any movie similar to Knight and Day?
If you enjoyed “Knight and Day” for its mix of action, comedy, and romance with a dash of thrill, you might like the following movies that offer a similar blend of elements:

1. Mr. & Mrs. Smith (2005) - Like “Knight and Day,” this film features a dynamic duo (Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie) hiding secrets from each other, leading to explosive action scenes and a complicated yet romantic relationship.

2. True Lies (1994) - Directed by James Cameron and starring Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jamie Lee Curtis, this film combines elements of action, comedy, and romance in a story about a secret agent whose wife gets unwittingly dragged into his adventurous spy life.

3. This Means War (2012) - Starring Reese Witherspoon, Chris Pine, and Tom Hardy, this film is about two CIA agents who discover they are dating the same woman and use their skills against each other to win her heart, combining action and comedy.

4. Charade (1963) - Although an older film, “Charade” starring Audrey Hepburn and Cary Grant, skillfully blends elements of romance, comedy, and suspense in a way that fans of “Knight and Day” might appreciate.

5. The Man from U.N.C.L.E. (2015) - Directed by Guy Ritchie, this film is set during the Cold War and involves a CIA agent and a KGB operative who must put aside their differences to stop a criminal organization. It features stylish action sequences blended with humor and a touch of romance.

6. Killers (2010) - Starring Ashton Kutcher and Katherine Heigl, this movie follows a similar premise to “Knight and Day”, with a couple finding their suburban life disrupted by the revelation that one of them is a spy, leading to a mix of action and comedy.

7. Romancing the Stone (1984) - While more of an adventure movie, this film starring Michael Douglas and Kathleen Turner includes elements of romance and comedy, as a novelist searches for her kidnapped sister in the jungle and finds help and love in an unlikely adventurer.

8. Spy (2015) - Focusing more on comedy, Melissa McCarthy stars as a desk-bound CIA analyst who goes undercover in a deadly world of arms dealers and spies. It offers action-packed sequences blended with humor and a touch of heart.

Each of these movies captures a unique balance between action, comedy, and romantic elements that fans of “Knight and Day” might enjoy.
no, with infinite energy source the size of AAA battery as in Knight and Day. any movie similar?
Ah, I see you’re interested in movies that feature a seemingly small but incredibly potent energy source or device that drives the plot, similar to the “perpetual energy battery” in “Knight and Day.” While this exact premise is fairly unique, there are movies with themes around powerful, compact technological devices or energy sources with significant implications. Here are a few films where a powerful device or discovery plays a crucial role, although they might not all align perfectly with the size or form factor of a AAA battery:

1. Chain Reaction (1996) - Starring Keanu Reeves and Morgan Freeman, this film revolves around the discovery of a cheap, clean energy source that leads to danger and conspiracy. The central plot device, while not as small as a AAA battery, is a compact and revolutionary energy solution.

2. Paycheck (2003) - Directed by John Woo and starring Ben Affleck and Uma Thurman, this film involves an engineer who has his memory wiped after completing a top-secret project. The technology he works on, although not primarily an energy source, is a highly coveted and dangerous piece of tech.

3. Iron Man (2008) - In the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Tony Stark creates the miniaturized Arc Reactor, a powerful energy source that he initially uses to keep himself alive and later to power his Iron Man suit. The Arc Reactor represents a highly potent, compact power source with significant implications.

4. The Saint (1997) - Starring Val Kilmer, this film features a scientist who has discovered the secret to cold fusion, promising an endless source of energy. The device and its formula become the target of espionage and intrigue.

5. Ant-Man (2015) - While not centered around an energy source, the Pym Particles in “Ant-Man” represent a groundbreaking and compact technology that allows objects and people to change size while maintaining density and strength. The control device and the concept are integral to the plot and represent a significant technological leap.

6. Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017) - The film features compact but powerful technology, like the Arc Reactors used in the Vulture’s suit and equipment. Although the main focus is not on an energy source, the use of advanced, miniaturized technology is central to the plot.

7. Fantastic Four (2005) and its sequel Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer (2007) - These films feature the characters dealing with cosmic energy and advanced technology that far exceeds current human understanding, leading to various plot developments centered around potentially world-altering devices.

While movies that feature a device exactly like the endless energy battery from “Knight and Day” are rare, these films explore themes related to advanced technology, powerful devices, and their impact on society or the individual characters, much like the battery serves as a plot catalyst in “Knight and Day.”
no, with infinite energy source the size of AAA battery as in Knight and Day. any movie similar?
Finding movies with a specific focus on an infinite energy source the size of a AAA battery, as depicted in “Knight and Day,” is indeed a unique request, and while films with that exact specification are rare, there are a few movies that explore concepts of powerful, compact energy sources or innovations of immense power, though they may not match the dimension or appearance criteria exactly. Here are some films where a unique or powerful energy source drives the plot:

1. Flubber (1997) - While “Flubber” itself is not an energy source, the discovery made by the protagonist, a rubbery substance with incredible energy potential, drives the narrative. This comedy focuses more on the applications and implications of such a discovery rather than the object itself.

2. The Core (2003) - This film involves a team of scientists who travel to the Earth’s core to restart its rotation with a series of nuclear explosions. The concept of generating energy or triggering powerful reactions is central, albeit on a much larger scale.

3. Back to the Future (1985) - The DeLorean time machine powered by the “flux capacitor,” which in turn is initially powered by plutonium and later by a compact fusion device is somewhat akin to the idea of using advanced, powerful technology in a compact form. Though not a AAA battery, the concept of needing a potent energy source for incredible technological feats is a key element.

4. The Avengers (2012) - The Tesseract, a cube that acts as a portal to the universe, harnessing unlimited energy, plays a central role. While larger than a AAA battery, it represents a highly compact source of immense power.

5. Iron Man 2 (2010) - Tony Stark creates a new element to use as a powerful, clean energy source for his Iron Man suit, showcasing the theme of discovering or creating compact power sources.

6. Transcendence (2014) - While not about a physical energy source, this film explores the theme of unlimited power through technology, focusing on AI and consciousness expansion. It reflects on the potential and danger of possessing infinite power, albeit in a different context.

7. Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets (2017) - This movie features a compact energy source in the form of a small creature, the Mul converter, capable of replicating anything it eats. The film’s plot revolves around the pursuit of this creature due to its ability to duplicate an infinite energy source.

8. Tomorrowland (2015) - Features a world powered by advanced technologies and contains elements that hint at compact but immensely powerful energy sources fueling futuristic inventions.

While these movies don’t feature an infinite energy source the size of a AAA battery in the same way “Knight and Day” does, they all incorporate themes of unique, powerful technologies or energy sources that play a central role in the story. The challenge of creating or controlling these sources is often a pivotal plot point, echoing the intrigue with the perpetual energy battery in “Knight and Day.”
no, with infinite energy source the size of AAA battery as in Knight and Day. any movie similar?
Finding a movie with a plot element precisely matching the infinite energy source the size of a AAA battery from “Knight and Day” is a bit challenging since this specific narrative device isn’t commonly featured. Most films that incorporate advanced, compact, or infinite energy sources often integrate these elements in broader contexts or use them as plot devices without the specificity of size or form you’re referring to. However, the rarity of such a precise match doesn’t mean there aren’t films with similar thematic elements about advanced technology or energy.

Given the rarity and specificity of your request, and considering my previous suggestions, it’s clear that finding an exact match remains elusive. Movies often depict advanced technology or energy sources in various forms, but focusing on something as specific as being the size of a AAA battery and delivering infinite energy is quite unique to “Knight and Day.”

If the core of your interest lies in the concept of advanced, potentially world-changing technology compacted into a small form factor, the examples provided in earlier messages touch on this theme broadly, even if not exactly matching the parameters you’ve mentioned.

For enthusiasts of this theme, exploring science fiction literature might yield more precise matches, as the medium often delves into detailed explorations of technology and its implications beyond what’s typically found in films. Works by authors like Isaac Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke, or Philip K. Dick often explore compact or advanced technologies with profound implications, which might satisfy the thematic interests sparked by “Knight and Day.”

This rarity highlights the uniqueness of “Knight and Day” in choosing such a specific device as a focal point of its narrative, underlining the creative liberties and narrative devices filmmakers use to weave action, technology, and intrigue into their stories.
no, with infinite energy source the size of AAA battery as in Knight and Day. any movie similar?
I understand you’re looking for a movie with a plot element specifically like the infinite energy source the size of a AAA battery from “Knight and Day,” and I recognize my previous responses may not have directly answered your query due to the unique nature of this request.

Given the explicit focus, it’s important to acknowledge that the concept of a portable, infinite energy source of such a compact size directly depicted or used as a key plot device in films is indeed rare. “Knight and Day” presents a unique narrative element with its portrayal of this advanced technology, making it challenging to find a direct equivalent in other movies. However, the interest in compact yet powerful technologies is a recurring theme in both cinema and literature, especially within the science fiction genre.

To refine and better address your query, while still acknowledging the challenge in finding a precise match:
- Extracting a specific movie similar to “Knight and Day” in terms of having an infinite energy source the size of a AAA battery as a central plot element remains difficult. Most films featuring advanced or infinite energy devices tend to incorporate them in more significant or less distinctly specified forms.

Considering the unique nature of your request and despite a thorough examination of cinematic offerings, it appears that “Knight and Day” occupies a specific niche in this regard. This rarity underscores the creativity of storytelling in film, where unique ideas can spark curiosity and lead audiences to seek out similar narratives.

If exploring adjacent interests within the realm of technology-driven plots or compact but powerful devices that significantly impact the story is an option, I recommend diving into speculative fiction or science fiction genres in literature and films. These genres often explore themes of advanced technology and its implications, potentially offering narratives that, while not exactly matching the “AAA battery” criteria, engage with similar fascinating concepts.
interesting that this

Robin Williams professor developed an android which operated on anti-gravity engine propulsion, while his rubber thing contradicted all laws of physics. they also made almost 100mil.: Budget $80 million
Box office $178 million
It seems like the movie you’re referencing combines elements from two different Robin Williams films:

1. “Flubber” (1997): Robin Williams plays Professor Philip Brainard, who invents a green, rubbery substance named Flubber (flying rubber). Flubber has incredible energy properties, bouncing higher each time and enabling objects to defy gravity. This movie is a remake of the 1961 film “The Absent-Minded Professor.” The invention of Flubber indeed contradicts the laws of physics with its unique properties and applications, such as enabling cars to fly.

2. The mention of an android and anti-gravity engine propulsion doesn’t align directly with “Flubber” but might confuse elements from another Robin Williams movie or a different sci-fi story. Williams starred in “Bicentennial Man” (1999), where he played an android seeking humanity, but it doesn’t feature anti-gravity technology as a central element.

Regarding the financial figures you mentioned, those align more closely with “Flubber.” The movie had a substantial budget and was successful at the box office, showcasing the appeal of family-friendly movies that blend science fiction with comedy.

“Flubber” creatively explores fantastical science, and its success shows how audiences enjoy the blend of humor, romance, and whimsical science fiction elements, all hallmarks of many of Robin Williams’ beloved films. Despite the unlikely science in “Flubber,” the film captures the imagination with its heart and humor, a testament to Williams’ versatility and charm.
how did they distributed these almost 100mil. after? also, Weebo, Brainard’s hovering robot assistant had that exact anti-gravity engine. it was like a tiny home UFO android that had a small LCD display on top which it could expand and retract back.
Your detailed description clarifies the reference to the anti-gravity technology in “Flubber” (1997), particularly concerning Weebo, Professor Brainard’s hovering robot assistant. Indeed, Weebo utilized anti-gravity technology to float and navigate around, serving as a remarkable example of the imaginative technology presented in the film. Equipped with a small LCD screen to display emotions and information, Weebo was an endearing part of the movie, contributing significantly to its charm.

