How rich is Hollywood? Richer and richer, at the top anyway.

The media industry's top executives reaped the benefits of a strong 2013 when companies like Fox, Disney and CBS all saw their stocks climb by double digits. 

In TheWrap‘s annual look at executive compensation (did someone say over-compensation?) Lionsgate CEO Jon Feltheimer earned a stunning 97 percent increase in compensation to $12.6 million while Executive Chairman Sumner Redstone took home a jaw-dropping $93.4 million, driven by a similar pay boost at both his companies, Viacom and CBS.

Check out the list here >

Redstone's chief executives at each company, Viacom CEO Philippe Dauman and CBS CEO Les Moonves, both enjoyed healthy pay increases as well.

“Sumner has paid Philippe and Les Moonves exorbitant amounts, and done it on the basis of paying ‘above average,'” Steven M. Davidoff, a professor at Ohio State University's Michael E. Moritz College of Law told TheWrap. ”But every year they move the average higher. It's a classic case study in excessive executive compensation.”

See All  TheWrap Compensation Surveys: 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

The disparity between media compensation and the high growth industry of technology remains vast, with the latter placing greater emphasis on a company's financial performance in determining compensation. Apple's Tim Cook, the CEO of a company worth more than Lionsgate, Viacom and CBS combined, earned $4.2 million, a 2 percent raise over the prior year. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg took a pay cut in the same year Facebook skyrocketed, making less than $1 million.

Executives like Cook, Zuckerberg and Netflix CEO Reed Hastings make their money by cashing stock options. Zuckerberg made $2.3 billion in 2012 by doing just that.

The link between performance and pay is not as clear in Hollywood. In Feltheimer's case, his company's stock soared with the blockbuster successes of “Hunger Games” and TV sales. Though earnings at Viacom rose in 2013, revenue dropped by one percent.

Viacom's share price has more than tripled over the past few years, but family control over the company also permits Redstone to continue to line his and his executives’ pockets. Dauman earned a $16.9 million cash bonus in 2013.

“In Silicon Valley we're still strongly in the ethic of you work for the upside,” technology forecaster Paul Saffo told TheWrap. “The traditional model here is an options based one, without a doubt. It comes out of the whole venture capital model. The model is that a company's founders provide sweat equity and capital markets provide the money.”

9. Mark Zuckerberg, "Facebook" Chairman & CEO ($650K)

Facebook CEO and Co-Founder Mark Zuckerberg earned $651,165 in 2013, down from $2 million dollars in 2012. His base salary in 2013 dropped to the ceremonial $1.

Of course, Zuckerberg, like many who made their fortune in start-ups, carries the bulk in his money in stock options. In 2013, Zuckerberg exercised a reported $3.3 billion worth of those. So don't worry, his Facebook Status is still “Filthy rich.”

Also read: Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg Gets Visionary With Wall Street After Strong Earnings Report

8. Tim Cook, "Apple" CEO ($4.2M)

This might seem like a small pay day for the CEO of one of the world's most valuable companies, but most top Apple executives earn money through stock that they cash out later.

Apple's stock has taken a beating over the last year and a half, as the company has not released a game-changing product since the iPad. That was only four years ago.

Cook did receive fewer stock awards this year as a result of the company's poor performance, but he's still banking plenty.

Also read: Apple Sells Record Number of iPhones and iPads to Start 2014

7. Jon Feltheimer, "Lionsgate" CEO ($12.6M)

Jon Feltheimer's compensation doubled to $12.6 million, a 97 percent gain in a year Lionsgate enjoyed success from “The Hunger Games” and “Twilight” franchises and TV sales. His package included $1.3 million in salary, $6 million in bonuses, $3.6 million in stock awards, $1.5 million in non-equity incentives, along with less material amounts in other compensation.

Lionsgate shares jumped 70 percent in the fiscal year that ended in March 2013, justifying the hefty pay increase.

The CEO and the company are enjoying the financial boon came from TV shows including “Nashville,” the early repayment of the Summit Entertainment term loan, and the performance of ”Hunger Games” ($690 million in box office).

Also read: ‘Divergent’ Finale ‘Allegiant’ Will Be Split Into Two Movies

Shortly after Disney announced in October 2012 that Star Wars: Episode VII is in development, fans have wondered whether or not the Expanded Universe, which consists of numerous novels and other ancillary material set in this world, will be used for this new trilogy, or the two untitled spin-offs. 

Simon Kinberg, who is working on one of the spin-offs, recently spoke to IGN at WonderCon, where he revealed that the Expanded Universe is being avoided, and that while the TV series now in production might go that route, the new trilogy and spin-offs are limited only to the first six movies already released.

"You know, it's not off-limits, and it's certainly inspiring - I'm working on an animated show for [Lucasfilm] as well, Star Wars: Rebels, that will take inspiration from everywhere, but - I know for the movies, the canon is the canon, and the canon is the six films that exist."

Just one day after the Disney/LucasFilm announcement in October 2012, we reported that Star Wars: Episode VII would be an original story. Fans had hoped the story would center on The Thrawn Trilogy, based on the novels written by Timothy Zahn which many believe is a part of the canon.

We have known for quite some time that the spin-offs would center on Han Solo and Boba Fett, the later of which is being written by Lawrence Kasdan. When asked to confirm whether or not these characters will be showcased in either spin-off, Simon Kinberg wouldn't confirm, but he did say that they want to honor the original trilogies while telling a new story.

Star Wars: Episode VII comes to theaters December 18th, 2015 and stars Harrison Ford, Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, Billy Dee Williams, Anthony Daniels. The film is directed by J.J. Abrams.

Untitled Star Wars Han Solo Spin-Off comes to theaters in 2017 and stars Harrison Ford.

Untitled Star Wars Boba Fett Spin-Off comes to theaters in 2017.

