Daniel Radcliffe really wants to work with Wes Anderson.

So much so that the actor said he would punch someone for the opportunity to work with the "Grand Budapest Hotel" and "Royal Tenenbaums" director.

"Me and another actor friend of mine once had a conversation about directors we would legtimately maim somebody else to work with — not so that the person would suffer any permanent damage but if you said you can get to work with this person if you just punch someone, would you do it?" Radcliffe said during the Q&A portion of a TimesTalks promoting his new film "Imperium." "And it ended up being Wes Anderson, Paul Thomas Anderson, Quentin Tarantino, and the Coen brothers, for me. I like people who make weird movies, as is becoming apparent as I list them."

"Imperium" director Daniel Ragussis said his actor of choice would be Daniel Day-Lewis.

"You're obviously just going to get us naming the best people in the world," Radcliffe joked with the audience member who asked which director he'd like to work with.

Radcliffe has expressed his interest in working with Wes Anderson before, when he answered the same question in a Reddit AMA in 2014.

"It's directors I suppose I get more excited about than actors," Radcliffe said in the AMA.

Watch the TimesTalks interview, including the audience Q&A, with Daniel Radcliffe and "Imperium" director Daniel Ragussis:

SEE ALSO: Daniel Radcliffe thinks we should consider calling all gun crimes 'a form of terrorism'

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The directors of 'Catfish' and 'Nerve' reveal how to make it in Hollywood without going to film school

We fell for Paul Newman's acting talents long before we bought his salad dressing.

And Dr. Dre mapped the future of hip-hop before his Beats headphones made him incredibly rich. 

Actors and musicians often step outside of entertainment and expand their names' power into the retail, restaurant, liquor, and investment industries.

Sometimes, these side businesses rake in enough that it's surprising they aren't what the celebrity is primarily known for.

Check out these 15 celebrities who invested in other areas and hit big:

SEE ALSO: 25 celebrities you didn't realize are really tall

Ashton Kutcher — A-Grade Investments

You have a lot to thank Ashton Kutcher for.

The “That ‘70s Show” actor’s A-Grade Investments put money into Uber, Airbnb, Spotify, Shazam, and Soundcloud. In 2010, Kutcher cofounded the venture-capital firm, which invests in technology startups (“problem solvers,” he said), with entertainment manager Guy Oseary.

In 2011, The New York Times reported that the investments likely ranged from $50,000 to $200,000. TechTimes reported that he had $100 million worth of investments in 2014. So it’s not hard to understand why he tried to do some free promotion on “Two and a Half Men.”

Magic Johnson — Magic Johnson Enterprises

The NBA legend founded his investment company in 1987 with a mission to strengthen urban and underserved communities.

Throughout the history of the company, he's had deals with Pepsi-Cola, Sony Retail Entertainment (to create the multiplexes of Magic Johnson Theatres), T.G.I. Friday’s, Founders National Bank, 24 Hour Fitness, Burger King, Best Buy, and more. In 2010, his deals to sell his stake in the Los Angeles Lakers and his 125 Starbucks stores netted him about $100 million. In 2012, he became co-owner of the LA Dodgers, a purchase of $2 billion. MJE is reportedly worth $1 billion.

Magic on the basketball court, and magic in the boardroom.

Jessica Alba — The Honest Company

In 2011, the “Dark Angel” and “Fantastic Four” actress cofounded The Honest Company, which supplies nontoxic household products and has a promise of transparency with its Honestly FREE Guarantee to tell customers the origins of the products. Though its claims have faced scrutiny, the company was valued at $1.7 billion in 2015. That’s a lot of diapers sold.

Netflix has a hit on its hands.

“Stranger Things,” its latest original series, has far outpaced other Netflix originals in viewership. In the first 16 days, 8.2 million people watched the science-fiction drama, putting it far ahead of hits like "House of Cards," "Daredevil," and "Jessica Jones."

