Matt Belloni: “$1M Movie Made $450M—Hollywood Is Looking at Box Office All Wrong”

Summary

Lunch with Jamie – Episode Summary

Guest: Matt Belloni
Host: Jamie Patricof
Release Date: August 6, 2026
Episode Title: Matt Belloni: “$1M Movie Made $450M—Hollywood Is Looking at Box Office All Wrong”

---

Overview

In this dynamic and wide-ranging conversation, film producer Jamie Patricof sits down with leading Hollywood journalist and podcaster Matt Belloni to dissect the future of the box office, evolving film economics, studio mergers, and the blurring lines between traditional and creator-driven media. They cover everything from record-breaking box office weekends and the existential challenges facing theaters, to industry consolidation, the influence of the creator economy, and bold predictions for the future of Hollywood. Spirited, jargon-savvy banter is mixed with industry insider insights, making this episode essential listening for anyone curious about where the entertainment industry is headed.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Setting the Table: Hollywood, Pizza, and Baseball

• [01:28] Food & Sports as Icebreakers:
  • Jamie opens with his signature “Lunch in L.A.” question, to which Matt chooses Pizzeria Sei, praising its new, larger venue.
  • The conversation flexibly moves to the Dodgers-Red Sox series, with Matt jokingly blamed for attending all three games during the Dodgers’ first ever home sweep: "I actually went to all three games this weekend... I am [singularly responsible]. It was very depressing.” ([02:34-02:37])

---

2. Is the Box Office Dead? Record Highs Amid Gloom

• [03:02] Contradictions in the Narrative:

  • Jamie notes the record-breaking box office weekend and questions the pervasive “box office is dead” mindset.
  • Matt argues for nuance:
    • “Two things can be true at the same time... There are real concerns... But this narrative that nobody goes to movie theaters and Gen Z doesn't care... to me is overblown.” ([03:22])

• [04:17] Experience Matters?

  • Jamie and Matt debate whether a high-quality theater experience (good food, cushy seats, state-of-the-art sound) is critical to box office recovery.
    • Matt: “A compelling reason to go to a movie can also just be that your friends are all talking about it and you haven't seen it yet.” ([05:04])
    • Points to the microbudget hit Obsession: “That movie became successful because everyone under 30 was talking about it… It was not available in the home. That is a key component here.” ([05:17])
    • Spider-Man cited as a success because “the Spider man movies are good. People like them... Rotten Tomatoes audience score was 98%. Five out of five on post track... It’s the same with a restaurant. You have a shitty experience, you don’t go back.” ([06:41])

---

3. Rethinking Box Office & Windowing

• [07:36] Eventization and Marketing:

  • Jamie: “If everything's firing... the box office still has a chance to grow as people want more experiences, in person, together… it's on Hollywood [to deliver that].”
  • Matt: “The marketing has a responsibility to convey that messaging. So many movies... are marketed as if the consumer is automatically going to the movies on a Friday night and choosing one of six or seven... That is not the case anymore. The onus is on the individual movie to make that transaction with the customer.” ([08:20])

• [09:05] The Theatrical Window Debate:

  • Jamie: “Do you think Hollywood has to rethink... these shorter windows and go back to a longer period?”
  • Matt:
    • “I do. The 45-day window seems pretty short... I would love to see a window longer than 90 days to SVOD.” ([09:15-10:38])
    • Emphasizes distinction between PVOD and SVOD, and the "free" perception of streaming on Netflix or Amazon.

---

4. Rise of Nontraditional Content and Theaters’ Hustle

• [11:10] Filling Seats with More Than Movies:
  • Jamie notes the surprising box office impact of nontraditional fare (live captures, sporting events).
  • Matt: “The theaters are all scrambling to fill their seats... less than 30% of their seats are sold... Anything they can do... when the studios are not sending a reliable pipeline of product... at this point audiences have been trained for those kinds of movies to expect them on streaming.” ([11:28-12:44])
  • The value of exclusivity: “Part of the allure of the big IP movies... is it won’t be on streaming for a while.” ([12:54])

---

5. Studio Economics & The Entrepreneurial Pitch

• [13:28] Pitching 'Belloni Entertainment':
  • Jamie challenges Matt to pitch a new, viable film studio model.
  • Matt’s strategy: “I would... hire and incentivize the best talent pickers in town... try to recreate a version of the Blumhouse model... Do five, two million dollar movies and maybe one of them makes 10 million... genre filmmakers... have the ability to make money on a lower scale at first.” ([14:44-16:30])

---

6. Who’s Positioned for Growth?

• [17:35] Growth Companies and Indie Distributors:
  • Jamie: “Which company... has the biggest chance for growth?”
  • Matt:
    • “It’s got to be one of these companies that is appealing to younger audiences. And I know A24 has had success with that… Neon is great… But, you know, they need the horror hits to fund all that.” ([18:19-20:12])

---

7. The Creator Economy and Hollywood

• [20:33] Brand Funding, Creator Definition:

  • Jamie: “I’m fascinated by this... traditional Hollywood is not really paying enough attention to the creator economy... The creator economy is going to be a half a trillion dollar business by next year.”
  • Matt:
    • Downplays the novelty: “That’s television. That’s been television since the beginning... That name means nothing to me. Everybody’s a creator. Everything is media.” ([21:17-21:51])
    • “Media is flattening. Everybody has access to it. And if you can get an audience you can make money.” ([22:00])

• [22:25] Brands Partnering on Content:

  • Jamie: “Isn't that just kind of a layup for [studios] to be looking more directly at brands?”
  • Matt: “They are...already seeing streaming services like Netflix and Amazon and even Disney lean more into creator style deals where you can bring on these brands. But... Netflix doesn’t want all the brands pre-plugged in Hot Ones... They have their own brand relationships at Netflix.” ([22:44-23:47])

---

8. Ecosystems: Newsletters, Podcasts, and Beyond

• [24:07] Media Crossovers:
  • Jamie: “Wouldn’t be surprised if we start seeing films where you have newsletters or podcasts associated...”
  • Matt:
    • “If you watch HBO, listen to the companion podcast... The Ringer... specializes in pop culture and doing essentially shoulder programming for sports and entertainment... So that it’s already kind of out there.” ([25:04-26:28])

---

9. Warner Brothers–Paramount Merger & Industry Consolidation

• [26:28] Status of the Mega-Merger:
  • Jamie asks for Matt’s prediction; Matt sees the merger likely but plagued with delay and wild cards:
    • “Yes, I still bet that it happens, but the calculus has changed, obviously... The real big wild card is the Larry Ellison question. The Oracle stock is down about 50% over the past year and a half... There’s a plausible path here and the states will get something that they can crow about.” ([26:49-28:27])
  • The problem of even less diverse content from vertical integration:
    • "Outside producers are really squeezed and ultimately the consumer gets a less diverse array of content." ([30:03])

---

10. Netflix’s Growth Future and Bold Predictions

• [31:11] Netflix’s Next Act:
  • “They got to create a new narrative, a growth narrative, because that's what Wall Street is looking for... For Netflix, that could be the ad tier... buying another studio... growth overseas... an engagement increase...” ([31:39-32:46])
  • Jamie bets Netflix ends up with Warner Brothers. Matt doubts its regulatory chances but acknowledges that's a bold, possible scenario. ([32:51-33:56])

---

11. Microdramas & Vertical Shows: The Next Gold Rush?

• [34:31] Will Microdramas Save the Industry?
  • Matt on Quibi vs. current microdrama formats:
    • “What Katzenberg was doing was at a budget that is still not sustainable. He was making short form content, paying people millions of dollars to get high end. That's not the micro drama boom... These shows are being made for peanuts... and they're not good.” ([34:49-35:55])

---

12. Belloni’s Outlook for the Rest of the Year

• [36:35] Predictions for 2026 Box Office:
  • Jamie and Matt make a “dinner bet” on whether domestic grosses will top $10 billion.
  • Matt: “I do think we’ll end the year between 9.5 and 10 [billion] somewhere. And it will be the biggest year since COVID... I don't know if that mark is ever going to be returned.” ([36:54])

---

Notable Quotes

• Matt Belloni:

  • “Two things can be true at the same time... there is a real desire to see certain kinds of movies on the big screen.” (03:22)
  • “A compelling reason to go to a movie can also just be that your friends are all talking about it and you haven’t seen it yet.” (05:04)
  • “The onus is on the individual movie to make that transaction with the customer.” (08:20)
  • “Everybody’s a creator. Everything is media.” (21:51)
  • “Media is flattening. Everybody has access to it. And if you can get an audience you can make money.” (22:00)
  • On microdramas: “They're not good. They're, you know, one step above what you would see in an Instagram user generated video.” (35:55)
  • “I do think we’ll end the year between 9.5 and 10 [billion] somewhere. And it will be the biggest year since COVID…” (36:54)

• Jamie Patricof:

  • “If, if all those things hit and as a filmmaker, you know, I said in my last few movies, like, what. What's the reason that someone has to go out on a Friday night to see this movie?” (07:36)
  • “Isn't that just kind of a layup for them to be looking more directly at brands?” (22:44)
  • “I think it's all going to, I think, I think people are loving going back to the theater and I think it's just, I think, I think the tide is turning.” (38:28)

---

Major Timestamps

• 01:24 – Food talk intro: Matt picks Pizzeria Sei
• 03:02 – Is box office “dead” debate
• 05:04 – Matt on Obsession’s viral success
• 09:05 – Windowing and theatrical strategy
• 13:28 – Jamie pitches Matt the ‘Belloni Entertainment’ challenge
• 18:19 – Studio growth prospects
• 21:17 – Defining “creator” in the creator economy
• 25:04 – Media ecosystems: newsletters, podcasts, shoulder programming
• 26:49 – Warner Bros–Paramount merger discussion
• 31:39 – Netflix’s new growth narrative and Jamie’s merger prediction
• 34:31 – The microdrama question
• 36:54 – Box office predictions for 2026

---

Memorable, Playful Moments

• Jamie repeatedly ribbing Matt for “causing” the Dodgers sweep.
• Matt resisting Jamie’s fictional scenario of quitting his job to start a studio, insisting: “But I wouldn’t do that... You’ve done it. Okay, this is my podcast. This isn’t your podcast.” ([14:09-14:22])
• The palette of bets and predictions, with dinner stakes riding on 2026 box office totals.
• Both revealing their inside-baseball knowledge with references to Kalshee, agency scuttlebutt, and merger repercussions.