SEE ALSO: 'Star Wars: Episode VII' Is Already In Production With Casting Almost Complete

Join the conversation about this story »

 Heather Graham is taking a stand.

The Californication actress, 44, recently spoke to Esquire.com and sounded off on what she sees as pervading sexism in the movie industry. 

 Asked about her recent run of "sexy mother roles" in projects including Petals on the Wind and Judy Moody and the Not Bummer Summer, Graham commented, "I'm just glad to be working. I'm not actually a mom in real life, so it's fun to pretend to be one. I like to approach things the same in art as in life. You can choose to look on the positive side and enjoy whatever roles you're given. You can find the silver lining in anything."

"I'm not saying the movie business isn't sexist," the actress continued to Esquire.com. "It's totally sexist. If you look at all the movies being made these days, eighty percent of them are about men."

"There's not much I can do about it," the Boogie Nights star said, resigning herself. "It's a sexist world and a sexist industry. But I've been very lucky as an actress, to work as much as I have and as consistently as I have. And when you don't see the kind of stories out there that represent you, you have to make them yourself."

Graham, who recently reprised one of her most famous roles with a cameo in The Hangover: Part III, is hardly the first actress to comment on sexism in Hollywood. Girls star Lena Dunham spoke out at March's SXSW festival, commenting on women getting typecast and saying about her own limitations, "There's no place for me in the studio system."

Cate Blanchett took the public platform of the 2014 Oscars to make her voice heard. "Those of us in the industry who are still foolishly clinging to the idea that female films, with women at the center, are niche experiences," the Australian star said in her acceptance speech for the honor of Best Actress. "They are not—audiences want to see them and, in fact, they earn money. The world is round, people."

Olivia Wilde also chimed in, saying at a panel in February, "It's really hard to get stories made that are about women—not just women being obsessed with men or supporting men. And it's really hard to get men to be a part of films that are about women in a leading role."

More From Us Weekly:

In Photos: Heather Graham’s Style

In Photos: Celebrities Who've Lost or Gained Weight for Movie Roles

In Photos: Stars’ Big Breaks

In Photos: Celebrities Who’ve Played Porn Stars

In Photos: Stars As Strippers

SEE ALSO: Female Protagonists Made Up A Tiny Percentage Of 2013's Top Movies

Join the conversation about this story »

William Hurt has dropped out of the Gregg Allman biopic Midnight Rider, two months after production was suspended following the death of 27-year-old camera assistant Sarah Jones. Since William Hurt was playing Gregg Allman in this adaptation of the singer's biography, it remains unclear whether or not the production will start back up again, as investigations continue into the tragic on-set accident.

Production was taking place in Atlanta, Georgia when, on February 20, a train collided with film equipment in rural Doctortown, GA, where the crew was setting up for shooting on a train trestle that overlooks the Altamaha River, resulting in Sarah Jones' death and seven other crew members getting injured. According to Deadline, the movie's producers were apparently still trying to rally the crew to continue production in the days following, but shooting was eventually suspended.

William Hurt was one of the actors on the bridge who were filming a dream sequence involving a mattress laying on the tracks, and nearly escaped injury on February 20. The actor was said to be visibly shaken after the incident, and it wasn't known if he would come back. The actor is currently shooting another movie overseas, The Moon and the Sun with Pierce Brosnan.

A source close to the production reveals that the producers were already looking to recast several roles, including the Gregg Allman character played by William Hurt. Director Randall Miller reportedly wants to shift production from the Atlanta area to Los Angeles, where his Unclaimed Freight Productions company is based, in hopes to restart production as early as June. News of the production restart has prompted a flurry of activity on the Internet in protest, including a page entitled "I Refuse To Work on Midnight Rider," which has almost 11,000 members.

Investigations are still ongoing regarding who may be to blame for Sarah Jones' death. Randall Miller, his Unclaimed Freight Productions company and other crew members could face criminal or civil lawsuits once the investigations are completed.

Midnight Rider is in development and stars Eliza Dushku, Bradley Whitford, Wyatt Russell, Kathy Baker, Joel Moore, Aldis Hodge, Tyson Ritter, Chad Lindberg. The film is directed by Randall Miller.

SEE ALSO: Freight Train Smashes Into Movie Crew Filming Gregg Allman Biopic, Killing One

Join the conversation about this story »

This summer marks the 30th anniversary of the popular second installment of the Indiana Jones series, "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom."

However, a more important anniversary is what "Temple of Doom" helped to usher in — the creation of the PG-13 rating, a box-office sweet spot that would shape film production.

Here's how the rating came to be.

A Darker Dr. Jones

Of all the films in the Indiana Jones series, there's no doubt that 1984's PG-rated "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" is the darkest.

As producer George Lucas explained to Empire, "Part of it was I was going through a divorce, Steven had just broken up, and we were not in a good mood. It ended up darker than we thought it would be. Once we got out of our bad moods ... we kind of looked at it and went, 'Mmmmm, we certainly took it to the extreme.'"

Those extremes — which included an incredibly violent human-sacrifice scene— outraged parents who brought their children to the PG-rated film. Still, the darker installment was massively popular and brought in $179 million in the U.S. alone.

"Everybody was screaming, screaming, screaming that it should have had an R-rating, and I didn’t agree," director Steven Spielberg told The Associated Press in 2004.

But with no rating in between PG and R, Spielberg would come up with a compromise that would change movies and the rating system forever.

A New Rating

Up until 1984, there had been only four ratings that a film could receive: G, PG, R, and X (which would later become NC-17).

Films like "Temple of Doom," which were too mature for PG audiences but not mature enough for the R rating, would find themselves in limbo.

