Explain the role of production companies vs studios to an idiot

[T & P]

As aptly illustrated by the above Family Guy gag, I’ve long wondered why so many production companies are involved in some (though not all of course) films.

I suspect it might largely have to do with budgeting and backing, but is that the whole story? Sometimes you see films produced by massive, wealthy household name studios, yet you are treated in the opening credits to the names of three, four, and on occasion even five or more different production companies that were involved in the film in question.

So is it just a financial issue? The studio puts the film together and makes it happen, but contributes only a small percentage of the funding if it’s not an A-list flick so multiple production companies have to chip in?

I just feel there must be more to it- if it was purely a financial issue couldn’t you just have wealthy backers investing in a film without the need to create a company to do so, and slap (rather fancy) logos at the beginning of the reel?

 

[T & P]

And if any film buff is kind enough to answer, could you also let me know the difference between a producer and an executive producer? Ta

 

[alsoknownas]

A production company can provide services on a variety of levels. They don't even have to be connected to the financier necessarily. A studio could bring a production company on board because of their expertise in arranging the effects side of things for example.

My understanding of the Producer / Exec Producer is that a Producer would naturally posses and run a production as the active head of production, whereas an Exec is usually someone who has a lot of influence and connections, so can help to steer the project, but isn't going to be acting as the day-to-day producer. But the problem with trying to define the role of the Executive Producer is that it is a bit of a moveable feast (this is kind of deliberate, so that people can operate at the producer level while taking on as much or little responsibility as suits them / the project).

These days a common example of an exec producer might be a successful actor, who has attained influence, and wants to be part of the financial structure of the project itself, but wouldn't have the production capability or experience to actually produce it.

Another model might be an established producer, who has a bundle of projects she's interested in and can service, but doesn't have the capacity to actually produce them all during the timeframe. By being exec she can exert influence, while somebody else does the actual producing.

 

[T & P]

Thanks for that. I had noticed a lot of people listed in the credits as executive producers were Hollywood A-listers, and had wondered why...

 

[Maltin]

Thanks for that. I had noticed a lot of people listed in the credits as executive producers were Hollywood A-listers, and had wondered why...

Exec producer seems more of a title rather than a role. It acknowledges their involvement. But I’m sure that there are a lot of “producers” that get given credit without necessarily producing much.

 

[Maltin]

There are lots of disputes when awards are issued as to who of the producers actually did anything sufficiently significant to receive recognition, so it seems a very ill-defined credit.

 

[Maltin]

In a response to the thread question, a short answer is that many studios are often just distribution companies nowadays and films are super expensive and carry lots of risk, hence why so many production companies get involved.

 

[Maltin]

In a book published by the American Film Institute, their glossary for producing defines some of the roles:

Producer - The person in charge of getting a movie made, including securing the financing, acquiring or developing a story, and bringing the creative elements together.

Executive producer - A person in some way responsible for a film who rarely participates in the nitty-gritty of filmmaking to the degree that creative of line producers do. The title itself gives no clue at to what the person does. The executive producer may raise money to the the film to made; may be very involved in business aspects; or may do nothing more than place a phone call to help close the deal. She may be the head of the production company, the star's business manager, or the star herself.

Associate producer - Traditionally, the producer's second in command, who helps with such tasks as on-set problem solving and coordinating location shoots. But the credit may also be awarded to someone only tangentially involved with line producing, such as a writer or studio executive. Or it may be the only title given to the person who does all the actual work of line producing, while the producer credit goes to someone less involved but more powerful.

Their introduction to producing ask the questions as to what is a producer and the difference between exec producer/associate producer and quote William Goldman's answer as "I haven't the foggiest" which seems to sum it up.

 

[Reno]

Traditionally studios are the factories where films get made. They take up a large plot of land and they house everything from production offices, to sound stages, to post production facilities, to large warehouses full of props, costumes and sets. They have everything needed to produce a film or a tv series from beginning to end.

In the classic Hollywood era from the 20s to the 50s, studios like MGM, Warner's, RKO etc made films from pitch to premiere and each had their own house style. They also had their movie stars and character actors on exclusive contracts. Many other countries had at least one major studio facility (UFA in Germany, Cinecitta in Italy).



A production company facilitates a film/TV show getting made. This can be just an office full of production staff who organise everything needed to make a film or tv series. They don't necessarily have the physical means for a production (sound stages etc), though they often have some post production facilities. Most production companies produce just commercials, idents, promos etc. or they specialise in one field of post-production (digital editing, special effects etc.) and they don't produce entire films or TV series at all.


Studios as sole producers of their content, went into a decline by the 60s. Now films nearly always are coproductions, where one or two studios and several production companies are involved. Independent films usually are put together by production companies only, they rent everything as needed.