And while the series draws on a compelling plot, solid acting, and exceptional cinematography to make a sale to viewers, it would be difficult to ignore the magic that holds it all together: a nostalgia for earlier days.

The show, set in a rural Indiana town during the 1980s, transports viewers to another period in American history.

An era apparently void of the complexities of modern life.

There are no smartphones or video games. Instead, children in the show are seen navigating the small town on bicycles, playing board games, and getting into innocent mischief. Law enforcement holds the respect of the community and the nuclear family is alive and well.

It’s a period of time many Americans recall fondly in their memories — and, according to Republican strategists who spoke to Business Insider, its the same nostalgia that’s also fueling some of Donald Trump’s popularity with supporters.

“Arguably we were winning under [President Ronald] Reagan. We won the Cold War. We were a superpower in the '80s. The economy was booming,” said John Thomas, a Republican strategist and president of Thomas Partners Strategies. “So I think that's what a lot of people want to go back to.”

“The other interesting thing was we were more homogeneous in the 1980s as a culture,” Thomas added, saying the nation has become divided on several issues that run deep through society.

Indeed, in the past several years America has undergone radical transformation.

The Black Lives Matter movement has stirred discussion on racial inequality. The Supreme Court has legalized gay marriage, and for the first time in US history a major political party has nominated a woman for president.

“[Trump] wants to go back to a simpler time where some of these thorny issues that are difficult" are not at the forefront of American politics, said Matt Mackowiak, a Republican strategist and president of the Potomac Strategy Group. "The gender issues, the racial issues, the sexuality issues — at the end of the day he wants to focus on immigration, the economy, and trade."

Mackowiak noted that many adults who had a positive experience growing up want to return to those days — something he sees in Trump.

“He did like the world that existed when he was a kid,” Mackowiak said. “And a lot of us are based on our childhood. If we had a happy childhood, we sometimes want to recreate it. And so I think for the most part, I think he would in his own mind would like to take us back to a simple world where right and wrong were very clear.”

For his part, Trump hasn’t hid his desire to take Americans back to earlier days. His entire campaign is based on the premise of making America great again— something that Thomas noted is strange.

“Every election is about moving forward,” he said, pointing out the anomaly with Trump in the 2016 campaign cycle.

But perhaps a sizable portion of the country doesn’t want to move forward, and that's why Trump got nominated. They want to go back to a past they remember fondly.

And it's that glowing view of the older days that provides the magic in "Stranger Things"— the callback to a more simple time.

SEE ALSO: Why Donald Trump is the monster from 'Stranger Things'

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Trump rips a protester in Pennsylvania: 'Your mother is voting for Trump'

British actor Kenny Baker, who played R2-D2 in Star Wars, has died at the age of 83, according to The Guardian.

Baker, who stood 3 feet 8 inches tall, portrayed the spunky droid in the original Star Wars films as well as the prequels.

Abigail Shield, Baker's niece, told The Guardian that Baker's death had been expected, as he had been very ill over the past few years.

"He had a very long and fulfilled life," she said. "He brought lots of happiness to people and we’ll be celebrating the fact that he was well loved throughout the world. We’re all very proud of what he achieved in his lifetime.”

When Baker was younger, he was told he wouldn't live through puberty, Shield said. But he lived a long life, bringing moviegoers joy not only in the Star Wars films, but also through roles in "Time Bandits," "The Goonies," "Flash Gordon," and many other films.

Baker began acting at 16, though his role in the first Star Wars movie in 1977 was what catapulted him into acting success.

SEE ALSO: ROBERT DE NIRO: Donald Trump is 'totally nuts'

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 7 things you missed in the new Star Wars Rogue One trailer

The 2016 Summer Olympics are well underway, and so far a number of celebrities have been quite vocal about their support for Team USA.

Some notable names, like Matthew McConaughey, have even made the trek down to Rio de Janeiro in order to witness the games.