Spielberg found this "netherworld" rating unfair to both filmmakers and audiences. So, according to a 2008 interview with Vanity Fair, Spielberg says he came up with a new rating that would bridge the gap:

"I remember calling Jack Valenti [then the president of the Motion Picture Association] and suggesting to him that we need a rating between R and PG, because so many films were falling into a netherworld, you know, of unfairness. Unfair that certain kids were exposed to Jaws, but also unfair that certain films were restricted, that kids who were 13, 14, 15 should be allowed to see. I suggested, 'Let’s call it PG-13 or PG-14, depending on how you want to design the slide rule,' and Jack came back to me and said, 'We’ve determined that PG-13 would be the right age for that temperature of movie.' So I’ve always been very proud that I had something to do with that rating."

On Aug. 10, 1984, only three months after parents were outraged over the release of PG-rated "Temple of Doom," "Red Dawn," a drama starring Patrick Swayze, became the first film to be released with the PG-13 rating.

The Popularity And Profitability Of PG-13

Over the next 30 years, the PG-13 rating would become one of the most popular and profitable ratings in the film industry.

Six of the top 10 highest-grossing domestic films of all time are rated PG-13.

The highest-grossing film ever, 2009's PG-13-rated "Avatar," raked in $760 million at the domestic box office, while the highest-grossing R-rated film, 2004's "The Passion of the Christ," took in a comparatively low $370 million.

With its ability to be both safe and threatening while still reaching a mass audience, the rating has become a great marketing tool for most major studios.

"In a way it’s better to get a PG-13 than a PG for certain movies," Spielberg told the AP. "It turns a lot of young people off. They think it’s going to be too below their radar and they tend to want to say, 'Well, PG-13 might have a little bit of hot sauce on it.'"

SEE ALSO: Harrison Ford Explained The Story Behind The Best Scene In 'Indiana Jones'

MORE: How Steven Spielberg Made Millions Off 'Star Wars' After A 1977 Bet With George Lucas

Join the conversation about this story »

Avi Lerner wants the U.S. government to be more proactive in its fight against piracy, but does not have much faith in President Barack Obama to act on it.

“We've got a major problem with [President] Obama, who is scared of Google,” Lerner told TheWrap.

Also read: Why America Is Looking to UK for Help Fighting Piracy

Hollywood continues to fret over the theft of their intellectual property, especially in countries like Spain, Italy, China and Russia. Yet recent legal efforts have failed, and politicians have shifted their focus to persuading the American public that piracy is bad.

Many applaud those efforts, including Lerner.

“Most of the people in the world, especially young children, don't think they have to pay to see a movie,” Lerner said. “They don't understand that by doing this, we are losing millions and billions of dollars.”

Also read: How Companies Like BroadbandTV Have Helped Hollywood Turn Piracy Into Millions

Lisa Wilson, co-founder of the The Solution Entertainment Group, agrees.

“One of the biggest problems we face is the younger generation doesn't necessarily see it as stealing,” Wilson told TheWrap.

She described the government's efforts as “not terribly successful.” Lerner took it a step further. He wants the government to go after companies like Google, whose search engine surface results to website hosting pirated content.

Politicians would rather work with Google, but Lerner doesn't see it that, and he has directed his complaints straight at Obama.

“He said Google is bigger than all of the studios put together, and he can get more money from them,” Lerner said.

Wilson, when asked to elaborate on her thoughts, demurred that her board members would have more to say.

“Have you talked to Avi Lerner?” she asked/said.

SEE ALSO: How Sketchy Streaming Sites Really Work — And Why Some Are Legal

Join the conversation about this story »

In 2002, director Richard Linklater began filming then-six-year-old actor Ellar Coltrane, Ethan Hawke, and Patricia Arquette — and then periodically shot scenes over the next 12 years. 

The result is an incredible coming-of-age film in which we actually see the main character grow up — and his parents age — on screen.

Watch Coltrane transform below:

Linklater, who is the director behind the somewhat similar "Before Sunrise" trilogy, explained his unorthodox process to Indiewire:

"You know, every year I had a year to think up the next part, based on everything that had gone before. So by year four, I’ve got three years that I can look at, that are edited, that we’ve been working on, and I can feel where it’s going and where it wants to go. I was stuck with this kind of architecture but yet within that the décor, the details were always being reworked, being found. That’s kind of how I work on any movie, there’s always a strong outline, a structure and then within that structure, a certain looseness to work with the actors," he explained. "It makes you keep working—the night before, I want to have the great idea that keeps the scene interesting. I want to leave myself open to that."

"Boyhood" opens on July 11th. 

SEE ALSO: 15 Movies You Should See This Summer

Join the conversation about this story »

Arnold Schwarzenegger's 1987 sci-fi action film "Predator" is today most remembered for one amazing line: “Get to the choppa!”

You've probably heard the movie line before, but why are we still saying it today?

Schwarzenegger, who played Major Alan “Dutch” Schaeferd in the movie, actually said the line straight as he yells it to character "Anna" to quickly board the helicopter after the rest of his team has been killed by the Predator. But with the actor's thick European accent, it unintentionally came across as comical.

Since then, the line has become a part of our general lexicon.

According to Urban Dictionary, "Get To Da Choppa!" means "that one is saying that they must attain whatever goal it is that is set forth. 'Getting the choppa' is the act of succeeding in this goal and is the highest possible recognition." The entry adds that "It's used when there is no need to mention where you're going, you all already know where you're going. So you just yell 'GET TO DA CHOPPA!!!!'"

In the game World of Warcraft, "Get to the Choppa" became an achievement badge "which could be unlocked once the player obtains a Mechano-hog or Mekgineer’s Chopper, both motorcycles," according to knowyourmeme.

The phrase was also featured as an unlockable title in "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2" once the player completes the “Chopper Gunner I” challenge by calling in 3 Chopper Gunner helicopters.

In April 2009, the quote was  even featured in a U.S. Library of Congress report titled “Wise Guide to Helicopters.”

During a recent "Tonight Show" appearance, host Jimmy Fallon made Schwarzenegger partake in a QVC cooking show skit in which the actor had to say his infamous line over and over again.