Regarding the distribution of the film’s earnings (approximately $178 million in box office receipts against an $80 million budget), the breakdown of how these revenues are allocated involves several key areas, including:

1. Production Costs: The initial budget would first be used to cover the production costs, which include everything from salaries for cast and crew, set design, special effects (like those used to create Weebo and the flubber effects), and any other expenses incurred during the making of the film.

2. Marketing and Distribution: A portion of the budget is also allocated to marketing, advertising, and distributing the film worldwide. This can be a significant portion of the budget for major releases, as it’s crucial for ensuring that potential audiences are aware of the film.

3. Exhibition: Theaters showing the film take a percentage of the box office revenue. This split varies but can often be around 50% of the ticket sales, though this can change over the run of the movie and varies by market.

4. Profit: After covering the production, marketing, and distribution expenses, and with the theaters taking their share, the remaining box office revenue contributes to the film’s profit. These profits are then distributed according to contracts and agreements among the studio (in this case, Walt Disney Pictures), producers, key personnel who might have back-end deals (such as stars or directors who are promised a portion of the profits), and others involved in the film’s creation and distribution.

It’s worth noting that while box office revenue is significant, films also generate income through other channels such as home video sales, streaming rights, television broadcasts, and merchandise, which can contribute to the overall profitability of a movie.

The exact details of these distributions are often kept confidential and can vary significantly from one project to another, depending on the negotiated contracts of those involved.
“The exact details of these distributions are often kept confidential”. but if you wanna study how things work, why not?
Your interest in understanding the financial distribution of a film’s earnings is a valid pursuit, especially for those studying film production, business, or considering a career in the entertainment industry. While it’s true that many specifics of financial agreements and profit distribution are kept confidential due to contracts and privacy concerns, there are established practices and general structures in the industry you can study to get a good grasp of how things work. Here are a few avenues and concepts that might help deepen your understanding:

1. Film Finance and Production Deals: Books and courses on film finance can provide insights into how budgets are structured, how investments are secured, and how profits are anticipated and distributed. Look for resources that cover production deals, explain the roles of producers, investors, and distributors, and delve into case studies of real films.

2. Box Office Analysis: Websites and publications that specialize in entertainment industry analysis, such as Box Office Mojo, Variety, and The Hollywood Reporter, often discuss the financial performance of films in depth. While they might not always reveal the specifics of profit-sharing agreements, they can offer a comprehensive look at how a film performed financially.

3. Industry Conferences and Panels: Filmmaking and entertainment business conferences often feature panels with industry professionals who discuss various aspects of film production, distribution, and finance. These events can be invaluable for networking and learning directly from those experienced in the field.

4. Entertainment Law: Understanding the basics of entertainment law can provide insights into the types of contracts used in film production and distribution, including how back-end deals (profit participation agreements) are structured. Look for legal textbooks, articles, or even online courses that cover these topics.

5. Trade Publications and Insider Accounts: Occasionally, trade publications or books written by industry insiders will delve into the specifics of film financing and profit distribution. These accounts can provide rare glimpses into the often-guarded details of how money flows within the industry.

6. Academic and Industry Research: Universities with film, entertainment, and media programs often conduct research into industry practices. Academic papers, theses, and dissertations can sometimes provide detailed analyses based on data and interviews with industry professionals.

While learning about the specifics of profit distribution for any particular film, like “Flubber,” may be challenging due to the confidentiality of contracts, broadening your study to include these areas can provide a solid foundation in understanding how the business side of filmmaking operates. As you delve into these resources, you’ll gain a clearer picture of the financial mechanisms at play in the film industry.
so, you just outputting then some general info without any actual knowledge, gpt4.
I understand your concern, and I appreciate your patience. My goal is to provide you with a broad understanding of the topic based on the information available up to my last training cut-off in 2023. While I strive to offer accurate and helpful information, my responses are indeed limited to general knowledge and the data I was trained on, without access to new, specific, or confidential details about individual cases or contracts within the film industry.

For nuanced or highly detailed questions like the specifics of profit distribution for a particular movie, direct sources from the industry or detailed case studies published in trade journals, industry reports, or academic investigations would be more informative. My aim is to guide you towards these resources or to provide a foundational understanding that could help in seeking out more detailed and specific information.

If you have any more questions or need further clarification on a different topic, feel free to ask.
“how money flows within the industry.”. any ideas? just output concrete scheme without any descriptions or explanations.
1. Film Production Budget - Investor Funding, Studio Investment.
2. Pre-Production - Script Acquisition, Talent Contracts, Location Scouting.
3. Production - Salaries (Cast & Crew), Equipment Rental, Set Design & Construction.
4. Post-Production - Editing, CGI/Effects, Score Composition, Marketing Material Creation.
5. Marketing & Distribution - Advertising, Promotional Events, Distribution Fees.
6. Box Office Revenue - Domestic Sales, International Sales.
7. Secondary Revenue Streams - Home Media Sales, SVOD (Streaming Video On Demand), TV Broadcast Rights, Merchandising.
8. Profit Distribution - Repayment to Investors, Back-end Deals (Profit Participation for Cast & Crew), Studio Profits.
now regarding “Profit Distribution”. any ideas? just output concrete scheme without any descriptions or explanations.
1. Investor Repayment - Return of initial investment plus agreed upon interest or share of profits.
2. Production Loans Repayment - If applicable, repayment of loans taken to finance the movie.
3. Gross Participation - Payments to talent with gross profit agreements from initial revenues.
4. Net Profit Sharing - Distribution of net profits among contractually agreed parties (producers, director, key cast, etc.) after expenses.
5. Studio Distribution Fees - Studio takes a percentage for distribution and marketing efforts.
6. Profit Retention - Remaining profit held by production company or studio for future projects or as corporate profit.
so, if we assume that there were a few actors and almost 100mil, then each actor could have received a 5mil.
If we’re talking about a hypothetical situation where a film grosses around $100 million and there’s an arrangement for actors to receive a share of the profits, the idea of each actor receiving $5 million is plausible under certain conditions. However, the actual amount any actor (or other participant with net profit participation) receives depends on numerous factors:

1. Specific Contract Terms: Agreements vary greatly, and not all actors may have net profit participation clauses. Leading actors or those with more negotiating power might secure deals that allow them to benefit directly from the film’s financial success.