Meanwhile, "Saturday Night Live" star Leslie Jones — whose persistent live-tweeting of the games grabbed headlines this week — is reportedly Rio-bound and expected to give commentary on NBC's broadcast of the events.

Justin Timberlake, Kim Kardashian, and Zac Efron are among the others who have chimed in on social media.

Read on to see how celebrities have reacted to the 2016 Summer Olympics:

SEE ALSO: Michael Phelps wins his 21st Olympic gold medal

DON'T MISS: Here's how each country is doing at the Olympics

In Rio, Matthew McConaughey watched the US rugby team compete.

Then, in typical McConaughey fashion, he lounged at Day 3's swimming events.

Justin Timberlake was one of the many celebrities in awe of the two gold-medal wins by Michael Phelps, the most decorated Olympian of all time.

Tweet Embed:
https://twitter.com/mims/statuses/763208039696441344
This is getting ridiculous! Wow, @MichaelPhelps JUST WOW. #USA

It's that time of year when people fly as far away as they can and snap photos to make their friends jealous.

But celebrities do this a little better than everyone else. And the ones who are active on Instagram are not shy about documenting their experiences.

Here are the top celebrities on Instagram right now who are giving followers a glimpse into how they're living their best lives on vacation in summer 2016, from Jessica Alba and Britney Spears in Hawaii to Lupita Nyong'o in Bali:

It's hard to forget when Taylor Swift threw a July 4 bash at her seaside Rhode Island mansion, since her famous friends — such as Karlie Kloss, here with Swift — saturated social media with photos documenting it.

Instagram Embed:
http://instagram.com/p/BHfcv0ODPqR/embed/
Width: 658px

It was a big group with Blake Lively.

Instagram Embed:
http://instagram.com/p/BHiJ5CHA5Kj/embed/
Width: 658px

Of course, Beyoncé couldn't be left out of the action.

Instagram Embed:
http://instagram.com/p/BIbU3Lzhvx_/embed/
Width: 658px

It’s time to finally see “Suicide Squad,” one of the most anticipated movies of the summer. But we have to warn you, there are a lot of characters to digest.

From some that show up for what seems like seconds, to others that are on-screen for way too long, and one we wish we could have seen more (we’re talking to you, Panda Man), the latest DC Comics movie throws a lot at you in two hours (don't get us started with all the music queues).

Here we break down all the characters and rank them from worst to best.

Mild spoilers ahead.

SEE ALSO: Here's the biggest problem with "Suicide Squad," and how it could've been fixed

21. Slipknot (Adam Beach)

With one of the most distasteful introductions in movie history as he walks out of an SUV and immediately decks a female guard with a right hook, there's really nothing else memorable from the guy who can climb anything. Might have been best to leave him on the cutting-room floor.

20. Enchantress (Cara Delevingne)

The evil witch who likes to shake her hips is the cause of all the trouble in the movie. But played by an actress who is still learning her craft, the character feels forced.

19. The Flash (Ezra Miller)

One of the last-second additions to the movie, The Flash literally says one line and, like his power, is gone. Just teasing us for Erza Miller coming in "Justice League." 

Video games have evolved a lot over the years, from the goofy polygonal graphics in the first "Metal Gear Solid" to the hyperrealistic games currently in development, like "Detroit: Become Human."

But realism isn't everything — some of the most beautiful games ever released came out 10+ years ago, standing out instead for excellence in their overall art direction.

Since the world of gaming is wide and varied, we're just going to focus on PlayStation exclusive games for now, which was plenty difficult enough.

These are the most beautiful PlayStation exclusive games ever made.

SEE ALSO: The 10 most beautiful planets people have found so far in 'No Man's Sky'

20. "The Unfinished Swan"

"The Unfinished Swan" is a stunning video game that blurs the lines between fine art and entertainment. You start in a completely blank environment — as you throw dark ink on your surroundings, you'll slowly reveal the details of the landscape that surrounds you.

