Scott, can you explain why development costs are what the studios are cutting in particular? Is development more than just hiring writers to do rewrites, because it seems like that would be a drop in the bucket compared to some of the other items in a studio's budget - kind of like cutting funding for pancreatic cancer research and not touching the defense budget, you know? Unless cutting development means cutting massive amounts of staff positions, too, or huge numbers of scripts were being developed that never made it to the screen, or that kind of thing....

Just to be clear, I think the studios are trying to cut costs all around, not just acquisition and development dollars. But specific to development, in the past the studios had a pretty poor record in terms of projects acquired and projects produced. At various times, I've seen percentages like 10-20. You figure at least $2M in fees (and sometimes much more) to acquire and develop a script (including rewrites), and 80% of the projects initiated not getting made, that can amount to some pretty serious red ink.

And while your point is accurate -- development costs are not nearly as big as production, post and marketing expenditures, at least when you make a movie and distribute it, it can generate revenue, even if it's not a good movie. On the other hand, a script that is developed but never gets made, that's nothing but a write-off, no chance to make up out of pocket expenses.

Keep in mind while we can speak generally about the studios, their approaches do vary. As noted in the numbers, Warner Bros. has bought 8 spec scripts for three years running. Maybe it's because their track record for several years running -- at or near the top of the list for biggest B.O. -- reinforces their buying pattern. Maybe they have confidence in their creative group.

But my sense is the decrease is part of an industry-wide attempt to reduce costs, make the development process leaner and more efficient, and allocate a greater percentage of funds toward the bells-and-whistles of filmmaking (CGI, 3-D) which continue to demonstrate the ability to help a movie generate revenue as opposed to scripts stuck in development hell which collect nothing but dust.

That's just my take. If the head of a studio would care to elaborate, I'm sure we'd be more than happy to hear from you.

Hey Scott,

Are there any stats on the mini-majors' spec pickups? Of course it would be lower - but I'd be very interested to know - especially the Weintein Co.

Thanks!

@hdxz: The world of spec scripts is an inexact science. For example, we pitched Alaska to Castle Rock. They liked it, but weren't quite sure. So we wrote Act One on spec. Based on that, they bought it. Is that a spec script or a pitch sale? Variations like that happen a lot, especially on the prodco and mini-major side of things. Often those don't get announced in the trades or even on tracking boards, so bottom line we can't really know every spec that sells.

Re Weinstein Co: What projects they have listed in development on IMDBPro with them as the production company are: The Silence of Six, The Prom, Come Drink With Me, Rounders 2, Lincoln, Get Happy: The Life of Judy Garland, and Kill Bill: Vol. 3. You can use Google and look at the ones that aren't obviously sequels to see how they got started.