---

Conclusion

This episode delivers a savvy, sometimes contrarian look at Hollywood’s shifting power centers, the ongoing viability of theatrical exhibition, the pipeline of content, and the collision between traditional and emergent media. Jamie and Matt make clear that while doom-and-gloom abounds, nuanced thinking, eventized filmmaking, and marketing innovation still offer hope for cinema’s future—albeit in new, not always studio-driven forms. For listeners seeking both industry clarity and spirited banter, this is an essential lunch hour.

Listen for:

• Hard truths on box office economics
• Sharp, quotable takes on the creator economy
• Unique insights on consolidation and the future of content
• Realistic (and sometimes bullish) bets on Hollywood’s comeback

Transcript

[A]

Hey everyone. Welcome to Lunch with Jamie. I'm excited today to be joined by someone everyone in Hollywood knows or should know, Matt Bellamy. Matt came to Hollywood journalism sideways through law. He studied political science at UC Berkeley, then earned his law degree at usc, drawn in part by the school's deep Hollywood ties. After graduating, spent several years an Entertainment litigator in LA. He but then made a switch in 2006 to leave the law and to launch the Hollywood reporters entertainment law vertical, thinking it'd be a short detour. Well, in 2021, he co founded Puck, which is one of the most important newsletter in all fields, especially Hollywood writing. What I'm hearing. And then he also launched one of the most important Hollywood podcasts called the Town, which is on the Ringer podcast network. Matt has become a good friend and someone I just love talking to. Matt and I covered a range of topics from the the Warner Brothers Paramount merger to micro dramas to if the box office will get over $10 billion to the Red Sox Dodgers series this weekend to his favorite pizza restaurant in la. So I think you'll enjoy the conversation. I know I did. Now here's my conversation with Matt Bellamy. Matt, thank you for joining me. This is a real treat to have you on here. First time on Lunch with Jamie.

[B]

No problem. This is a food podcast, correct?

[A]

Although, by the way, so you highlighted the toughest question of the day for you, which is the one that the chance of you really winning here is going to be tough. I always start out this, although it's not a food podcast with the toughest question. If we were going to lunch in Los Angeles, where would you be taking me? No pressure.

[B]

Well, probably to Pizzeria, say because their new venue is close to my house and they are bigger now and you can get a seat.

[A]

Great answer, great answer. Okay. You know, I normally don't interview, you know, people from from Hollywood on my Lunch with Jamie podcast, but I the stars aligned for today because a record was broken this weekend, which was the Dodgers lost the Red Sox in the first sweep ever at home and you were there. So you're part of the reason for the loss.

[B]

Weirdly, through a conflation of events, I actually went to all three games this weekend.

[A]

So you're singularly responsible for the sweet. I am.

[B]

It was very depressing. Although after the second game I was very happy to be sitting in the baseline bar when the news flashed on ESPN that we are getting Tarik Skubal back, best pitcher in baseball. So hopefully that will cause rectify any problems. We have down the stretch, they were

[A]

just being kind to the Red Sox. Let them get some wins before we sweep them.

[B]

Make them feel better about themselves so they can get swept in the World Series.

[A]

Okay, so Matt, box office is dead. Movie industry is done. It's already been buried. Yet we just broke the record for highest grossing weekend of all time. And we had the film that grossed the highest opening of all time. Something's off.

[B]

Well, I mean it. Two can be, Two things can be true at the same time. I mean, I don't, I'm not one of those people that says the concerns about the future of the box office are non existent. There are real concerns about the future of the box office. Especially now as we have two major theatrical studios merging in Paramount and Warner Brothers. But this narrative that nobody goes to movie theaters and Gen Z doesn't care about movies in theaters and it's really just a slow waltz to the grave that to me is overblown. I think that there is a real desire to see certain kinds of movies on the big screen. And when the studios can eventize their movies in whatever way they see they're able to do so. Whether it's IP stars or word of mouth, people will show up.

[A]

So I guess, I mean, and I appreciate the two things can be true at once, but I, you know, is, is there a world where we're sort of thinking about box office and theatrical wrong? You know, I believe that as we all know, people love experiential.

[B]

Right?

[A]

I mean, you've talked about it time and time again. Concerts are booming, sporting events are booming. And obviously those are different theatrical experiences. But when you provide a great experience for people, they can't get at home and a reason for them to go out. So when they go to the movie theaters and it's easy to park, easy to buy a ticket, it's great food, the seats are great, the screens are great, the sound's great. Isn't that as much of a critical part of the growth of box office going forward? And obviously the movie is being great with the most important.