I've worked at many production companies, which is basically an office job, even when you work in animation like I did. The occasional times I worked at a studio were always far more exciting, popping your head round sound stages, seeing big sets being built and spotting the occasional movie star at the canteen.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Producers actually do some work, executive producers might make the odd phone call.

 

[alsoknownas]

Producers actually do some work, executive producers might make the odd phone call.

Usually pretty important phone calls though .

 

[Reno]

Often executive producers simply run the production company which is involved in a film/tv series and they don't do any real work on the project at all. Including their name in the credits is merely a contractual obligation. That's why its misleading when a film's publicity trumpets "from the producers/people who brought you (insert hit movie)" and then they cite the name of an executive producer. Some of course are very involved in a production, but it's always suspicious when they don't name the writer/director instead in the publicity.

 

[Orang Utan]

Sometimes executive producers, esp if they’re actors, will be a bit more involved than just lending their name to a production to get financial backing and promotion. They might have final word or input on casting decision or have creative input on the script

 

[Gromit]

Actors as Exec Producer more often than not means that they have either contributed intellectual property rights associated with the movie or are taking some or all of their payment in royalties instead of fees.

But it can also mean they’ve invested actual cash money themselves in the project.

Producers go around fund raising and actually doing all the nitty gritty of getting the movie to actually happen.

 

[Reno]

Actors as Exec Producer more often than not means that they have either contributed intellectual property rights associated with the movie or are taking some or all of their payment in royalties instead of fees.

Every artist/creative working on a film contributes intellectual property, the rights of which are transferred to the studio or production company via a contract. If someone wants to retain some of these rights, that has to be negotiated beforehand.

In most cases actor-producers would get a fee and percentage points, residuals far more rarely

But it can also mean they’ve invested actual cash money themselves in the project.

That doesn't happen, apart from the very rare occasion when some movie star's vanity project runs into major trouble and they are desperate enough to attempt a rescue. What occasionally happens but still is rare, is that the producer-star may agree to a reduced fee in exchange for more percentage points, to bail out a budget overrun.

One of the first rules of film production is not to invest your own money.

 

[Gromit]

That doesn't happen, apart from the very rare occasion when some movie star's vanity project runs into major trouble.

That doesn’t happen... apart from when it happens.
Yeah Um good reply. I never said or hinted that it was common. I agree that it’s very rare.

I have heard of a few projects jump started by stars as they wanted the vehicle of their fame to continue and so their fame to continue.

Richard Dean Anderson has a history of this.

 

[Reno]

That doesn’t happen... apart from when it happens.
Yeah Um good reply. I never said or hinted that it was common. I agree that it’s very rare.

I have heard of a few projects jump started by stars as they wanted the vehicle of their fame to continue and so their fame to continue.

Richard Dean Anderson has a history of this.

Movie stars develop projects for themselves all the time, that's why they usually get a producer credit. They don't do this by funding films with their own money as you claimed, their fame is what gets production companies to invest in theit films. Brad Pitt is probably among the most prolific stars to develop his own films. Not glittering a star as Richard Dean Anderson of course !

 

[Gromit]

Movie stars develop projects for themselves all the time, that's why they usually get a producer credit. They don't do this by funding films with their own money as you claimed, their fame is what gets production companies to invest in them. Brad Pitt is probably among the most prolific stars to develop most of his own films. Not glittering a star as Richard Dean Anderson of course !

Brad’s fame has never dwindled so it would be ridiculous to use his own money.

Those whose fame is dying though... sometimes they take the unthinkable risk.
You won’t hear about the ones who failed in the risk. Only the very rare few for who it paid off.

 

[Reno]

Brad’s fame has never dwindled so it would be ridiculous to use his own money.

Those whose fame is dying though... sometimes they take the unthinkable risk.
You won’t hear about the ones who failed in the risk. Only the very rare few for who it paid off.

 

[DaveCinzano]

Step back, Reno, people need to hear Gromit's truthbombs

 

[T & P]

Seth Rogen is an interesting one. He’s an extremely prolific producer/ executive producer; unless I’m
reading it wrong, right now he’s listed on IMDB as a producer (or exec producer) of 28 upcoming projects. Which seems an extraordinary amount to me.

Not only that, but a lot of the stuff he’s been involved as a producer has been superb- far better than most of the films he’s been a main actor in, as a matter of fact: The Boys, Future Man, and Preacher being the crowning glories for me. I now regularly look out for upcoming series or films he might be involved in at a production level.

 

[Orang Utan]

Brad’s fame has never dwindled so it would be ridiculous to use his own money.

Those whose fame is dying though... sometimes they take the unthinkable risk.
You won’t hear about the ones who failed in the risk. Only the very rare few for who it paid off.

Your mate Brad, who you're gonna make a Highlander remake with.