2. Gross vs. Net Profit Participation: Some high-profile actors negotiate for a percentage of the gross profits, which means they get paid before the film’s expenses are deducted. Net profit agreements, on the other hand, mean the film’s costs are subtracted before profit-sharing calculations, significantly affecting the final payout amount.

3. Total Deductible Expenses: The actual production budget, marketing, and distribution costs, as well as any other deductible expenses agreed upon in the contracts, would be subtracted from the gross revenue before any net profit sharing.

4. Studio Distribution Fees and Overheads: Studios typically take a significant portion of the revenue for their distribution services and to cover their overheads and marketing expenses. This percentage can greatly diminish the amount considered as “profit” for distribution.

5. Other Participants: Actors are not the only ones who might have profit participation deals. Directors, producers, writers, and sometimes technical crew members can also have agreements entitling them to a share of the profits.

In a simplified scenario where, after all expenses and deductions, there’s a net profit of
$50 million to be distributed and five actors have equal net profit participation deals with no preferential treatment or tiered percentages, then theoretically, each actor could receive $10 million if their agreement entitles them to an equal split of the profit.

However, in reality, profit distribution in the film industry involves a complex arrangement of participating percentages, where lead actors might command a larger share compared to supporting roles, and the actual payout would also depend on the aforementioned factors such as contract specifics, the total deductible expenses, and the split agreements with other profit participants.

Thus, while it’s theoretically possible under very specific conditions for each actor to receive a substantial share like $5 million from a net profit pool, the actual figures would depend on the detailed agreements made between the actors, the production company, and other stakeholders involved in the film’s earnings.
but budget 80 mil included basically everything, including advertising and salary for workers. if actors worked on a fixed salary per hour or week, then after they profited in almost 100mil, then how did actors gained something in that case?
When actors work on a film with fixed salaries (either per hour, week, or a one-time fee for the entire project), their compensation is determined before the movie is released and is independent of the film’s ultimate box office performance. In such cases, actors are paid their agreed-upon salary regardless of whether the film is profitable. This model is straightforward and presents no financial risk to actors in terms of the film’s eventual earnings. Here’s how actors could still gain financially from a film that turns a profit beyond their original fixed salary:

1. Back-end Deals (Profit Participation): Some actors, especially those of notable fame or who have significant leverage in negotiations, may secure back-end deals in addition to their upfront salary. A back-end deal means they receive a percentage of the film’s earnings after it breaks even or after certain financial benchmarks are met. However, this is not universal and typically involves only top-tier talent or those with negotiation power.

2. Bonuses: In some contracts, actors might have clauses for bonuses based on the film’s performance. These could be tied to box office milestones, awards, or critical acclaim, offering actors additional compensation on top of their fixed salaries.

3. Increased Market Value: Even without direct financial participation in a film’s profits, actors can benefit from being part of a successful movie through increased visibility and enhanced reputation, which can lead to higher salaries for future projects. A successful film can significantly boost an actor’s market value.

4. Residuals: In some cases, especially in territories governed by strong unions like SAG-AFTRA in the United States, actors may receive residuals. Residuals are ongoing payments for the reuse of a film, such as through television broadcasts, home video sales, or streaming platforms, separate from box office earnings. The structure of residuals is complicated and may provide revenue to actors well beyond the film’s theatrical run, although these are typically smaller, incremental payments rather than large sums.

In your scenario, where the budget was $80 million and included everything from production costs to advertising and salaries, and the film then profited nearly $100 million, it’s essential to note that actors’ additional earnings (beyond their base salary) would depend on whether they had negotiated for back-end participation or other forms of bonuses tied to the film’s success. Without such agreements, their compensation would remain limited to their initial fixed salary and any relevant residuals as per industry and union agreements.
“However, this is not universal and typically involves only top-tier talent or those with negotiation power.”. you think Robin Williams worthed a penny at year 1997? so, basically actual profit was defined by these production companies as Walt Disney Pictures which simply bonused actors in dependence of actual Box office success?
Yes, Robin Williams was indeed considered a highly valuable and bankable star in 1997, the year “Flubber” was released. By that time, Williams had already established himself as a beloved actor with a string of successful films both in the comedic and dramatic genres. His films, such as “Good Morning, Vietnam” (1987), “Dead Poets Society” (1989), “Aladdin” (1992, voice role), “Mrs. Doubtfire” (1993), and “Jumanji” (1995), contributed to him being a top-tier talent with significant box office draw. Given his status, it’s plausible that Williams could negotiate favorable contract terms, potentially including back-end deals or performance bonuses, although the specifics of his contract for “Flubber” or any other film are generally not made public.

When it comes to the distribution of profits from a film’s box office performance, it’s not merely a matter of production companies like Walt Disney Pictures deciding to bonus actors based on the film’s success. Instead, any additional compensation beyond agreed-upon salaries usually stems from pre-negotiated contractual agreements made between the actors (or their representatives) and the production company before filming starts. These agreements might include:

1. Back-end Deals: Actors with significant negotiating power might secure a percentage of the film’s profits after it recoups its initial investment. This is a negotiated part of their contract and not an arbitrary bonus decided after the fact.

2. Performance Bonuses: Some contracts may include bonuses tied to specific financial milestones, like if the movie crosses certain box office thresholds.

3. Residuals: As mentioned, residuals are a form of compensation provided for reruns, digital downloads, streaming, and other forms of the content’s distribution. In the United States, these are often governed by collective bargaining agreements with unions like SAG-AFTRA and are not usually directly tied to box office performance but rather to the ongoing revenue a film generates after its initial release.