Platforms: PlayStation 4, PlayStation 3, PlayStation Vita

19. "Kingdom Hearts 2"

Though "Kingdom Hearts 2" isn't the most technically impressive game, Square Enix deserves major kudos for its ability to seamlessly blend "Final Fantasy" and Disney into one beautifully cohesive world.

A third entry in the series is coming to PlayStation 4 in the next year or two that looks fantastic, but until then, we're happy to keep ogling at this now decade-old game.

Platforms: PlayStation 2, PlayStation 3

18. "God of War III Remastered"

The "God of War" series its known for its brutal action and over-the-top boss battles that draw from the imagery of Greek legend. The dark and gritty art direction is beautiful, in that grotesque, Quentin Tarantino way.

Though the whole series is beautiful, the most recent entry stands out as something truly incredible to look at. That is, until the new "God of War" unveiled at E3 in June comes out.

Platform: PlayStation 4

Netflix is famous for its unique company culture, which does not tolerate either failing employees or brilliant jerks.

This culture was outlined in a famous 2009 slide deck by CEO Reed Hastings that summarized Netflix’s management philosophy.

And though the company has morphed since then, diving into original content and expanding across the globe, it has maintained a commitment to that culture.

That means that working at Netflix isn’t quite like working anywhere else, and neither is getting hired there.

In a recent Reddit AMA, a purported Netflix employee (who showed a photo of a redacted pay stub as proof), described what it was like to get hired and work there.

The interview:

“About 40-50% of the interview is about making sure your personality is compatible with our company culture. The rest is about making sure you're technically capable … They flew me out and interviewed me for eight hours. It seemed really easy at the time, but I now realize that a lot of the questions were checking that my personality was a fit for the company. No crazy technical questions that I hate.”

Culture fit was a big part of the hiring:

“You'll talk to about eight or so people, some from HR, some higher-ups, some of the team you're applying to. Typically if even a single person doesn't like you, it's unlikely you'll be hired. Ultimately the decision is with the team that's hiring but it's very rare for them to overrule a single ‘no.’”

No one cares where you went to school:

“I'm a college dropout. I haven't heard a single person discuss education or degrees. When you're working with people who have 5, 10, or even more years of experience education doesn't matter anymore. It's all about what problems you have the knowledge to solve.”

There’s independence with responsibility:

“At every other place I've worked, there's a very strict hierarchy and everyone is working on whatever the orders from up high are. In a sense that's also true at Netflix, but the orders are less orders and more context about what the big picture is and what is going on with the numbers. And everyone is expected to pitch in in their own way. You can give someone a problem and they can solve it without going back and asking you for the exact procedure.”

You have to perform:

“Netflix is definitely more cutthroat about firing ‘dead weight’ than every other company I worked for. If you're not working out for whatever reason, there's no reason to keep you.”

This person also said there weren’t any real “entry-level positions.” So if you were looking to get hired straight out of college, you’re probably out of luck. Though there are definitely people who have begun their Netflix careers in their mid-20s.

If you want to take a look at Reed Hastings' famous 2009 slide deck, scroll down:

The massive new PlayStation 4 game "No Man's Sky" is all about exploring the vast reaches of space, all from the comfort of your couch. The game has a near-infinite universe, filled with alien planets, intergalactic trading posts, and all other manner of sci-fi delight. 

But just like here on Earth, cold hard cash rules everything in the universe. How else will you get a nicer ship? 

The logic is simple: In "No Man's Sky," your goal is to reach the center of the universe. The only way to do that is by building a ship capable of traversing millions of light years across the universe. A bigger ship is also capable of holding more stuff, and the more stuff you can hold in your ship, the better your ship is. 

So, how do you get a bigger ship?

You could find one, crashed and in need of love, on an alien planet. Those tend to come in small increments, though — in so many words, you're likely to find a slightly nicer ship than what you've already got. 

There is, however, a way to skip all that and jump to a much bigger ship relatively early in the game. It's a simple trick of basic economic theory.

Sound intimidating? It isn't! Here's all the economic theory you need to grok: buy low, sell high. ECON101 lesson over.