[B]

Yeah, see I, I think you and I care about that stuff. And I agree that a component of a box office recovery should include a better overall experience. But a compelling reason to go to a movie can also just be that your friends are all talking about it and you haven't seen it yet. I mean, if you look at what happened with Obsession amongst young people, that's a movie that's going to get to 450 million worldwide, made for less than a million Dollars. Most profitable movie in the history of Focus Features and one of the most profitable movies of all time in the business. That movie became successful because everyone under 30 was talking about it. And if you didn't see it, you were not part of the conversation and it was not available in the home. That is a key component here for all the, you know, better food and better parking and all of that stuff. There has to be the movie element. The movies have to be compelling and there has to be that. Gotta see it now, gotta see it before my friends start talking about it. I'm not part of the conversation. And for some movies, that can be IP for my 10 year old, he really wants to see Spider man because all his friends are gonna see Spider man and he loves the character. But for the under 30 crowd obsession was that movie.

[A]

And listen, as a producer, I appreciate that because obviously it, it, it has to live and die with the movie and Hollywood and the filmmakers have to deliver great movies.

[B]

But I guess the same true with Spider Man. Honestly, everyone's today. Everyone today is like ringing their heads like, why is Spider man so big? Why did it beat Avengers? Honestly? Yes, the scarcity. There hasn't been a movie, a Spider man movie in five years. Tom and Zendaya are massive stars and they got lightning in a bottle casting them when they were young. But the biggest factor is that the Spider man movies are good. People like them. The Rotten Tomatoes audience score was 98%. Five out of five on post track. Like, this is a franchise that people feel is quality and delivers. And after three movies, people were primed for the fourth because they had a good experience. It's the same with a restaurant. You have a shitty experience, you don't go back, you don't tell your friends, but you have a good experience. When they open another new one, you're gonna go check it out, by the way.

[A]

And that's the same thing. What I say though, when I equate it to, you know, to music and to sports, right? I mean like, if, if, if everything's clicking, if everything's firing, I'm, you know, in the belief that the box office still has a chance to grow as we as people want more experiences as people in person, together, congregating again. If, if all those things hit and as a filmmaker, you know, I said in my last few movies, like, what. What's the reason that someone has to go out on a Friday night to see this movie? Why do they have to get out of their house? They have to get a babysitter. They have to skip doing whatever it is, whether it's scrolling TikTok or watching a sporting event. And that is on Hollywood. But the experience is a key part of that.

[B]

Yeah. And I think the marketing has a responsibility to convey that messaging. So many movies still to this day are marketed as if the consumer is automatically going to the movies on a Friday night and choosing one of six or seven to see. That is not the case anymore. Nobody does that. They decide this is a movie I need to see, then they get tickets in advance and then they go. So the onus is on the individual movie to make that transaction with the customer. You can't rely on people just going and choosing amongst a buffet.

[A]

And do you think windowing is a big part of that and do you think.

[B]

Absolutely.

[A]

Do you think Hollywood has to rethink this, this idea of these shorter windows and go to back to a longer period for windowing?

[B]

I do. And, and the window that we are settling on right now, I mean obviously the pendulum swung pretty far to one side during COVID where movies were going day and date. They, you know the Universal model where the, the smaller movies were on peacock after 17. No, sorry. The Universal model was that the smaller movies were going to P VOD after 17 days and then going to subscription screaming and streaming and Peacock shortly after that. That to me I think is too short. The 45 day window that they're settling on to me also seems pretty short. When you talk about svod, I see a big difference between premium video on demand and subscription video on demand. If you're going to make your film available for rental or purchase, that is very different than making your film available for free. If you subscribe to one of the subscription services, especially if it's Netflix or Amazon because those two for most people are considered utilities and are considered free. Most people get their Amazon prime video for free if they are a prime subscriber. So saying to people after 45 days you're going to be able to watch this movie for free is very different than saying in 45 days you're going to have to pay for it. Because that transaction makes a big difference. I would love to see a window longer than 90 days to SVOD. Disney, Universal, you know, Sony via Netflix and Paramount, they are hovering in this 90 day to SVOD and I still think that's pretty short three months. I'd love to see it at four months. But you know, they have businesses to run and they believe that the math says to do it at three months.

[A]

The other thing I Love seeing is this sort of non traditional films of the box office. You know, Bleecker street just had the biggest live capture release with Hadestown beating Hamilton, which was a shocker. You've had things like sporting events, Love Island. Do you think you see more of that going forward?

[B]

I do. They got to. The theaters are all scrambling to fill their seats. I mean, this is a business where less than 30% of their seats are sold. Right. So in order to get their money, they need to stock the pond. They need to have more reasons for people to come to theaters, especially at times when it's not like this past weekend where every theater is. Is packed. You know, you've been to a million movie theaters that are empty. I go all the time and they're empty. Anything they can do. And when the theater, when the studios are not sending a reliable pipeline of product or they're putting movies on their services soon. You know, how long did. What was the window on Roofman, your movie?