According the the below Google Trends chart, the phrases "get to the chopper" and "get to the choppa" have only become more searched since the film's 1987 release.

"Predator," which was made for $15 million, has since gone on to earn over $98 million worldwide. It even snagged an Oscar nod in 1988 for Best Visual Effects.

SEE ALSO: How ‘Indiana Jones’ Finally Forced Hollywood To Create The PG-13 Rating

Join the conversation about this story »

For the first time in 9 years a Pixar film will not be on the summer movie schedule.

Fans will have to wait until next year's "The Good Dinosaur" to enjoy the vibrant colors and heartfelt story that has helped make Pixar an animation giant for over a decade.

But how did Pixar come to dominate the industry in the first place?

Most will recall the studio taking off after 1995's "Toy Story," but that was only one film. Without a lineup of great films to follow, Pixar could have easily been one and done.

That is why one lunch meeting at the Hidden City Café in Point Richmond, California may be one of the most important moments in Pixar's history.

The Lunch

In the summer of 1994, director John Lasseter, writers Andrew Stanton, Joe Ranft, and Pete Docter were putting the finishing touches on Pixar's first feature, "Toy Story" when, during a lunch meeting, a big question was raised: "What is Pixar going to do next?"

"'Toy Story' was almost complete and we thought, well geez, if we're going to make another movie we have to get started now,"Stanton later recalled of the lunch conversation.

According to the New York Times, Lasseter, Stanton, Ranft, and Docter then started a brainstorming session sketching the outlines and characters that would make up four of the studio's greatest films (1998's "A Bug's Life," 2001's "Monsters, Inc.," 2003's "Finding Nemo," and 2008's "WALL-E") on nothing more than the napkins on their table.

"There was something special that happened when John, Joe, Pete and I would get in a room," Stanton told the Post and Courier. "Whether it was furthering an idea or coming up with something, we just brought out the best in each other."

The story of the famed lunch became something of legend (the story even made it into the teaser trailer for "WALL-E"), but for Stanton there was much more to the creation of those films than just a mythical lunch.

"Well, I'm trying to dispel a little bit of it, before it turns too mythical," Stanton later told the Times-Picayune of the lunch. "The truth is, there are people who worked really hard at making things like 'Monsters' and 'Nemo' really turn into the great stories they were way after those lunches."

One Lunch, $1 Billion Box Office

Since that lunch, Pixar has gone on to be one of the biggest and most critically acclaimed studios in the history of animation.

Pixar's 14 films have brought in $3.5 billion at the domestic box office. Of that, the four films created at the table that day have brought in nearly $1 billion combined. Those four films have also spawned two sequels (2013's "Monsters University" and the upcoming "Finding Dory") and have been nominated for a combined 15 Academy Awards, winning 3.

Those at the lunch would go on to other great things themselves. Lasseter went on to direct "A Bug's Life" before becoming the Chief Creative Officer at Disney. Docter would go on to direct "Monsters, Inc.," Stanton would direct "Finding Nemo" and "WALL-E," and Joe Ranft would also go on to create other features at Pixar before dying in 2005.

As for the place where the fabled lunch took place, the Hidden City Café (which was actually included in "Monsters, Inc." as seen above) closed its doors in 2012.

SEE ALSO: 12 Places In Pixar Movies That Actually Exist In Real Life

MORE: How ‘Indiana Jones’ Finally Forced Hollywood To Create The PG-13 Rating

Join the conversation about this story »

The evolution of digital media has radically shifted how audiences ingest movies and television. Buying DVDs has become old-fashioned in a world where clouds can hold all our online movie files. And theaters are now competing with streaming video libraries that offer scads of titles for less than a movie ticket.

DreamWorks Animation chief Jeffrey Katzenberg has been watching all this unfold, and he believes there's an even bigger shift coming.

Variety reports Jeffrey Katzenberg was a guest speaker at the Beverly Hills' Milken Global Conference on the Entrepreneurial Leadership in the Corporate World panel. There he unfurled his belief that the next change in movie distribution will be dramatically shorter theatrical runs, and pay-per-inch VOD. He explained:

"I think the model will change and you won’t pay for the window of availability. A movie will come out and you will have 17 days, that’s exactly three weekends, which is 95% of the revenue for 98% of movies. On the 18th day, these movies will be available everywhere ubiquitously and you will pay for the size. A movie screen will be $15. A 75" TV will be $4.00. A smartphone will be $1.99. That enterprise that will exist throughout the world, when that happens, and it will happen, it will reinvent the enterprise of movies."

Katzenberg predicts we'll see this shift within 10 years.

It's a rattling thought. Right now, a theatrical run often depends on how well a movie is doing in theaters. A movie with a three-week run would be considered a problem in this environment. But if Jeffrey Katzenberg's figures are accurate, this model could be the way Hollywood shifts in hopes of cutting print and advertising costs considerably. However, there are the occasional movies that just continue to rake in major money beyond the three-week mark, and those examples might stall Katzenberg's cause.

Consider Disney's Frozen, a massive hit that broke a slew of box office records. The critically heralded musical opened wide on November 29th. With a $67 million opening, it became the No. 1 all-time Thanksgiving debut. The following week, it pulled in $31 million, then $22 million the next week. That's roughly $120 million domestic. That's not chump change, but for a movie that costs $150 million, it's not enough to make it a success.

In the course of it's 23-week run, Frozen earned $400 million domestic, and another $743 million overseas for a grand total of $1.1 billion. This example might be one of the 2% of movies that break from Jeffrey Katzenberg's majority. Still, it's hard to imagine studies converting to a shorter theatrical run that could leave that kind of money on the table.