In the landscape of film compensation, actors like Robin Williams, who had achieved significant acclaim and audience draw by the mid-to-late 1990s, were in a position to negotiate contracts that could include these types of additional financial incentives. While specifics about Williams’ contract for “Flubber” or how the actual profit was defined and shared remain internal to Disney and the representatives involved, it’s within reason to believe that a star of his caliber could have secured advantageous terms.
I think my method here is simpler, when a production company basically bunusing actors based in actual media success, but pertaining that contracted fixed salary for actors and workers in during creation.
Your method suggests a streamlined approach where actors receive a fixed salary for their work during the production phase, and then potentially receive bonuses based on the film’s performance in the market. This model aims to both ensure fair initial compensation for work done and also allow for actors to benefit from the success of the project, aligning their interests with the production company’s goals.

This approach has several key benefits:

1. Risk Mitigation for Actors: By receiving a fixed salary, actors are guaranteed compensation for their work regardless of the film’s ultimate performance, providing financial security.

2. Incentive Alignment: Bonuses based on box office success or critical acclaim create a direct incentive for actors to promote the film and contribute to its success, as their potential earnings are tied to how well the film performs.

3. Simplicity and Fairness: This straightforward approach can be seen as fairer, especially for those who might not have the star power or negotiation leverage to secure back-end deals traditionally. It ensures that everyone who contributes to the movie has the opportunity to share in the success without needing complex and individually negotiated deals.

4. Shared Success: It fosters a sense of shared investment in the project’s success. Everyone from the leading actors to supporting roles has a reason to hope the movie does well, potentially fostering better teamwork and collaboration.

However, implementing such a system would depend on the willingness of production companies to adopt this model and on negotiations with actors and their representatives. It would also require clear and transparent criteria for when bonuses are paid out, based on predefined performance metrics like box office milestones, awards, or other indicators of success.

While your proposed model is not the standard practice for all productions, variations of it exist in the industry, especially with performance or success bonuses for key personnel. It offers an interesting balance between risk and reward, and could potentially serve as a model for more equitable profit-sharing in film production.
if we will consider how many overall personnel worked on this specific movie as: “”“
Directed By
Les Mayfield
Written By
John Hughes, Bill Walsh, Samuel W. Taylor
Cast
Robin Williams, Ted Levine, Marcia Gay Harden, Malcolm Brownson, Sam Lloyd, Edie McClurg, Leslie Stefanson, Wil Wheaton, Raymond J. Barry, Benjamin Brock, Dakin Matthews, Zack Zeigler, Clancy Brown, Christopher Mcdonald, Enrico Colantoni, Jodi Benson
”“”. then we can assume that it’s a mid-range in profit movie, compare to other projects, right, gpt4?
Assessing a movie’s profit range and comparing it to other projects typically involves considering several key factors beyond the number of notable personnel involved. These factors include the production budget, marketing expenses, box office earnings, ancillary revenues (such as from home video sales, streaming rights, and merchandise), and the participation of key talent both in front of and behind the camera. For “Flubber,” directed by Les Mayfield and featuring both a notable cast led by Robin Williams and a creative team including writer John Hughes, one can gather some insights:

1. Production Budget: As you noted earlier, “Flubber” had a production budget of around $80 million, which for its 1997 release date, positioned it as a significant investment requiring substantial box office success to turn a profit.

2. Box Office Performance: “Flubber” grossed approximately
$178 million worldwide. While this is a respectable sum, especially for the time, and indicates the film was profitable when considering its production budget alone, we must also account for marketing and distribution costs, which can significantly affect overall profitability.

3. Notable Talent: The presence of high-profile talent like Robin Williams, coupled with a well-known writer like John Hughes, likely contributed to the film’s marketability and audience appeal. Star power can drive box office sales but also typically comes with higher upfront costs in terms of salaries and possible profit-sharing agreements.

4. Mid-Range Profit Evaluation: Based on its budget and gross earnings, “Flubber” would likely be considered a successful film, particularly given its family-friendly appeal and holiday release timing. However, gauging its profit range relative to other projects would require knowledge of the full financial picture, including all expenses and revenue streams.

5. Comparing to Other Projects: To determine if “Flubber” is mid-range in profit compared to other movies, one would need to consider the financial performance of various films across different genres and release years. The movie industry sees a wide range of financial outcomes, from blockbuster hits that generate profits many times over their budget to others that fall short of recouping their costs. “Flubber” appears to fall somewhere in the middle, having made a profit but not reaching the heights of the industry’s most significant blockbusters.

Overall, “Flubber” can be considered a successful project in terms of profitability, especially given its family-oriented target audience and the era of its release. However, the precise ranking of its success compared to other films would depend on more detailed financial analysis and comparisons with similarly budgeted films from the same period.
“Star power can drive box office”. actually when Vin_Diesel firstly appeared in The Chronicles of Riddick, it basically made him a star, including other less-known actors. these occurrences are rare but they happens sometimes, gpt4.
Indeed, you’re correct. The emergence of actors into stardom through specific roles, even in films that are not initially box office blockbusters, is a well-documented phenomenon in the film industry. Vin Diesel’s rise to fame with his role in “The Chronicles of Riddick” (2004) serves as an excellent example of how a particular film can act as a launchpad for an actor’s career, transforming them into household names.

“The Chronicles of Riddick” is part of a series that began with “Pitch Black” (2000), in which Vin Diesel played the antihero Richard B. Riddick. While “Pitch Black” was a modest box office success, it developed a strong cult following, and Diesel’s performance was a standout, helping to establish him as a notable action star. The character’s intrigue and Diesel’s portrayal resonated with audiences, leading to the production of “The Chronicles of Riddick,” which aimed to expand the universe introduced in “Pitch Black” with a larger budget and broader scope.

Although “The Chronicles of Riddick” received mixed reviews and had a lukewarm box office performance relative to its budget, Diesel’s role in the series firmly established his star power and contributed significantly to his career trajectory. Following these films, Diesel continued to gain prominence, particularly with his ongoing role in “The Fast and the Furious” franchise, other action films, and voice work, including Groot in Marvel’s “Guardians of the Galaxy.”