[A]

It was 45 days. Ish. Maybe to Asa. To Par. To Paramount.

[B]

To Paramount Plus.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, I think that's.

[B]

I don't think that's long enough.

[A]

Yeah, no, exactly. I agree.

[B]

And we're training the audience to. And that was a good movie. That was a really good movie. I saw it in the theater and had a great experience. The. The audience at this point has been trained for those kinds of movies to expect them on streaming.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And part of the allure of the big IP movies, I think, is it's not just that it's spectacle and we know the ip, it's that we also know it won't be on streaming for a while.

[A]

Yeah, that's great. Okay, so fair to say you're not bullish on box office, but you're cautiously optimistic. There's good things going on. Okay. Yeah. The.

[B]

The. The days of the Netflix narrative where the customer wants movies at home, moviegoing is an outmoded experience. Ted Sarando said about a year ago, those days are over. Everybody except Netflix and Apple has recognized that there is value to theatrical releases.

[A]

Okay, well, this is great news because we're going to do a little exercise here. Congratulations. You're the founder of Bellamy Entertainment, a new film financing and distribution company. Excellent. You are now pitching me as an investor on why I should be investing in your new company. So give it to me.

[B]

What do I do? I mean, what is. You mean you're asking what kind of a studio would I start today?

[A]

Right Today, right now. What's the opportunity? And you're pitching me right now. So you got to be really bullish here. You got to sell me on why I should be investing. You've already started. You've quit your job.

[B]

Do I have unlimited money?

[A]

You have zero right now. You're raising money right now.

[B]

Oh, I'm raising money?

[A]

Yeah. And you quit all your job. You've quit everything. You have no income at all right now.

[B]

But. But I wouldn't do that. You've done it.

[A]

You've done it already. Okay, this is my podcast. This isn't your podcast.

[B]

All right, So I have. I have decided to quit my job and, and start a movie studio from scratch right now. And I need. First of all, I would come to you and I. And I would say, I need like, $500 million.

[A]

You're talking to, you're talking to Ellison. You're talking to. You're talking to, you know, Aries. You're talking to a equity company.

[B]

All right, this is what I would do. I would. I would say I need to hire and incentivize the best talent pickers in town. People who have shown a track record of being able to identify filmmakers that can do a lot with a little. So let's. So give me some money. I need enough money. I don't need to go off and buy IP or do a million deals with estates to get the rights for the money. That would be nice, but that's a pretty competitive market. What isn't as competitive is the ability to spot noisy filmmakers. And they are out there. And if you are smart and savvy, you can pick up genre filmmakers especially, that have the ability to make money on a lower scale at first, and you do five, two million dollar movies and maybe one of them makes 10 million and then the next five, batch of five, maybe one of them makes 20 million. And then you build from there. Essentially try to recreate a version of the Blumhouse model where, remember at the beginning, Jason was making a lot of movies that never saw the light of day, that were low, low budget, everyone works for cheap. And then all of a sudden he had hits and was able to graduate into making, you know, studio style movies. But I think the low budget area, and honestly, not just horror, they could be comedies. If there's a breakout potential and there's a YouTube following for an author, a creator, maybe they're able to break out. And if you do enough of those in low budget, maybe something breaks through.

[A]

I like it. I like it. I'm interested. I'm interested.

[B]

Matt, are you making any comedies right Now.

[A]

No, I mean, that's just not been an area that I personally have been kind of funny. Yeah, yeah. That Derek C. And France would bear. It would really appreciate your comments there. I mean, it was funny. It was funny. I like it. So in line with that, you know, you're. Maybe. This is an upcoming Town draft, which I love. I love your draft episodes. They're great. And you don't have to give me credit. Or you can if you do it. Which company? And I think you actually have done something like this before, but when you're looking at companies right now out there and not technology. So let's throw out Apple, Amazon, Netflix for a minute, but more traditional companies. Who. Who do you think, if you were drafting in the top spot, has the biggest chance for growth, Percentage growth. Right. So not just valuation, but when you look at the 8 24s or the Neons or the Universals or the Bleaker Streets or, you know, maybe, you know, there's even some companies. I'm blanking on some of the. Even some new companies that are entering the distribution game. Who do you think excites you the most and has the. The biggest chance for sort of growth in the coming years among all the film companies? Yeah, yeah. Who are a couple that you think are really exciting who've got it, kind of got it right right now. I mean, listen, Warner Brothers, obviously, and it's got its challenges, but at the same time, the, the, you know, last. The year, you know, 2025, it wouldn't

[B]

be a major studio.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Because the. The major studios are stuck in this IP doom loop where they need the IP movies to really, you know, perform in order to fund everything else. I was shocked when I looked at the opening for Spider Man. Did you know I'm gonna write this in my newsletter tonight. Did you know that the opening weekend for this Spider man movie was bigger than the total worldwide gross of every Sony Pictures movie this year and last year? Wow. That's shows you what is paying the bills at Sony Pictures right now. So I don't know about that, but it's got to be. It's got to be one of these companies that is appealing to younger audiences. And I know a 24 has had success with that and, you know, Backroom's perfect example of that. They've also had some flops that have come and gone and they've had some pricier movies these days. You know, I like one of these companies that, I don't know. It's sort of who am I going to plug Here,

[A]

I'll let you come back to it. You can come back. We'll come before, before we end.

