human rights abuses are also normalized.
Hey, speaking of countries with human right violations, David Ellison made a big show (just under two months after Skydance bought Paramount) out of Paramount+ acquiring the October 7 miniseries Red Alert. David's father, Larry Ellison, is one of the most prolific supporters of Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel, along with countless other organizations, have concluded that Netanyahu and his IDF forces are committing a genocide against the Palestinian people.
As if that weren't enough corrupt world leaders to pal around with, David Ellison has also been incredibly chummy with US President Donald Trump. ICE custody deaths have ballooned under Trump's presidency. His implementation of Elon Musk to lead DOGE and gut USAID led to hundreds of thousands of deaths. Millions of Americans have lost their healthcare under the Trump administration. Trump was also found liable for sexual abuse in court and has been accused countless times of sexual misconduct by women.
The qualifications for being in David Ellison's friend group are apparently (1) being powerful, (2) being rich, (3) having blood on your hands.
It's estimated that 4,500 Los Angeles jobs could be eliminated because of him buying Warner Bros.
Keep that in mind as Ellison blabbers on cable news shows about Skydance now being the king of "content" or various rich people like Tom Cruise and James Cameron bootlicking this corporate king.
Part of Ellison's idea for ruining, er, "ruling" pop culture is that the combined Paramount and Warner Bros. entity will produce at least 30 movies a year and, starting in 2029 (as mandated by various U.S. state attorney generals), 32 titles a year. Is that actually possible, though? Given that the U.S. Department of Justice is all too happy to just let this deal slide on through since Ellison is besties with the Orange Führer and California Attorney General Rob Bonta folded like a house of cards, there's been no real consideration from legal authorities as to whether that mandate is actually possible.
Looks like it's up to an autistic numbers-and-movie-studio-obsessed lady like me to crunch the figures and see if there's any precedent for Ellison's plans. Let's look through the modern (read: post-1990) history of movie studios and see if any of them have delivered 30+ movies annually.
First off, next year, since Skydance is inheriting a slate of Warner Bros. titles greenlit and shot before the merger closed, its slate of theatrical releases will be way above 30. Currently, 16 Warner Bros. features are on the docket for 2027 while 13 Paramount features are slated for the same year. Jonah Hill's comedy Cut Off will launch next year from Warner Bros. and presumably the studio will also have the new Friday installment come out before New Year's Eve 2027. Meanwhile, Paramount's allegedly launching Damien Chazelle's new prison drama, Freaks Part II, and Smile 3 in 2027 as well. That means 34 Skydance features in 2027, not counting whatever releases Warner Bros. Clockwork and Republic Pictures put out.
So, can they keep that pace up? Are there examples of multiple studios under one conglomerate releasing 30+ movies a year?
Have Studios Released 30+ Movies A Year Before?
You'll be unsurprised to learn, no, not a ton. Comcast, for instance, has two movie studios, Universal Pictures and arthouse label Focus Features. Typically, the two studios produce tons of motion pictures a year, but they rarely hit 30+ a year. In 2012, for instance, Comcast's two studios released 24 movies (and that's counting Promised Land, a feature released in 2012's final days that didn't go into wide release until 2013).
What about before The Great Recession? Before the 2007-2008 economic collapse, studios were spending a lot more on movies (especially since the home video market was at its peak). In 2005, though, Comcast's two studios released 25 movies (16 from Universal and nine from Focus Features). Universal's annual output typically tops out at 16 features, and Focus has rarely exceeded ten annual movies in its pre-2020 output. Even in 2023, a year where Focus put out more movies, Comcast's North American theatrical distribution exploits still only reached 23 features (and that's counting a handful of Focus films like Inside that never reached 600+ theaters or wide release).
A better comparison for Skydance's ambitions, then, might be Disney's 1990-1994-ish output. Through its Buena Vista Pictures Distribution, Disney released movies through three major labels:
Walt Disney Pictures (family movies)
Touchstone Pictures (adult-skewing movies)
Hollywood Pictures (more adult-skewing movies)
From 1993 through 2010, Disney also owned and distributed Miramax films. For now, we'll disregard those since Harvey and Bob Weinstein's Miramax had more autonomy than Touchstone and Hollywood.
Across these three studios, Disney released 21 movies in 1992. Two years later, when Walt Disney Pictures had a comparatively more bustling year, the three Disney labels did hit 30 movies a year. A year earlier, the trio of Disney studios put out 27 theatrical films in North America. However, by 1997, Disney had dialed back its annual film slate, with the three studios delivering 23 features. Hollywood Pictures only put out three North American theatrical releases in 1999, and the label was basically dead (save for a brief 2006-2008 revival to handle a trio of horror films) once the 21st century came around.
So, Disney is basically a bust as a model for "successfully" doing 30+ movies a year unless Ellison is guiding the entire Warner/Paramount enterprise around one year in Disney's 90s output.