To look at a more recent, and still-emerging example, Captain America: The Winter Soldier made an impressive $95 mil its opening weekend. The next two weeks brought in $41 mil, then $25 mil. If Jeffrey Katzenberg's proposed three-week theatrical run were in effect now, Buena Vista could have conceivably missed out on the $16 mil Cap 2 took in this past weekend.

Of course, if moviegoers knew a film would only be playing for three weeks, there might be an increased urgency to see it in theaters that might bolster the first three weeks' numbers. On the other hand, if movies would play for just 17 days then hit the web in a pay-per-inch setup as Jeffrey Katzenberg suggests, causal movie fans might just wait it out, hurting box office totals.

Worse yet, a smaller window for theatrical releases might mean studios scaling back considerably on budgets. While a big budget doesn't guarantee a great film, a smaller one offers lots of additional obstacles for filmmakers. But that might be the way we're headed as Katzenberg insists, "Movies are not a growth business." To that end, DreamWorks is diversifying with short form content on television and digital platforms.

SEE ALSO: Film Industry Movie Theaters To Try Discount Tickets One Day A Week To Improve Sales

Join the conversation about this story »

Kristen Bell may be the poster child for a successful "Veronica Mars" movie Kickstarter campaign, but Courteney Cox didn't want fans' money to finance her directorial debut, "Just Before I Go."

Instead, the former "Friends" actress chose to fund the film herself.

She explains her reasoning to Vanity Fair:

I think I would have been uncomfortable doing a Kickstarter. Don’t get me wrong — I need to make the money back [on this film] if I want to direct another one. But I believed in this project that much. I initially tried funding like normal companies do — but it’s hard to get actors without financing and financing without actors. I could have gotten financing, I think, but it would have taken me a year or so and I knew after reading after the script that this was something I wanted to do right away.

The first-time feature filmmaker debuted her dark comedy at this year's TriBeca Film Festival to mixed reviews. It stars Elisha Cuthbert, Olivia Thirlby, Kate Walsh, and Sean William Scott as a suicidal man traveling to his hometown to make amends.

While it remains to be seen whether Cox can recoup her personal investment into her passion project, Kickstarter CEO Yancey Strickler is still a firm believer in going the "Veronica Mars" way.

“I think that a lot of artists who never before would have thought Kickstarter could be for them were suddenly made aware that the scale of this is actually — well, we don’t even know how big this is. Maybe there isn’t a limit,” Strcikler explained to EW after the success of "Veronica Mars.""This whole system is just a blank canvas for people’s dreams and for the enthusiasm of the internet."

Strickler added, “Something like 300 Kickstarter films have opened theatrically, one has won an Oscar [2013 Best Documentary Short winner Inocente], over a thousand have played at major festivals. Ten percent of Sundance, Cannes, Tribeca, and SXSW have been Kickstarter-funded films in the last couple years. But Hollywood-scale movies? That has been new ground for Kickstarter, and it’s certainly one that I expect to continue.”

SEE ALSO: How Napkin Sketches During A Pixar Lunch Meeting Led To Four Of The Studio's Greatest Movies

Join the conversation about this story »

“Star Wars: Episode VII” has a good shot at joining “Avatar” and “Titanic” in hitting $2 billion at the worldwide box office, industry analysts said Tuesday.

“The casting for this new film is perfect from a commercial standpoint,” BoxOffice.com Vice President and Senior Analyst Phil Contrino told TheWrap.

Disney, Lucasfilm and director J.J. Abrams on Tuesday said that the stars of the original film — Harrison Ford, Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher — will be joined by newcomers Oscar Isaac, Adam Driver, John Boyega, Daisy Ridley, Andy Serkis, Domhnall Gleeson and Max von Sydow.

“Bringing back the original cast is brilliant, because it cements the link with the franchise's incredible legacy, and so is going without A-list actors in the new roles, because it keeps the focus on the brand,” Contrino said.

Even if hardcore fans of the franchise aren't totally happy with the casting picks, the excitement surrounding them could help build momentum — which is already at fever pitch.

“It's a time-honored tradition for fans of that series to complain about George Lucas and any number of other things surrounding the franchise — and then they go to see the movies five times,” Contrino said.

James Cameron's “Titanic” and “Avatar” are the highest-grossing movies ever at the worldwide box office. The romantic sea disaster epic brought in $2.1 billion in 1997, a record that stood until the futuristic 3D sci-fi saga rolled up a staggering $2.7 billion in 2009. 

See photos: ‘Star Wars: Episode VII': 10 Other Loathed Then Loved Castings

Disney, which was radio silent on Tuesday, will want to manage expectations for “Episode VII.” And it's worth noting that forecasting box-office returns on a movie more than a year-and-a-half-ahead of its release involves more speculation than data analysis.

Wall Street analysts at this point aren't as bullish; last summer, Credit Suisse's Michael Senn predicted $1.2 billion in box office for “Episode VII. This week, Cowan & Co. projected $1.2 billion and FBR Capital Markets said it would take in $700 million domestically — and net $1 billion overseas. 

Nonetheless, industry analysts are convinced that the sequel will be one for the record books. 

Keeping the focus on the brand is just what Disney needs to do if  they want “Star Wars: Episode VII” to hit record heights, agreed Rentrak Senior Media Analyst Paul Dergarabedian.

Also read: ‘Star Wars’ New Cast: Daisy Ridley – What We Know So Far

“We're talking about what, for many people, is the biggest movie brand in their lifetimes, one that evokes all sorts of memories, imagery — and box-office expectations,” he said.

Since “A New Hope” opened in 1977, the six previous “Star Wars” movies and their re-releases have brought in more than $4.5 billion — but no film in the series has hit the $1 billion mark. That's not surprising; “Titanic” is the only movie released before 2009 on the Top 10 list. The highest-grossing entry in the “Star Wars” series remains “Episode I: The Phantom Menace,” which took in $983 million globally in 1999.

