If they invest in film funds they have zero on their account, so every movie must recoup money otherwise the investment didn't made sense.
If they had Mozart today, they couldn't work with him, although he was a very adaptable man.
Today, I looked out at the word of mouth on Alone in the Dark and there seems to be a lot of medium, okay and good reviews coming out.
Let's put it this way: art house theaters are vanishing. They have almost disappeared completely, and that means there's a shift in what audiences want to see. And they have to be aware of that and be realistic. It's as simple as that.
We work very cost effective and I sell my movies in 100 territories on my own.
Take the hardcore gamers. The characters are way more real in the world of hardcore gamers who have played the game for hundreds of hours. They have the movie in their heads, they've built it on their own. These guys are always very disappointed in the movies.
I knew Law, and I knew theater. I didn't, of course, know American law, and in America the theater did not exist, except for Broadway.
Now while the German money is over for Hollywood, I still have $80 million to make movies, and we will have two things coming up: less major movies and the price for actors will go down.
We like Batman - we understand him, we suffer with him. On the other hand, we want to be Superman. But they're conflicting philosophies. Let's bring them together in one movie and see how we, as an audience, wrestle with our inner demons.
A movie like House of the Dead with around $7 million budget or Alone in the Dark with around $16 million budget are much easier to make profit than the typical $50 million major motion picture.