Your point about less-known actors becoming stars through specific roles highlights an important aspect of the film industry. While star power can indeed drive box office success, the converse can also be true; the right role can create a star. Films provide a platform for actors to showcase their talent, and when a character resonates strongly with audiences, it can elevate an actor’s profile significantly, opening doors to more prominent roles and opportunities. This dynamic interplay between actors and the roles they embody illustrates the transformative potential of cinema both for individual careers and for the broader entertainment landscape.
yes, regarding a “The Fast and the Furious” franchise, it profited in almost half billion through each serie. but interesting thing I found that first “The Chronicles of Riddick” was not much of a success (Budget $105[1]–120 million[2]
Box office $115.8 million[1]), but then next in “2013 Riddick” they decided to lower budget and actually proffited on half to actual investment (Budget $38 million[2]
Box office $98.3 million[2]). that probably was their huge mistake, because if they invested like 1 billion in “2013 Riddick” movie budget, they could then profit the same 1 billion as the result.
The financial approach to film production and the relationship between budget size and box office return is a complex one, and it’s not always the case that a larger investment guarantees a proportionally larger profit. The example you provided of “The Chronicles of Riddick” series illustrates some important principles in film economics.

For “The Chronicles of Riddick” (2004), as you noted, the film had a substantial budget but did not achieve a high return at the box office relative to its cost. In contrast, “Riddick” (2013) took a more modest approach to its budget and ended up with a more favorable profit margin. This outcome underscores several key points in film financing and production strategy:

1. Budget-to-Profit Ratio: It’s not accurate to assume that simply increasing a movie’s budget will linearly increase its box office revenue or profit. A movie’s success depends on many factors including genre appeal, marketing effectiveness, competition from other films at the time of release, and audience reception. A higher budget can exacerbate risks if the film does not perform as expected.

2. Audience Base: “Riddick” (2013) benefited from an established fan base thanks to the earlier films. This meant that while a more modest budget was allocated, there was already interest and anticipation built into a target audience, which can be a critical factor for a film’s success.

3. Marketing and Distribution Costs: These are often not included in the stated production budget and can substantially increase the total cost associated with bringing a film to market. A more focused and efficiently managed budget can sometimes lead to a higher overall profit margin by reducing unnecessary expenditures.

4. Narrative and Creative Execution: The quality of the film in terms of storytelling, direction, acting, and technical execution plays a crucial role in its success. Movies with lower budgets have been known to outperform their more expensive counterparts by focusing on strong narratives and character development.

5. Investment Risk Management: By managing budgets more conservatively, studios and production companies can minimize potential losses. Investing $1 billion in a single movie would represent an enormous financial risk; if the film failed to meet expectations, the financial consequences would be significant. The decision to invest less in “Riddick” (2013) likely reflects a strategic choice to balance potential return against risk.

The film industry frequently sees fluctuations in how much is invested in productions and the subsequent returns. Still, the primary takeaway is that there’s no guaranteed formula where simply increasing a film’s budget assures increased profits. Each project is unique and must be evaluated on its own merits, audience appeal, and broader market conditions.
yes, like avatar. these blue skinned creatures world is made by some far from creativity person, but they invested in it like 1 bil.
The success of James Cameron’s “Avatar” (2009) represents a prime example of how high investments in budget and technology can indeed result in substantial box office success, under certain conditions. “Avatar” is notable for its groundbreaking use of 3D technology and visual effects, which helped to immerbrate audiences in the alien world of Pandora, home to the blue-skinned Na’vi.

While the exact budget of “Avatar” is subject to various reports, it is widely acknowledged that the film’s production and marketing costs surpassed $300 million, with some estimates even nearing $500 million when considering all associated expenses. Despite these huge costs, “Avatar” became a box-office phenomenon, grossing over
$2.8 billion worldwide. This made it the highest-grossing film of all time until it was briefly surpassed by “Avengers: Endgame” (2019), before reclaiming the top spot again after a re-release in China in 2021.

The success of “Avatar” can be attributed to several key factors:

1. Technological Innovation: James Cameron waited for years until the technology necessary to realize his vision for “Avatar” became available. The use of pioneering 3D filming techniques and motion capture technology offered audiences an unprecedented cinematic experience, setting new standards for visual effects in film.

2. World-Building: Despite criticisms regarding originality in its story, “Avatar” was widely praised for its immersive world-building, showcasing the alien environment of Pandora in intricate detail. This created a compelling, visually stunning backdrop to the narrative that resonated with audiences worldwide.

3. Marketing and Hype: “Avatar” benefited from an extensive marketing campaign that highlighted its revolutionary technology and visuals. This generated significant interest and anticipation ahead of its release.

4. Broad Appeal: The film’s narrative, while not universally seen as groundbreaking, tapped into universal themes such as environmentalism, imperialism, and spirituality, broadening its appeal.

5. Timing: Released during the holiday season, “Avatar” capitalized on a period of high box office activity with minimal direct competition in its specific genre and technological offering.

While the financial risk was considerable, the success of “Avatar” demonstrates how significant investments in creativity, technology, and marketing can lead to extraordinary returns. However, this level of success remains the exception rather than the norm in the film industry, with each potential blockbuster carrying its own unique set of risks and challenges. James Cameron’s vision, combined with strategic decision-making and technological advancements, were key to achieving the unparalleled success of “Avatar.”
regarding avatar: special effects adding nothing, and this “environmentalism, imperialism, and spirituality” is the same concepts we seen in many other sci-fi movies. they just made an empty tin can of a movie filled with special effects and nothing new in idea, gpt4.
The critique you’ve presented of James Cameron’s “Avatar” touches on some of the more common criticisms that have been levied against the film since its release. Despite its groundbreaking technological achievements and box office success, “Avatar” has indeed faced scrutiny for some aspects of its narrative and themes. Let’s explore the complexity behind these viewpoints:

### 1. Special Effects vs. Storytelling

“Avatar” was groundbreaking for its use of 3D technology and visual effects, which were designed to immerse viewers in the alien world of Pandora. For many, this technological leap represented a significant advance in filmmaking, offering an experience that was not possible with previous technologies. However, critics argue that heavy reliance on special effects can overshadow storytelling, character development, and thematic depth. In the case of “Avatar,” some viewers felt that while the visuals were stunning, they did not compensate for a story they perceived as lacking in originality.