“It clearly has a built-in audience, but how the movie is received will make a difference,” Contrino said. “If it's really good, some people are going to go see it several times. If it's not, that won't happen.”

The box office is a high-profile piece of the franchise's overall value, but it's far from being the only factor. With returns from DVDs, books and toy sales factored in, the series has generated more than $27 billion in revenue, according to the research institute Statistic Brain.

Even by “Star Wars” standards, the anticipation around “Episode VII” is unprecedented, Dergarabedian said.

“A few years ago, people thought they'd never see a new ‘Star Wars’ movie, much less a full-fledged franchise,” he said. Disney chairman Robert Iger has said the studio is planning on several more “Stars Wars” movies in the coming years.

The North American release date for “Episode VII” — Dec. 18, 2015 — is the same date that “Avatar” opened on five years ago.

“That's significant, and ideal,” Contrino said. “It will surely have a huge opening, but it will also have the whole month of January to keep on playing. I can't imagine a lot of other studios are going to get in its way.”

See video: ‘Star Wars': The Original Auditions (Video)

That's a formula “Avatar” followed to its record haul, establishing new standards for the highest-grossing third-through-seventh weekends domestically. And after just 41 days in release, “Avatar” had established new records in 24 foreign markets.

“With the incredible growth of the foreign markets, I think the sky is the limit this time around,” said Contrino.

“Phantom Menace” is the biggest earning film of franchise overseas with $552 million, which represented roughly 56 percent of its worldwide haul. Largely due to the explosive growth of the foreign markets, today's biggest blockbusters typically bring in roughly 70 percent of their grosses from overseas.

SEE ALSO: Disney Is Going To Nuke All The 'Star Wars' Books And Comics Fans Have Been Enjoying For Decades

Join the conversation about this story »

The political crisis in the Ukraine could be disastrous for the U.S. film industry, which is already feeling the financial fallout from the bloody fissure in the former Soviet republic.

Hollywood producers, financiers and sales executives told TheWrap they expect to lose millions from the ongoing turmoil, which is heightening tensions between the U.S. and Russia weeks before the annual Cannes film market.

The West has accused Russia of fomenting discord, and distributors, fearful of sanctions and general economic unrest, are offering 30 to 60 percent less for the rights to American movies.

Also read: Avi Lerner Rips the President for Not Fighting Piracy: ‘Obama is Scared of Google’

Some Russian distributors are attempting to renegotiate past deals, according to IM Global CEO Stuart Ford, while others can't even buy movies if they want to. This has everyone concerned headed into Cannes, one of the most important film markets in the world.

“We were in negotiations with the two largest Russian distribution companies, and they both asked us to put everything on hold because of directives they received,” Richard Rionda, CEO of Hannibal Pictures, told TheWrap.

Russia is an important market to Hollywood, while the Ukraine is a smaller one. On Monday, the U.S. government announced sanctions against seven top Russian officials with ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin. The European Union is also contemplating sanctions against Russia.

Also read: John McCain Calls Russia ‘A Gas Station Run by a Mafia That Is Masquerading as a Country’ (Video)

Potential financial impediments create uncertainty, uncertainty breeds caution and cautious buyers pay less to mitigate risk.

“It's disastrous,” Lisa Wilson, co-founder of the Solution Entertainment Group, told TheWrap. “There's one distributor who is actually based in the Ukraine, and the others are not based in the Ukraine. But we've been getting, ‘I can't pay it because of the war.'”

The political crisis has destabilized an already flagging Russian economy. The country was suffering from stagflation, a mix of stagnant growth and high inflation, and the various new pressures have prompted ratings agencies to cut the value of Russia's debt, hurt its stock market and decreased the value of its currency. Money is flying out of the country, which stands on the brink of recession.

Also read: Hollywood Worried Russian Sanctions Could Spark Quota Backlash

“The economy in Russia is not as strong as everyone thinks it is,” producer Avi Lerner told TheWrap. “It's based on a very small percentage of oligarchs and very rich people. Most people have no money. That's a problem.”

Lerner said he was making 30 percent less money from his deals in Russia, but, he insisted, the deals will not stop. Russian distributors are still interested in movies, they just won't pay as much.

“The big issue is that because of the situation in the Ukraine, the Russian government may ban foreign movies as retaliation for the many sanctions they will be facing,” Rionda said. “Outside of that, it's pretty clear people are eager to secure additional films for their line-up.”

SEE ALSO: Hollywood Producer Rips Obama For Not Fighting Piracy: 'He Is Scared Of Google'

Join the conversation about this story »

SEE ALSO: How ‘Indiana Jones’ Finally Forced Hollywood To Create The PG-13 Rating

Join the conversation about this story »

Here’s a hypothetical for you: you’re a powerful magician from outer space who’s locked in a battle of wills with diabolical powers who want to destroy earth and its friendly human inhabitants. You’d want teenagers to help you fight, right? And not just any teenagers, but teenagers with attitude, correct?

Of course you would. That’s why the Power Rangers are so popular, and have been for two decades. Now on the franchise’s 21st birthday, creator Haim Saban has announced that he’s partnering with Lionsgate to make a feature film with the karate chopping team that combines their individual battle vehicles into a mechanical beast worthy of Pacific Rim.

This new Power Rangers movie marks the third feature film for the franchise, although the first two came back-to-back in the mid-90s when the series was first hitting its stride. Both were also low budget affairs that sought to bring the TV show into theaters, and while the first was a minor success, the second was a forgettable flop.

It’s unclear at what level this particular incarnation will be. In the press release, Saban name-drops The Hunger Games and Divergent, which seems like wishful thinking from a man trying to sell plastic toys and playing cards. On the other hand, if Lionsgate has faith in the property and gives it a $35-50m budget, then we could be talking about a serious stab at making this a viable action movie instead of an upgraded DTV affair.