[B]

Because I don't want, like, I don't want to say, I don't want to plug any company not knowing exactly what their next slate is.

[A]

Right, yeah, yeah, I got it. I think it's more conceptually just as an idea of like sort of what, what's interesting they're doing. Again, like, I think Bleecker Street's really interesting what they're doing with this live capture films and they become really successful at that.

[B]

Shock to me that that is going to do $20 million.

[A]

Unbelievable.

[B]

Neon is great. Neon is picking up, you know, great quality films and seems to have a model around it. But, you know, they need the horror hits to fund all that.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Because you can have an aura. But that movie costs so much for them to release and campaign for awards that I don't know how much money they actually made on Anora.

[A]

Right, yeah, yeah. Let's get into the creator economy a bit. I've been really fascinated by this. I went to Cannes lion last two years and I really had sort of a light bulb moment this year where I just sort of realized traditional Hollywood is not really paying enough attention to the creator economy. And what I mean by it more is the brand, the role of the brands in the creator economy. I saw a number where the creator economy is going to be a half a trillion dollar business by next year. And ultimately that at the end of the day is content being funded by brands. I mean, that's really what makes the creator economy, which I wrote about in my newsletter, was the birth of Hollywood. Right. The first.

[B]

Yeah, but that's television. That's been television since the beginning. Sure, sure.

[A]

And it was the birth of the film business. But I think there's this concept of like, what even is a creator today? Right. Like Matt Bellany is a creator. You know, Jamie Patricoff's a creator. I have a podcast, I have a newsletter.

[B]

I make movies.

[A]

We create short form content out of those movies and trailers and social content, you know. Is Chris Nolan a creator? Sure.

[B]

That name means nothing to me. Everybody's a creator. Everything is media. You know, your aunt on Instagram is a creator.

[A]

So do you think the question is

[B]

what form it's taking? And that's why I. I've been less interested in the so called creator economy because this is obvious where it's all going. It's. The media is flattening. Everybody has access to it. And if you can get an audience you can make money.

[A]

Right. So do you think, you know, progressive is funding the next Barbie movie in its entirety or do you think.

[B]

Well, they kind of. Because there's, you know, product placement was

[A]

all over The Barbie movie, 100%. But do you think that becomes as, as film companies and studios and financing companies look for more ways to finance their movies, isn't that just kind of a layup for them to be looking more directly at the, at brands?

[B]

Yeah, I mean what you're saying is that should television mimic the creator economy a little bit more closely? Which as you know, was the birth of television. The, you know, the, the brand had its name in front of the title and all of that stuff. And, and I think that that will happen. We're already seeing the streaming services like Netflix and Amazon and even Disney lean more into creator style deals where you can bring on these brands. But then again, I mean, there was an interesting piece in Bloomberg this past weekend where Netflix wants to bring on Hot Ones, a show that I enjoy. But Netflix doesn't want all the brands that are plugged during Hot Ones. They have their own brand relationships at Netflix. They want to sell advertising against it. They don't want Hot Ones to come with five already pre plugged brands in the show. So there's conflicts there. But I just, I feel like everything we're seeing right now where with the rise of creators is just a natural evolution of television and its transition online. And we'll see roll ups and we'll see consolidation and, and more brand plugs and sponsorships as this stuff becomes flatter and TV melds into digital and digital melds, melds into tv.

[A]

And do you think that sort of, sort of trickles down in some ways into this larger ecosystem of newsletters and podcasts and I mean it sort of is this whole kind of media landscape kind of becoming one.

[B]

I think so, yeah. I mean it's, it's, it's already happening with sports. I mean the way that brands have been integrated into sports is, is pretty obnoxious. Yet it's. The sports ratings have not suffered because they cut away every 50 seconds on a football game and because the kickoff is now sponsored by Prime Video or Prime when you watch it on Amazon. So I think that it's all one. I mean everybody competes with everybody else now.

[A]

Yeah, yeah. But I even think, you know, I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing films where you have newsletters associated with them or podcast in the, in associated with them and the making of them and you have but we already do.

[B]

If you watch, if you watch hbo, listen to the companion podcast.

[A]

Yeah, no, it's true. You're seeing in some places, but it's not the norm. Right. Like, you know, I mean, imagine if on the. For example, imagine if on the drama or the invite, you had an entire ecosystem built around it.

