I'm wondering about straight-to-video releases. It has to be obvious to everyone involved during filming that the movie they had hoped would be "box-office magic" is actually a stinker, especially when the lead actors are terrible (hello, Jessica Simpson!). So why go through with something that not only has no hope of ever making any money but will eventually be an embarrassment for all?
You obviously speak of the Simpson bomb Blonde Ambition. You should know that clunker was made for the nearly microscopic—in Hollywood terms—sum of somewhere between $10 million and $12 million. Not even a Woody Allen movie is that cheap. Obviously these producers thought if the movie was inexpensive enough, they would have to make at least a little profit. They, shall we say, miscalculated, though the movie did reach No. 1...in Ukraine.
However, you should know that some movies are made with the express intention of skipping theaters and going straight to disc. The big motivation: saving money, not losing it. Find out which actors and cult-hit franchises are benefiting from the flourishing straight-to-DVD market, after the jump.