Now let's apply that lesson.

First things first, get yourself to an intergalactic trading post. These are the pyramid-like structures floating in every star system. They're basically much nicer versions of highway rest stops, sans Roy Rogers. Then, head inside and to the trading terminal. They look like this:

When you've engaged the terminal, select the "Sell" option. Then scroll through the various prices the trading post is offering. Some items are sold at a lower price than the galactic average, and some are higher than the galactic average, as indicated in red (less) and yellow (more) text next to the price this teller is offering per piece:

You may already be picking up what I'm dropping here: these price fluctuations mean you can buy or collect things cheaply in one star system that are ridiculously valuable in another. And that's true!

But that's the long game, and you wanna make money right now. Stay with me.

There's another visual indication of value in the galactic terminal. It's a gold star, and it indicates that the item in question is of particular value at this terminal. Like so:

In this instance, Terumin is valued at 77,289 space bucks per piece. 

And here's where things get wild: Just outside of the galactic terminal room, there's a space garage full of aliens who want to trade their stuff with me. 

And these aliens, it turns out most of them are selling Terumin at much more reasonable rates — in the range of 30,000 space bucks. Can you guess where I'm going with this?

I spent 15 minutes hopping from space trader to space trader, pillaging their ship inventories for low-priced Terumin. I invested hundreds of thousands of space bucks on it, in fact. 

As traders left, new ones arrived with even more low-priced Terumin for me to buy. 

And then, after having purchased as much Terumin as my inventory allowed, I dumped it all at the galactic terminal. 

So, let's do the math: If each Terumin cost about 30K, and the galactic terminal is buying them for about 70K, that's a more than 100%  return on every item. 

Or, in English, it's how I made all the money: 

And what'd I do with that money? I immediately bought the most baller space truck I could find in that star system.

Then I high-tailed it out of there, off to another space adventure.

SEE ALSO: The biggest PlayStation 4 game of the year is basically 'Minecraft' in space with 18 quintillion planets

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The most anticipated game of the year was designed by Brits and it will take you 584 billion years to finish

I don’t want to give the Focal Utopia back.

I don’t get this romantic very often. But the Utopia — a new pair of ultra high-end headphones from French manufacturer Focal — isn't a good gadget so much as it's luxury.

It’s made from rare materials, crafted with obvious care, and, put simply, better sounding than any headphone I’ve ever tested. If any device deserves to have the word “premium” attached to it, the Utopia is it. 

It’s also $4,000. That’s a lot! (It also explains my lede.) Yet, after testing the Utopia for the past couple of weeks, that price doesn’t feel completely absurd. Here’s what I mean.

SEE ALSO: The affordable new BlackBerry phone is safe in every sense of the word

The Utopia looks good. It has a lot going on, what with its dimpled leather earpads, aluminum grills, and carbon fiber yoke, but it doesn’t come off as showy. The jet-black style helps it find a balance between “thing that costs $4,000” and “thing I’m not embarrassed to wear around people.”

It’s also comfortable. You can’t expect anything less for the money, but the Utopia’s headband and earpads are supremely soft and cushioned. Your ears get plenty of breathing room, too. While the whole thing is fairly heavy (490 grams), that weight is well-balanced once it’s on your head.

Focal reps told me the company spent four years developing the Utopia, and it shows. It feels like a headphone that was pored over before it was sold.

Sound is what matters, though, and it’s there where the Utopia is nearly untouchable. Even after weeks of listening, I can’t muster any major complaints about what Focal has created.

What many feared about "Suicide Squad" in its second week in theaters looks to be coming true.

Following a record-breaking opening weekend, the latest DC Comics release by Warner Bros. only took in an estimated $43.8 million.

That's a disappointing 67% decline in gross from last weekend (previous DC Comics movie "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" had a 69.1% drop its second weekend).

On top of the bad word of mouth "Squad" is receiving, the movie also faced some stiff competition this weekend.