[B]

I mean, it's happening, but it's happening in the marketing context. It's all flowing into trying to generate awareness and interest in the movie itself. What you're talking about is kind of creating a creative ecosystem around a movie that could even live on its own.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And be interesting to people. And I think for the right types of content, that does work. I mean, the company that I do my show for, the Ringer, they specialize in pop culture and doing essentially shoulder programming for sports and entertainment. If you watch Sunday Night Football after the game, you then can now go to Netflix and watch the Bill Simmons podcast where they are talking about Sunday Night Football and the game you just saw. And people love it. It's really popular. If you watch Game of Thrones or House of Dragon or whatever, and afterward you want to learn more or discuss or be part of a Game of Thrones community, you can go to a ringer podcast right afterward and be part of that. So that it's already kind of out there.

[A]

Right. Yeah, I guess that's true. Let's, let's swift gears to everybody's favorite merger, Warner Brothers and Paramount. You know, we've hit a pause for almost up to a year now. First, if you're betting on Kalshi right now, is that merger happen?

[B]

Yes, I still bet that it happens, but the calculus has changed, obviously. The timing has changed, and the, the costs associated with that delay are pretty real. $7 million a day after October 1st. The delay is going to have a pretty big impact on the two companies as they are just sitting there at a standstill, not able to do big deals or invest in the future. The real big wild card is the Larry Ellison question. The Oracle stock is down about 50% over the past year and a half. And that's a big problem when Larry is funding 47 billion of this $111 billion deal, or at least he's backstopping that funding. So there's a lot of wild cards here, not just the legal case. And. But I do think that there is a window for some kind of a settlement. I actually don't think that either the government or the Paramount side wants this to be a big, expensive trial. If they can come to an agreement. And we saw a report in the Wall Street Journal last week that Gavin Newsom, the governor of California, would prefer a settlement here. And if that's coming from the top in the state, it seems like there's a plausible path here and the states will get something that they can crow about, maybe increase production commitments in their states. Maybe Paramount gets the ability to close the merger, but they have to spin stuff off. There are a bunch of different scenarios, but I still do think that it ends up happening.

[A]

No one in the world, except David Zaslav, I think, thinks this is a good merger to happen and that it should happen. I heard Peter Chernin on your podcast.

[B]

Don't forget Ari Emanuel loves it. Yes.

[A]

I heard Peter Chernon on your podcast recently, which was an awesome interview. I mean, your podcast is so good. But that one. And Peter is just, he is, he is like maybe the goat. I mean, the guy is just so great. And he's. His quote was less vertical integration would be the single biggest thing that could revitalize the content industry. This is not going to help that.

[B]

No, not necessarily. But remember, consolidation and vertical integration are kind of distinct things here. I mean, both of these companies, Paramount and Warner Brothers, are vertically integrated. They produce and distribute the content that they make. That's the definition of vertical integration. What, what he's. I think talking about is that this consolidation is going to make that vertical integration even stronger for the merged company and give them even less incentive to buy outside of their own ecosystem. Which is, I, you keep hearing it over and over again that that is the big problem in the industry. It's not necessarily that there are scaled companies. It's that they can produce and distribute their own content. And when that happens, outside producers are really squeezed and ultimately the consumer gets a less diverse array of content.

[A]

Right?

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

I mean, that's why as producers United, we've been pushing back against, you know, trying to, you know, reinstate FinCEN and which a lot of people are trying to do and those.

[B]

I would love that. Do you think that's there's a remote chance of that happening?

[A]

I don't know. I mean, it's, it's, you know, I would be betting on a Kalshi not to keep doing Kalshi promotion on this podcast.

[B]

But the only the way that happens and you know, because it would have to be a bipartisan thing. If we wake up in two years and there are three companies that essentially control all of content, if it's Amazon, Netflix and some version of the merged Warner, Paramount and I guess Disney. So if there are four companies that control everything and their mandates are simply to buy from themselves, then maybe you get some populist political effort to break that up. And the answer to breaking it up would be some kind of a FinCEN law that required them to buy 20, 50% of their content from outside suppliers. Maybe that happens.

[A]

Yeah. You know, listen, I hope for, we're going to keep fighting for it. So let's get to Netflix for a minute. They obviously one of the most extraordinary stories of success in, in a short period of time. And we completely upended the business. They're down 50% from their high right now. What do you, what's in Matt Bellany's crystal ball for Netflix?

[B]

They got to create a new narrative, a growth narrative, because that's what Wall street is looking for. It's not just Netflix. All of these entertainment companies, their stocks are stagnant because nobody knows where the next growth engine is coming from. So for Netflix, that could be the ad tier. They could show amazing progress on the ad tier. It could be buying another studio and supercharging the IP with either Universal or if this merger falls apart, they go after Warners again. It could be, you know, some kind of a technological breakthrough where the cost of their content comes way down due to AI or whatever innovation. It could be growth overseas. They just, it could be an engagement, increase their engagement. Right now the viewership is pretty stagnant or it's not growing as it once was. So I think they just need to figure out what the next story is that they're going to tell investors here.

[A]

Okay, here's my bet right now. Netflix winds up with Warner Brothers.

[B]

You think so?

[A]

Yeah, that's my bet right now. We'll see.

[B]

So do you think, but then the question begs, do you think Netflix would have an easier time with the government than Paramount has?

