Could WWE Films Be A Huge Mistake?

[Jack-Hammer]

What I mean by the title of this thread involves how the WWE's movie making ventures could possibly hurt the wrestling aspect of the product.

Randy Orton is starring in the next WWE film and it's not some action flick about a cop or soldier or any of that shit. It sounds like they're making a movie that has an actual plot and story to it rather than pointless violence. I'm not familiar with the details of the movie but I think Orton plays an abusive father in the movie and Oscar nominee Ed Harris is in the movie as well. What if this movie were to turn out to be a huge success? You know, what if it made a good profit at theaters, critics wind up praising it and praise Randy Orton's performance and all that. What if Randy Orton winds up getting bitten by the movie bug in the same way The Rock did? What if he prefers to go Hollywood and make movies rather than wrestle and what if future WWE film projects produce hit movies and acclaimed performances featuring other big named WWE wrestlers and they want to go make movies full time as well?

I dunno, it's just a thought that I had all of a sudden while seeing the preview of the new Stone Cold Steve Austin direct to DVD release.

 

[Mitch Henessey]

I don't think this up coming movie with Orton will be a hit. Few people will see it, and it won't make a splash at the box office. I think Orton will stick with wrestling. He seems to be more interested in becoming the next big thing in WWE than becoming a Hollywood movie star. Besides, The Rock has a lot more charisma than Orton has, and he was a bigger star when he was on top in WWF/WWE as a heel or face.

John Cena, WWE's #1 face has been in two movies already, and they both failed at the box office. Personally, I don't think The Marine or 12 Rounds are anywhere near as horrible as some people make them out to be, but still, neither of those movies had a real impact in any way. So if WWE's #1 guy can't make in impact in movies, than I find it hard to believe Orton will be able to do it. Also, pro wrestling isn't hot like it was during The Rock's time.

The Rock was, and will probably be the only one to make impact in Hollywood. He was a bigger star than Orton when he was on top in the world of pro wrestling, and again, has tons of charisma. I don't think The Rock is a great actor by any means, but he's very charismatic and he has that likable personality.

 

[Spaceman Spif]

WWE should have never ventured into actually doing than that being a name in the credits in movies. Everything they have had a major part in has failed and failed miserably. Then you look at the movies, that the WWE gets a executive producer credit for just loaning the guys to them, like The Marine 2 or Behind Enemy Lines 3, and they are actually really good movies. For the most part the wrestlers make good actors, DiBiase was good, Kennedy is good, Austin is really good and look at Dwayne Johnson when he still wrestled. Amazing talents on the big screen, but you look at WWE films like See No Evil, The Marine, 12 Rounds and they suck, and honestly so does Cena as an actor, terrible.

So yeah WWE films is a huge mistake, they need to stick with their boxed sets on their wrestlers and of course PPV's and best of's and leave it at that. However Vince is greedy and wants to have his hand in a lot of cookie jars, so while there is a chance for money to be made, he'll be there.

 

[The Con Volt]

I understand your concerns completely. But just like WWE implemented the 90 day no compete clause into wrestler's contracts, They also began including clauses that state that certain wrestlers can't just up get involved with a big studio production without consent from Vince. Obviously this kind of stuff still happens. Batista was in that movie recently, which isn't a WWE film, Mickie James has a country album, etc. But let's say James Cameron wants to sign John Cena or Randy Orton to act in Avatar 2 or something. John or Randy would be in breach of contract if they signed on without Vince's consent.

 

[miedzinski12]

I believe there is something to be said that is in a positive light for WWE Films. It gets their names out there, you know there is a glass ceiling when it comes to wrestlers switching to acting ex: Hogan suburban commando....garbage he didn't even crack the ceiling....The Rock however he busted through it and is on his way to bigger things.

I think the original poster is worried that all the stars will up and leave when they get the acting bug, look at it this way, we all do things in life and sometimes something better comes along, I say why not take it? Now if Orton, Cena etc....were to catch the acting bug and leave for good, oh well...

I say this because there is a ton of mid card talent not being utilized in the proper light, morrison for example is ore than ready for the main event picture, kingston as well..the fact of the matter is everyone says these guys need to step it up. They don't need to, they already have, their just not being utilized like they should...perfect example the pope. So whether or not these guys leave, there will always be someone in the magazine ready to fire off some great matches.