So what’s in store for the movie? According to the release, “The new film franchise will re-envision the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, a group of high school kids who are infused with unique and cool super powers but must harness and use those powers as a team if they have any hope of saving the world.”

In this case, it looks like they’re using “re-envision” to mean “envisioning the same thing again.” As of right now there are no other details beyond the plan to bring MMPRs to the big screen. Naturally, the only question on anyone’s mind is what role Amy Jo Johnson will get to play.

If there’s a second question, it’s whether the team’s costumes will still reflect their ethnic backgrounds.

I’m not hip to what the kids are doing these days, but is this franchise still popular? Or is it another sign that nostalgia creep is starting to slip into the 1990s for sustenance?

SEE ALSO: Mattel Is Banking On Barbie Being The Next Big Movie Franchise

Join the conversation about this story »

A great interactive graphic highlighted on Reddit shows that critics' reviews aren't always accurate representations of popular opinion about a particular movie.

Ph.D. student Ben Moore analyzed critic and public ratings from popular review aggregate site Rotten Tomatoes.

The site assigns each movie a percentage based on the share of positive reviews it got from critics. Rotten Tomatoes also gives an "audience" rating that shows how many users rated the movie positively.

Moore looks at the difference between critic reviews and audience ratings from the site.

The most overrated movies (films reviewed positively by critics but disliked by audiences) might surprise you:

1. "Spy Kids" (critics: 93%, audience: 45%)
2. "3 Backyards" (critics: 76%, audience: 31%)
3. "Stuart Little 2" (critics: 81%, audience: 40%)
4. "Momma's Man" (critics: 91%, audience: 50%)
5. "About a Boy" (critics: 93%, audience: 54%)

The kids' movies that made the list could be explained by the fact that most of the people who are rating the movies on Rotten Tomatoes probably aren't kids, and therefore not the target audience of the film.

But it's still surprising to see "Spy Kids" was so beloved by critics.

Now here's a look at the most underrated movies from Moore's analysis:

1. "Facing the Giants" (critics: 13%, audience: 86%)
2. "Diary of a Mad Black Woman" (critics: 16%, audience: 87%)
3. "Grandma's Boy" (critics: 18%, audience: 86%)
4. "Step Up" (critics: 19%, audience: 83%)
5. "Because I Said So" (critics: 5%, audience: 66%)

Many of the movies that made the "most underrated" list were popular with moviegoers but not necessarily considered great cinema.

You can check out the interactive graphic with dozens more movies at rCharts.

(via Reddit, lejeuneytunes)

SEE ALSO: This Deleted 'Amazing Spider-Man 2' End-Credits Scene Gives A Huge Hint At The Next Sequel

Join the conversation about this story »

Swedish filmmaker Malik Bendjelloul won the Oscar this year for best documentary with his debut feature, “Searching for Sugar Man," about a mysterious Detroit musician named Rodriguez who was unknown in the U.S. but a 1970s legend in South Africa.

Despite his recent success, Bendjelloul's brother, Johar Bendjelloul, confirmed to a Swedish newspaper that the 36-year-old director had taken his own life Tuesday in Stockholm.

Johar told the AP that his brother “struggled with depression.”

“Life isn't always easy,” Johar continued. “I was with him all the time towards the end.”

A novice filmmaker when he started filming "Sugar Man," Bendjelloul edited the film in his Stockholm apartment and paid for most of it himself. The indie documentary has gone on to make nearly $4 million at the box office.

"Bendjelloul spent four years working on the documentary, which was initially planned as a seven-minute piece for Swedish TV," explains The Wrap. "The project took on a life of its own before Sony Pictures Classics spent mid-six-figures to acquire the film out of Sundance in 2012."

Bendjelloul, who was able to track down and interview "Sugar Man" Sixto Rodriguez for his film, told The NY Times of the experience: “This was the greatest, the most amazing, true story I’d ever heard, an almost archetypal fairy tale. It’s a perfect story. It has the human element, the music aspect, a resurrection and a detective story.”

Simon Chinn, who produced “Sugar Man,” told the AP that he was shocked by the death.

“It seems so unbelievable,” he said. “I saw him two weeks ago in London. He was so full of life, hope and optimism and happiness, and looking forward to the future and future collaborations. We were talking about working together and talking about specific ideas, so the idea that he is no longer is just too hard to process.”

SEE ALSO: 'Star Wars’ Forces J.J. Abrams to Give ‘Star Trek 3' To First-Time Director

Join the conversation about this story »

Mike Leigh may be the early toast of the Cannes Film Festival for his “Mr. Turner,” his bold meditation on the life and art of painter J.M.W. Turner, but it wasn't easy getting the film to the Croisette.

The lavish period piece was made for around $15 million – as producer Georgina Lowe told TheWrap, 1 million pounds less than was spent on Leigh's last period piece, “Topsy Turvy,” a full 15 years ago.

Corners were cut at every opportunity – and one particularly striking shot of horses running across a field where Turner is standing, she said, came by accident when wild horses simply  happened to run through the frame while Leigh was shooting.

When he called “cut,” she said, the production crew exchanged high-fives at their good fortune.

Pulling off a lavish period film on such a small budget, Leigh admitted at a small press luncheon on Friday, was satisfying but also troubling.

“Part of me thought, maybe we should make a bad movie,” he said with a smile. “Then we could say to [the financiers], ‘See what happens when you don't give us enough money?’

“Now they're going to expect us to do it again.”

So far, “Mr. Turner” is the clear hit of the three-day-old festival, with Leigh returning in triumph to the place where he won the Palme d'Or 18 years ago with “Secrets & Lies.”

Critics have been lavish in their praise of the purposefully meandering drama, in which Timothy Spall plays Turner as a man so conflicted and repressed that he speaks more often in grunts than in compete sentences. Though the Best Actor category is often brutally crowded, Spall is likely one of the year's first legitimate Oscar contenders – and, the actor admitted at the same lunch, he's also a candidate for an unlikelier honor if the film catches on after Sony Pictures Classics releases it in December.