[A]

You know, maybe naively, because I still know how much Reed and Ted love films and movies and going to, and going to Sundance. I mean, Reed Reed is notorious for being in line at Sundance and like, seeing movies.

[B]

I've seen him there. Not involved in the company anymore.

[A]

I know, but he, I mean, I don't know. I, I, I, I think it, they, it would go through easier. And I think there's an argument for that. They don't do the same thing, at least.

[B]

Yeah, that's the best argument because, I mean, Netflix doesn't want cnn.

[A]

No.

[B]

And they, they don't want the linear channels. And the problem politically here is that CNN would change hands and be put into the hands of people of billionaires that are considered Trump friendly. That is 100% why the blue states are going after this merger, in my opinion.

[A]

What do you mean? It's worked out so well with 60 minutes so far. What are you talking about?

[B]

Well, but that's the thing is that Ellison's complaining about the politicization of this.

[A]

He did it right.

[B]

He could have left 60 Minutes in CBS News alone and just said, you know what, let's lay low until we get Warner Brothers and then we will make these big controversial changes. He didn't do that. He chose to go all in on Trump. And when he did that, he underestimated the backlash and response from the blue side of the table. And they are going 100 miles an hour trying to stop this.

[A]

All right, I want to get to one, one more thing before we go. Micro dramas. Verticals have become the buzzword. People are talking about it. First thing was Jeffrey Katzenberg. Right. And just too early.

[B]

That's a hard question to answer because what Katzenberg was doing was at a budget that is still not sustainable. He was making short form content, paying people millions of dollars to get high end. That's not the micro drama boom. These shows are being made for peanuts. They are paying either non union or very, very low budget union wages. And they are everybody who talks about microdramas. Very few people have actually watched them. And they're not good. They're, they're, you know, one step above what you would see in an Instagram user generated video. I'm not. No disrespect. They would say that the ambition is limited by the budget. Yeah. So Jeffrey was right in the sense that people are going to watch serialized content on mobile devices. But I think he was still wrong to think that the budgets for those shows could be similar to what we see in traditional television. At the model right now. It's not.

[A]

Got it. Okay. All right. So before we go a. Did you figure out your company that you're betting on, that you're excited about

[B]

going to be a microdrama company?

[A]

It's not. Okay, but. By the way. But, but should it. I mean, in the end of grow, you talk about growth.

[B]

Right.

[A]

Like is that one of the biggest growth areas? Right. I mean, like, you know, maybe growth.

[B]

Yeah. There, there will be a market for it. But like I put that, I put all that stuff in, in the kind of creator economy. Right. Basket. Because it is one step above that. It's, it's kind of barely professionally produced.

[A]

Okay. So Since I have you on here, what, what is sort of is Matt Bellany's second half of sort of Hollywood prediction this year? Do you, and, and, and, and in addition, where do you think the box office really could wind up?

[B]

I don't know if it's going to get to 10 billion. That's the, the, the bulls are saying we'll get back to 10 billion. I do think we'll end the year between 9.5 and 10 somewhere. And it will be the biggest year since COVID will not get to where anywhere near the 11 billion that we were getting to in those couple years before COVID I don't know if that mark is ever going to be returned. It's certainly not on an inflation adjusted scale, but we'll probably end the year up in attendance as well. So it won't just be an inflation thing. It will be the highest attended year at the box office since COVID The biggest show of the year will be the Harry Potter show. And that's, it's actually another example of wasted opportunity with this deal not closing because Paramount was very much looking forward to using Harry Potter as a subscription event for their combined service or at least to start to ingratiate or to integrate the two services together. And the Harry Potter show on HBO Max is going to be massive and they're not going to be able to, to touch it until that deal close. All right, well, we're going to have

[A]

to do this podcast again next year. And our bet, and we were betting a dinner. I'm taking the over on 10 billion

[B]

for, for 27, for 26.

[A]

No, I'm taking the over. Why? Why not? It's just fun. Okay. And I, and I think that Avengers

[B]

is going to way overperform Hunger Games, Meet the Fockers for.

[A]

Yep. Everything. I think it's all going to, I think, I think people are loving going back to the theater and I think it's just, I think, I think the tide is turning. People want to be out, they want to be doing stuff together.

[B]

And I spoken like a movie producer.

[A]

And then in 27 we'll have another bet where I'm betting Netflix winds up with Warner Brothers and you're betting Paramount does. So we had a dinner. I get to pick.

[B]

You're going to get better odds if you bet on Kalshee that Warner's will go to Netflix. You will get much better odds. So that's a much bolder pick. You're going to do better.

[A]

All right, Matt, I really appreciate it. Thank you so much. For joining me and I can't wait to see you in person soon.

[B]

Yes, thanks a lot.

[A]

Thanks for tuning in to this week's episode of Lunch with Jamie. As always, be sure to subscribe to my [e-mail] for my thoughts on all things food, pop culture, politics and more. And remember to join these online conversations and ask my guests questions in real time. Sign up to get a paid subscriber. You can listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or Audible and be sure to leave a review. Thanks and see you next time.