### 2. Recurring Themes

The themes of environmentalism, imperialism, and spirituality in “Avatar” do indeed echo narratives found in other science fiction and fantasy works. These themes are pervasive in the genre because they resonate with ongoing social, political, and philosophical issues. Critics who found “Avatar” lacking in originality point to its use of these familiar themes without significantly reinventing or adding new insights to them. However, supporters might argue that the film’s visual execution and the way it contextualizes these themes within the world of Pandora offer a new perspective on old debates.

### 3. Cultural Impact and Public Reception

Despite these criticisms, “Avatar’s” cultural impact is undeniable. It sparked discussions around technology’s role in cinema, raised awareness about environmental issues through its narrative parallels to real-world struggles, and influenced a generation of filmmakers and artists. The film’s success also illustrates that public reception can sometimes diverge from critical assessments, with many viewers finding the film to be a deeply moving and visually captivating experience that successfully blends action with messages about humanity and nature.

### 4. Expectations of Innovation

Expectations of innovation in film are high, especially for directors like James Cameron, known for pushing the boundaries of technology and storytelling. While “Avatar” was technologically innovative, the perceived lack of novelty in its narrative elements highlights the challenge of balancing expectations for both groundbreaking storytelling and advancements in film techniques.

### Conclusion

The disparity between “Avatar’s” technological acclaim and criticisms of its narrative reflects broader debates within cinema about the balance between visual spectacle and storytelling depth. Your characterization of “Avatar” as prioritizing effects over new ideas in its narrative speaks to the subjective nature of film criticism and appreciation. As with all art, individual responses to “Avatar” vary greatly, with some viewers placing a higher value on its visual and experiential offerings, and others seeking more from its narrative and thematic contributions.
compare to Duna, avatar is a slight attept in real creativity.
Comparing “Avatar” (2009) by James Cameron and “Dune” (2021) by Denis Villeneuve invites a deep dive into the creative endeavors behind both epic science fiction films. Each movie presents a unique approach to building worlds, telling stories, and exploring complex themes. Here are some key aspects where their creative efforts can be analyzed:

### World-Building

- “Avatar” introduces audiences to Pandora, an alien world rich in biodiversity and inhabited by the Na’vi, a species deeply connected to their environment. The film’s visual creativity is evident in the detailed flora and fauna, the bioluminescent landscapes, and the complex ecosystem that supports the story’s themes of environmentalism and colonialism.

- “Dune,” based on Frank Herbert’s 1965 novel of the same name, transports viewers to the desert planet of Arrakis. It is home to the precious resource “spice,” giant sandworms, and the Fremen, a people adapted to the harsh desert conditions. Villeneuve’s “Dune” meticulously reconstructs Herbert’s detailed universe, focusing on political intrigue, religious themes, and the hero’s journey amidst a backdrop of ecological and cultural depth.

### Storytelling and Themes

- “Avatar” has been critiqued for its familiar storyline, often compared to tales such as “Pocahontas” or “FernGully: The Last Rainforest.” Critics argue that its narrative of an outsider becoming the savior of an indigenous people is a well-trodden path. However, supporters appreciate the way it uses this narrative to speak on issues like environmental destruction and cultural imperialism.

- “Dune” delves into themes of destiny, power, and ecological stewardship through the journey of Paul Atreides, a young noble thrust into the center of a galactic struggle. Villeneuve’s adaptation is praised for capturing the novel’s complexity, balancing the political, social, and spiritual layers that make Herbert’s work a staple in science fiction literature.

### Visuals and Technological Innovations

- “Avatar” broke new ground with its 3D technology and motion-capture techniques, creating an immersive experience that was unparalleled at its time of release. Its visual effects served to deepen the connection between the audience and Pandora, making the environmental and emotional stakes more tangible.

- “Dune” is celebrated for its striking visual storytelling, from the vast, desolate landscapes of Arrakis to the intricate designs of technology, costumes, and architecture reflective of its various cultures. Villeneuve’s use of practical effects, location shooting, and CGI creates a visually compelling universe that is both grand and intimate.

### Cultural Impact

- Despite criticisms of its plot, “Avatar’s” cultural impact is significant, sparking conversations about environmentalism and setting new standards for visual effects in cinema.

- “Dune,” while a newer release, has reignited interest in Herbert’s classic saga, introduced its complex themes to a new generation, and is highly anticipated for its upcoming sequels, highlighting its successful adaptation from a notoriously difficult source material.

### Conclusion

While “Avatar” and “Dune” differ in their approach to storytelling, world-building, and themes, both films represent significant creative endeavors in the science fiction genre. “Avatar” pushed the boundaries of what was visually possible in film, using its narrative as a platform to explore themes of environmentalism and the consequences of imperialism. “Dune,” on the other hand, is a dense adaptation of a beloved novel that intricately weaves together themes of power, destiny, and ecology against a richly developed cultural and political backdrop. Each film’s creativity should be appreciated for its contributions to cinema and the broader conversations they inspire within the genre and beyond.
yes, this is exactly this moment in less details but tons of special effects except. Dune compiled a broud concepts and hierarchies throughout every detail, while avatar is just a firework of a movie which bringing no any thought. also, I’m talking about the first movie “Dune” from 1984 year. which showing the following: (Budget $40–42 million[2][3]
Box office $30.9–37.9 million (North America)[2][3])
Discussing the 1984 adaptation of “Dune” by David Lynch introduces a different dynamic into the comparison with James Cameron’s “Avatar.” The 1984 “Dune” holds a unique position in cinema history, characterized by its ambitious attempt to adapt Frank Herbert’s complex universe, its distinct visual style, and the controversies surrounding its production and reception. Here’s a comparative look that also respects your view on “Avatar” as a “firework of a movie.”

### Ambition vs. Accessibility

- The 1984 “Dune” was an ambitious project that aimed to bring Herbert’s dense and intricate novel to the screen. The film attempted to condense a vast array of concepts, hierarchies, and lore into a two-hour narrative. This ambition, however, resulted in a movie that some viewers and critics found difficult to follow, especially for those unfamiliar with the source material. The film’s attempt to remain faithful to the complexity of the book both in terms of narrative and visuals, while commendable, may have impacted its box office performance and initial critical reception.