TimeWarner Provides a Model for Skydance...Kind of
Ironically, the only mold I can find for post-1990 film studios delivering this many films annually is from a prior Warner Bros. owner: TimeWarner. In the mid-2000s, Time Warner had multiple movie studios under its belt. Warner Bros. Pictures and New Line Cinema, plus their arthouse labels (Warner Independent Pictures and Picturehouse). Even discounting the arthouse exploits (which only lasted three-ish years each), Time Warner's pre-2005 slate of just WB and New Line Cinema movies was still hefty. Combined, the two entities put out 29 titles in 2004. Two years earlier, their combined slates were 34 features. In 1999, the two combined to release 30 films.
Is that the model, then, for Skydance? If so, that's maybe not ideal since Paramount and Warner Bros. aren't equivalent to Warner Bros. and New Line Cinema. The latter two studios could theoretically co-exist at Time Warner because they explored different films. Put simply, New Line was often focused on smaller-scale but conceptually daring titles. Prior to Lord of the Rings, they weren't the home for massively expensive films (those went to WB), but they were the place that would take a chance on Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles or John Waters directorial efforts. New Line also tended to provide more opportunities to non-white filmmakers and artists compared to WB, as seen by its library including Set It Off, the Friday films, Bamboozled, and Love & Basketball, among other features.
Even in the 2000s, its bigger hits came from giving opportunities to unexpected comedies like the Harold and Kumar movies. New Line's demise even came from trying to make too many big-budget films after the success of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. 2007's The Golden Compass specifically was a costly failure that capsized the studio. When New Line's output became both indistinguishable from WB and too beholden to costly blockbusters, it crumbled.
So far, there's no indication Paramount and WB will carve out new identities like that. They both have costly summer blockbusters on the horizon. They both have homegrown animation divisions cranking out animated family movies. Most worryingly, they're both deeply committed to horror, with WB's New Line division thriving on new horror hits like Final Destination: Bloodlines and Weapons. Meanwhile, Paramount's going all-in on horror with its newly made Paramount Primal label. Additionally, of the 13 2027 Paramount movies with concrete release dates, five belong to the horror genre.
It's one thing to try and produce 30-34 movies a year between two studios when one makes About Schmidt and Magnolia while the other focuses on movies costing $60+ million like The Matrix, Wild Wild West, The Green Mile, and Eyes Wide Shut. As late as November 2002, it was easy to see how Warner Bros. and New Line Cinema could co-exist releasing Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets and Friday After Next, respectively, within a week of each other. It's another to juggle two massive studios each concentrating on the same projects in the same budget range. Surely Transformers, DC Comics, and Game of Thrones movies all launching in the same summer will create problems?
It also has to be said that, since the mid-2000s, no company has released 30+ wide releases into theaters annually. That model hasn't existed for eons. And suddenly Skydance is going to find the key to making that a reality beyond years (like 2027) where the company already inherits a massive Warner Bros. slate? That sounds doubtful, especially given the larger corporate problems Skydance must contend with.
More Debt, More Creative Ineptitude, More Problems
Here's a fact: only 11% of Skydance's 46 pre-October 2026 movies have been directed by women. Of those titles, only 12 were headlined by people of color (Dwayne Johnson anchored two of those 12 features). Skydance movies reinforce white male dominance in pop culture while delivering lame action movie pastiches that look absolutely pathetic compared to Your Mother Your Mother Your Mother or The Furious. Get ready for even fewer opportunities for marginalized gender artists at whatever the Hell this new Skydance looks like. After all, Trump, the Saudi Royal Family, and others propelling this deal sure don't like women in any capacity. Considering he's chummy with Andrew Ferguson and Bari Weiss, who spout white supremacist talking points like they breathe, even if Skydance fulfills its 30+ films a year promises, they'll all look the same.
Prepare for more movies starring Chris Pratt, Ryan Reynolds, Dwayne Johnson, and Mark Wahlberg until the sun burns out. Skydance's recent high-profile Paramount Pictures movie announcements including new Transformers and G.I. Joe titles only suggest that Ellison's trademark creative inertia will infiltrate the entire Skydance empire. Warner Bros. Pictures already had problems with offering plenty of opportunities to marginalized artists (there were no women directors behind any 2025 WB movies, for instance). Skydance will only amplify those problems.
Skydance's promises for 30+ annual movies from Paramount and Warner Bros. is technically feasible if TimeWarner's mid-90s to mid-2000s cinematic exploits are any explanation. However, the creative impulses of failed actor and generative AI enthusiast David Ellison suggest that, even if he does, theaters will be flooded with slop rather than compelling movies. He and his rich people buddies can blabber on news programs all he wants that he's a "fan of movies." Ellison isn't just a guy who allegedly got tens of thousands of dollars wired to him by Jeffrey Epstein (per these archived Justice Department documents). He's also a dismal creative executive whose artistic instincts have been to reinforce the status quo and never take risks.
No wonder he loves MAGA people and generative AI since both all about vomiting up the past and suppressing marginalized voices. The lack of historical precedents for major companies delivering 30+ movies annually (especially in the last 20 years) already suggests that Ellison's Skydance ambitions are doomed to disaster. The crushing debt he's amassed and his dismal artistic impulses, meanwhile, make it clear Hollywood will tremendously suffer under this newly christened deal. Behold yet another example in our modern world of the horrors of letting rich tech billionaires do whatever they want without consequences.
No comments:
Post a Comment