 

[Marko Markovic]

Marine with John Cena wasnt the flock,12 rounds are(My fav Miz quote "This isnt 12 rounds Cena,people will acctually see this").They had solid ones(Marine 1,The condemned) but they hade more flocks.Do I think they are mistake?No they arent.As long as they advertise demselves they are allowed to make a few bad ones,every publicity is good publicity

BTW Orton has probably very minor role in that movie .I am more interested in "Macgruber"(or what it is called) because they have more stars in that one

 

[Depakote]

What WWE Films is to movies, the XFL was to football, with the exception that WWE Films is actually making money. Either way, the product is garbage. McMahon should stick to wrasslin' because he can barely handle making that worth watching anymore. Is WWE Films a huge mistake? No, not in the sense youre implying. Its more of a huge mistake for out-of-work actors like Ed Harris and Danny Glover to become associated with WWE and their crappy movies. Next thing you know, we'll be seeing Mark Henry in a movie with Dennis Quaid. Its just going to keep getting worse as the WWE burns through its short list of guys they can market. Personally, I think WWE Films is just a front for McMahon. He's using it to control his top stars who want to get into movies so he can prevent another "Rock" from happening. "Cena wants to do movies? No problem. He can do WWE movies" says McMahon. Now Cena cant go the route of the Rock and do Disney movies without McMahon's approval. Its a win/win for McMahon; he gets to keep his wrestlers and make even more money at the same time. I wonder though. How long can they keep making these B rate flicks without turning over serious profit? 12 Rounds barely paid for itself when you look at how much they spent to make it and advertise it, and that was using the company's most popular guy.

 

[Davi323]

Being a huge hit and being profitable are not equal. Cena's movies haven't been huge hits, but it doesn't matter. The budget of a WWE movie is a fraction of the budget of other movies. They only need to sell what, 10 million dollars in ticket sales to pay for the film? WWE films makes money for the company.

 

[Depakote]

Being a huge hit and being profitable are not equal. Cena's movies haven't been huge hits, but it doesn't matter. The budget of a WWE movie is a fraction of the budget of other movies. They only need to sell what, 10 million dollars in ticket sales to pay for the film? WWE films makes money for the company.

Actually, the film had a $20 million budget but has only brought in a gross revenue of slightly over $17 million. So thats a loss just from its release. Then it went to dvd and brought in about $8 million. So thats a profit of $5 million total from making the movie. Spending $20 million to only make $25 million isnt considered a success. Its barely breaking even. If it werent for the dvd sales, the movie wouldnt have even made enough to cover production costs.

 

[bxbigshow]

As far as WWE Films making money, does "12 Rounds" $5mil. profit count what the fiflm does internationally, cable rights, or continuing dvd sales? I'm asking because if it doesn't then the film would still be pulling a profit.

I think WWE Films is a good thing for the company. As everyone knows Hollywood would be putting out B-level films with or without the WWE providing the money and/or talent. So why can't Vince get a small piece of that pie WHILE keeping some of his talent at bay?

Besides by having more control over what films are done by its stars WWE can also protect their talent from being used in ways that might hurt them (perception-wise). I'm thinking Triple H in "Blade 3", Edge in "Highlander (4? 5?12?)".

There is a possibility of another breakout WWE movie star...it's bound to happen as the nature of the buisness is equal parts acting/in-ring ability. Randy Orton's last heel turn is good character acting for what he's asked to do. Trips' "King of Kings" persona would've made him perfect for Conan. (maybe Blade hurt him more than I thought)

If Vince losses another talent to the acting bug he will always make a star to take their place. And he'll tell Hollywood "you're welcome" for making their newest star for them.

 

[Depakote]

As far as WWE Films making money, does "12 Rounds" $5mil. profit count what the fiflm does internationally, cable rights, or continuing dvd sales? I'm asking because if it doesn't then the film would still be pulling a profit.

Dvd sales will continue to trickle in, but once the initial sales from its release dwindle, they stop reporting how much money the dvd is making until after a longer period of time has gone by because the continuing sales are too small so it all gets lumped together in one batch report. The $8 million was made on the initial release and after the grace period was over, they stopped reporting how much the dvd is bringing in. A couple years from now, they'll report that the film generated X amount of money over X amount of time. So they will continue to make money off it, albeit in small amounts over time. Cable rights are usually acquired before the film is even released to the big screen. Companies like HBO get to preview the film before its released to the theaters to decide if theyre interested. Thats why a channel like Stars or Showtime can acquire box office hits. They acquire the rights before it becomes a hit. Usually, the amount of money paid to air such a movie like 12 Rounds is so minuscule that its just lumped together in the movie's initial sales upon its release. As far as international sales go, they are all included in the original numbers I posted. The movie made $17 million worldwide in its initial release, and another $8 million worldwide after its initial dvd release. So the initial profit is very low, but a profit is a profit and the movie will continue to slowly make money. Very slowly.

I agree that its good for the company. It protects McMahon's investment in his wrestlers while making him some money on the side. It also gives more exposure to the product. But it does run the risk of not turning over a profit at all. You cant just make stars. Youre either born with the "it" factor or youre not. Its true that McMahon will just find another body to cram down our throats, but that doesnt make that person a star or a good actor. There's nobody on the roster right now that has the "it" factor to make it in Hollywood. Even Stone Cold isnt a huge success and he was/is more popular than Cena and Orton.

As long as WWE Films can cover its production costs, then its a good thing for the company. Only time will tell if it has the longevity to keep that up.