“It's like the fart app on your iPhone,” Spall said with a groan. “There could be the Turner Grunt App.”

See photos: 25 Outtakes From CannesWrap's Director Photo Shoots (Photos)

While Leigh has been trying to get a Turner film off the ground for years, the 71-year-old director said his impressions of the artist growing up were limited to “landscapes, chocolate boxes, biscuit tins.” Later, he said, he realized the range and drama in Turner's art, and the dramatic potential in a man who was in many ways crippled socially and personally by the relationship with his mother, most likely a schizophrenic who was sent to an asylum.

“The whole eccentricity of the guy – the Turner of our research almost felt like a character in a Mike Leigh film,” he said.

Leigh's script-free films generally begin with his actors working for months to invent their characters, and then improvising situations in which those characters can interact. And even though in this case he was dealing with a man who left an historical record, Leigh told TheWrap at the luncheon that his method didn't change.

“The film was made in the exact same process as my other films,” Leigh said. “I did what I always do, which is to do a massive amount of preparation, research, development of characters, improvisation, etc.

“And then what I always do, and this film was no exception, is that before I start to shoot the film I do a kind of structure. And then the job is to go out on location and make the film to fit the structure.”

Also read: Ryan Reynolds’ Cannes Thriller ‘The Captive’ Draws (and Deserves) Boos

This time, though, history dictated some small changes. “Obviously, it's not all people having arguments on staircases and in back gardens, as sometimes my films are,” he said.  ”There are all kinds of disciplines built into it. The thing you have to understand about not having a script is that we wind up with something very precise, and very scripted indeed. And that's making the film, rather than writing a piece of literature on paper.”

And now that he's the toast of Cannes, don't expect the iconoclastic British director to willingly mouth platitudes when he's asked how he likes the way the fest has taken to his film.

“I'm tempted to say I was furious about the reaction [at the premiere] last night, that I want everyone to hate it and I don't want anyone to see it,” he said when a reporter at a small Friday press luncheon asked Leigh to comment on the lavish praise.

Then he shrugged. “What am I supposed to say? It's great. You make films. They could sink into obscurity. This is the opposite. You want people to appreciate what you do, and it's wonderful.”

SEE ALSO: This Cannes Photo Shows Why Nicole Kidman Is Such A Star

Join the conversation about this story »

Gordon Willis — one of the most influential cinematographers of the '70s and '80s — died Monday at age 82.

Willis is responsible for all of the cinematography on “The Godfather” series and Woody Allen’s “Annie Hall” and “Manhattan."

Willis, who was known as the "Prince of Darkness" for his artful use of shadows, received an honorary Academy Award in 2009.

Regarding his work on “The Godfather,” Variety wrote in 1997, “Among 'The Godfather’s' many astonishments, the photography by Gordon Willis — a rich play with light and shadow — confirmed Willis’ genius but was especially striking as an extension of Francis Ford Coppola’s creative intelligence."

"This is a momentous loss," American Society of Cinematographers president Richard Crudo told Deadline. "He was one of the giants who absolutely changed the way movies looked. Up until the time of The Godfather1 and 2, nothing previously shot looked that way. He changed the way films looked and the way people looked at films." 

Willis discussed some of his most notable films in a 2013 interview:

SEE ALSO: A Hologram Michael Jackson Gave An Amazing Performance At Last Night's Billboard Music Awards

Join the conversation about this story »

Director Quentin Tarantino attended the Cannes Film Festival this weekend for a screening of "Pulp Fiction" to mark his cult classic film's 20th anniversary.

But the 51-year-old filmmaker says a lot has changed since his heydey in Hollywood.

Speaking at the festival, where he won the Palme d'Or grand prize in 1994 for "Pulp Fiction,"Tarantino declared to journalists and critics that “cinema is dead."

He explained that screening films in digital is like forcing people to watch TV in public and he slammed current filmmakers for turning their backs on 35mm film.

"As far as I'm concerned, digital projection and DCPs is the death of cinema as I know it ... The fact that most films now are not presented in 35 mm means that the war is lost. Digital projections, that's just television in public. And apparently the whole world is OK with television in public, but what I knew as cinema is dead."

"Back in my day, you at least needed 16mm to make something, and that was a Mount Everest most of us couldn't climb. But why an established filmmaker would shoot on digital, I have no f------ idea at all."

Despite deeming the current flock of filmmakers “quite hopeless," Tarantino does have a bit of hope for future generations.

“I'm hopeful that we're going through a woozy romantic period with the ease of digital,” he added. “I'm very hopeful that future generations will be much smarter than this generation and realize what they lost."

Tarantino also took issue with directors who never re-watch their old films. He tells WENN:

"Whenever I hear directors say they don't watch their movies or they can't watch their movies because they just see the flaws and it's too painful; I feel so sorry for those people. How can you get up in the morning? How can you do what you do if you think your stuff is so s-----? If it was too painful to watch my movies I wouldn't make another one. I would just give up at some point.

I feel bad for them. I feel like their lives aren't enriched as they could be. I watch my movies all the time. At home I have a lot of movie channels and they show the films uncut. I just hit the guide button and whenever I see one of my movies is playing I turn it on. Sometimes I watch a little bit and sometimes I watch the whole thing.

I hadn't seen 'Kill Bill Volume I' in a couple of years and I noticed it was going to be coming on, like, (network) Showtime 2 or something. I thought, 'I'll watch it through the bang bang you shot me down opening credits and that'll be it'. I'll be damned if I didn't watch that whole mother f-----' thing! I watched right down to the closing credits and I felt very gratified."

SEE ALSO: Seth Rogen And Judd Apatow Slam Film Critic Who Linked Their Movies TO UCSB Shooting

Join the conversation about this story »