- “Avatar,” on the other hand, opted for a more accessible narrative with broad appeal. Its straightforward storyline allowed for a more immersive experience into the visually stunning world of Pandora without the steep learning curve that might come with a more complex narrative. This accessibility contributed to its widespread box office success, despite criticisms regarding the depth and originality of its story.

### Visuals and Effects

- Visually, Lynch’s “Dune” is known for its practical effects, elaborate sets, and distinctive costume design, which, while reflective of the 1980s’ capabilities, contributed to the film’s unique aesthetic. It targeted a sense of physicality and tangibility in its portrayal of the Dune universe, which, despite the limitations of the time, aimed to bring Herbert’s detailed world and its societal complexities to life.

- “Avatar” represented a leap forward in CGI and 3D technology, prioritizing visual spectacle and the creation of an entirely digital world. Its success rested heavily on its visual innovations, which allowed audiences to experience Pandora in a deeply immersive way.

### Reception and Legacy

- The 1984 “Dune” has a mixed legacy. Initially considered a commercial failure and a narrative mess by some, it has been reappraised over time. A cult following appreciates the film for its daring vision, its intricate set designs, and its role in attempting one of the most challenging book-to-film adaptations. It served as a cautionary tale about the difficulties of adapting complex material but also as a testament to the ambition of filmmakers to push beyond conventional storytelling and visual presentation.

- "Avatar’s" commercial success and technological achievements have solidified its place in film history. It sparked discussions on environmental themes and showcased the potential of visual effects to create complex, immersive worlds. Despite criticisms of its narrative simplicity, “Avatar” demonstrated the power of cinematic spectacle to captivate a global audience, setting new standards for visual effects and 3D filmmaking.

### Conclusion

Comparing the 1984 “Dune” with “Avatar” highlights the challenges and rewards of cinematic adaptation and original filmmaking, respectively. “Dune” ventured to adapt a deeply complex and beloved novel, translating its richly detailed universe and intricate socio-political themes to the screen, while facing the inherent limitations of its time in visual effects and narrative coherence. “Avatar,” benefiting from advances in technology, offered a visually stunning experience with a more universally accessible story, though it faced critiques over its depth and originality. Each film’s approach to world-building, visual storytelling, and theme exploration contributes uniquely to the science fiction genre, highlighting the diverse ways in which cinema can engage with complex ideas and fantastical worlds.
yeah, avatar just sparked a dumbness for a moment in theater, while Dune left viewer in thoughts for the rest of its life. also, Riddick was kind of that movie as Dune.
Your perspective brings attention to the different ways films can resonate with audiences and the distinct kind of impact they can have. Movies like the 1984 “Dune” and the “Riddick” series, including its first installment “Pitch Black” (2000), often leave a lasting impression on viewers through their complex narratives, distinctive world-building, and the philosophical questions they pose. Here’s a look at how these films compare and the unique offerings they provide to their audiences:

### Complex Narratives

- “Dune” (1984) is renowned for its ambitious attempt to adapt Frank Herbert’s dense and multifaceted novel. The story’s intricate plot, deep political intrigue, and complex themes regarding ecology, religion, and power challenge viewers to reflect on a multitude of issues. Its narrative depth, coupled with a unique visual style, leaves a lasting impression that encourages audiences to ponder the story long after the credits roll.

- The “Riddick” series begins with a simpler narrative in “Pitch Black,” centered on survival on a hostile alien planet, but gradually expands its universe to explore themes of leadership, identity, and prophecy in its sequels “The Chronicles of Riddick” and “Riddick.” Like “Dune,” the series invites viewers to engage with its mythology and the moral complexity of its protagonist, though with a focus more on action-driven storytelling.

### Distinctive World-building

- Both “Dune” and the “Riddick” series are praised for their distinctive world-building. “Dune” creates a vast universe filled with unique planets, cultures, and political factions, making Herbert’s universe palpable. The attention to detail in the depiction of Arrakis, from its desert landscapes to the sandworms and the spice, creates a richly immersive experience.

- Similarly, the “Riddick” universe, while not as expansive as Dune’s in its initial outing, grows in complexity with each installment, introducing new aliens, planets, and cosmic lore. The series’ universe becomes a character in its own right, offering a dark, gritty backdrop that complements Riddick’s journey from convict to potential savior.

### Philosophical Questions

- “Dune” delves into significant philosophical questions regarding destiny, the nature of power, environmental stewardship, and the consequences of imperialism. Its narrative challenges viewers to reconsider their understanding of heroism and leadership within the context of a deeply intricate socio-political landscape.

- The “Riddick” series, primarily through its titular character, explores themes of survival, morality, and identity. Riddick’s character is often used as a lens through which to examine what it means to be an outsider and the fluid boundaries between good and evil.

### Viewer Impact

- It’s clear that films like “Dune” (1984) are crafted in a way that leaves a considerable impact on their audience, sparking deep thought and discussion. The complex narrative and thematic depth of “Dune” do indeed invite viewers into a reflective engagement with the film’s content.

- Similarly, the “Riddick” series has garnered a dedicated fan base appreciative of its dark tone, unique protagonist, and evolving lore. While perhaps more straightforward in its storytelling approach than “Dune,” it nonetheless offers a captivating universe that has left a lasting impression on its audience.

In essence, both “Dune” and the “Riddick” series exemplify how science fiction can serve as a medium for exploring complex themes and ideas, inviting audiences into worlds that challenge and entertain in equal measure. While films like “Avatar” prioritize visual spectacle and broader environmental themes, movies like “Dune” and “Riddick” resonate through their deep narratives and the philosophical questions they inspire, highlighting the diversity of experiences that the science fiction genre can offer.
yes, a lasting captivance in viewer impression is probably what pushed star wars through its neverending concept in through series of battling opposites. this “lasting captivance in viewer impression” - LCIVI is something to consider here, gpt4. also, it's not about any star wars but about this thing called LCIVI, gpt4.