 

[M4xxWr3stl1ng]

All movies made by WWE were just shitty, and haven't got any big money. I don't know why they still make them.Propably we are going to soon see a WWE porn video...

 

[Depakote]

All movies made by WWE were just shitty, and haven't got any big money. I don't know why they still make them.Propably we are going to soon see a WWE porn video...

This is the greatest idea of all time. WWE Porn. Big wrestlers with tiny privates from all the steroids getting it on with fake barbie dolls who dont look that good once the clothes come off. Look up Mickie James' nude pics if you dont believe me. Maybe Beth Phoenix could pull a Chyna and expose her giant clenis. The movie would be called "1 Night in Phoenix" lol.

So essentially, the quality of porn that WWE could produce would be akin to something you'd see on late night Cinemax. I wonder if Buff Bagwell would make a comeback then, seeing as how he has experience with softcore porn. Who needs a Rated R Superstar when we could have a Rated XXX Superstar? Sean Morley could get his old job back as Val Venis.

Joking aside, I understand where you were actually going with that comment and I think youre right. With this talk of a WWE channel coming soon with original programming that isnt wrestling related, I'm starting to worry.

 

[Deexter Jorgan]

The thing most people fail to understand is that Film distribution is a big money hitter, the WWE may not make a profit making their movies but they have accomplished two things:

1/ established a brand name outside of wrestling, thanks to marketing such as movies and music the wwe has made John Cena the companies big time player.

2/break even and bring a larger audience to the WWE stage, they have made themselves into a conglomorate entertainment company, they just dont do wrestling anymore they promote sports entertainment.

WWE Films wont be another failed experiment because the amount of money being placed into these movies is not large enough to put the WWE in debt, they have estimated the cost of each film to run about a million dollars each, and are self distributing, so they dont have to give stuidos like universal a cut of there profits.

you can bash the venture all you want but the WWE has nothing to lose in regards to financial loses, and the company is doing its job, making stars of its WWE talent outside the wrestling industry

 

[Depakote]

The thing most people fail to understand is that Film distribution is a big money hitter, the WWE may not make a profit making their movies but they have accomplished two things:

1/ established a brand name outside of wrestling, thanks to marketing such as movies and music the wwe has made John Cena the companies big time player.

2/break even and bring a larger audience to the WWE stage, they have made themselves into a conglomorate entertainment company, they just dont do wrestling anymore they promote sports entertainment.

WWE Films wont be another failed experiment because the amount of money being placed into these movies is not large enough to put the WWE in debt, they have estimated the cost of each film to run about a million dollars each, and are self distributing, so they dont have to give stuidos like universal a cut of there profits.

you can bash the venture all you want but the WWE has nothing to lose in regards to financial loses, and the company is doing its job, making stars of its WWE talent outside the wrestling industry

Youre absolutely right. WWE Films wont end up like the XFL, even if the quality of the product is the same. I think most of us here agree that the movies they make are rather lame and/or just bad, but theyre successful in the sense that theyve got the top names in their company promoting outside of wrestling, which draws people in to watch WWE or the movie. Either way, the WWE wins. They have to keep the budget low on these films though if they want to continue to break even. The projects they have lined up now have less action and focus more on the story so they shouldnt cost as much to make as 12 Rounds did.

I will bash the product they've put out so far, because its pretty bad in the grand scheme of things. But bad movies still make money. They still give people their 15 minutes of fame. For the WWE, its free advertising in markets that they dont regularly get to promote in. As long as they dont lose money on a movie, that its a smart business move. I just think the movies theyve made so far are bad. If anything, their tv channel is going to flop faster than WWE Films will.

 

[The Ultimate]

Reading most of what everyone else said on here, it does look like having top stars in movies be a bad idea. But a good solution could be that they star as side actors in the big blockbusters. Like in the Longest Yard starring Adam Sandler and Chris Rock, there was a huge amount of wwe power in that movie. That is what I am talking about, have them as side actors, to help out the protagonists. If Randy Orton or John Cena starred as minor henchmen to the bad guy in Avatar 2 or something like somebody said before, then they could get the best of both worlds. Getting a sneak at publicity through the mask of a block buster.

 

[Deexter Jorgan]

The wwe is not doing this to get recognised as a serious film studio, their doing this in hopes that it expands their brand and so far it has been a huge sucess.

Look at the stars that have come out of WWE films and have been cemented to the top of the company, guys such as John Cena, Kane, Ted Dibiase even at one time Mr Kennedy.

The Films division will keep churning out bad movies because they dont care about the development, they just care about getting as many of these things out as possible in hopes that the division (much like the wrestling itself) brings loyal fanbase to the cinemas and also help develop more interest in the wrestling industry as a whole.

Vince knows what hes doing and i believe that with the impending new channel coming out the wwe will become something more then just a wrestling company that attempts to be family friendly