The Seth Rogen comedy "Sausage Party" exceeded expectation with a strong $33.6 million opening weekend, coming in second place.

That's the largest opening ever for an animated movie released in August.

An impressive figure for an R-rated animated comedy about food that learns what their real fate is when humans purchase them from the store.

Sony, which released the movie (produced by Annapurna Pictures), was bullish about their latest collaboration with Rogen and producing partner Evan Goldberg (its previous Rogen/Goldberg release was the now infamous "The Interview," which led to the Sony hacks).

The studio held numerous special screenings in New York and LA before the release that featured prescreening hors d'oeuvre, drinks, and a large sausage mascot walking around. Rogen and Goldberg also hosted had strong screenings at South by Southwest and San Diego Comic-Con.

Then there was the Disney release "Pete's Dragon," which gives a completely different story to the movie of a young boy and his best friend that's a dragon, which originally came out in 1977.

The movie came in third with $21.6 million. Though it's one of the few titles by Disney that will likely not be turned into a franchise, the movie received an impressive 85% rating on Rotten Tomatoes and proved to Disney that director David Lowery, known for his independent film work, can work within their system. They will swing for the fences on Lowery's next project for them, "Peter Pan."  

SEE ALSO: Here's what we learned about "Rogue One: A Star Wars Story" from the explosive new trailer

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 7 things you missed in the new Star Wars Rogue One trailer

Superheroes are a crowded business these days.

While they've been with us for a long time, with blockbusters along the way (Superman in the 1970s and Batman through the 1980s, '90s, and '00s), the superhero genre didn't become the many-tentacled beast it is today until Marvel realized the possibilities of its movie universe under Disney.

"The Avengers," in retrospect, was an expensive gamble (for the actors' salaries alone), but it has paid off handsomely even if critics don't always love the franchise's movies. At the same time, DC Comics has struggled to keep up with its major competitor.

"Suicide Squad," DC's latest, is reviled by critics, and it is projected to have a steep drop-off this weekend after a record August opening, which will most likely keep it off the list of the most prized superhero movies.

Below are the highest-grossing superhero movies at the domestic box office of all time:

*Note: figures, from Box Office Mojo, are adjusted for inflation, to keep things fair.

SEE ALSO: The 30 most expensive movies ever made

10. "Iron Man 3" (2013) — $422,680,300

Unadjusted: $409,013,994

9. "Spider-Man 3" (2007) — $423,597,700

Unadjusted: $336,530,303

8. "Avengers: Age of Ultron" (2015) — $463,543,100

Unadjusted: $459,005,868

It turns out there isn't mass hysteria at the major movie studios following a weak summer movie season, in which ticket sales were down 10% from last year.

In fact, moviegoers should expect little change in the kinds of movies that are released over the summer in the next few years, according to industry players who talked with Business Insider. So get ready for the endless stream of superheroes and franchises to continue apace.

Last year broke records at the box office. Domestic earnings totaled over $11 billion, and Universal topped all studios after it earned over $5.5 billion worldwide thanks to summer releases "Jurassic World" and "Minions," each of which earned over $1 billion worldwide.

This summer has had a few big hits, too. "Finding Dory" has made over $871 million to date, and "Captain American: Civil War" is the latest Marvel movie to earn over $1 billion worldwide.

But many titles over the summer didn't live up to the hype.

"Warcraft" hasn't even crossed the $50 million mark at the domestic box office. (It's at $47.2 million — though it's done much better overseas at over $385 million.) Steven Spielberg's "The BFG" has puzzled audiences and is one of the rare Disney titles not connecting with them this year, as it has only taken in $113 million worldwide (the worst wide release ever for a Spielberg film). And "The Legend of Tarzan" has done modestly, with $335 million worldwide.

And then there are the poor performances by numerous sequels that, frankly, no one asked for.

"Independence Day: Resurgence," "Alice Through the Looking Glass," "Zoolander 2," and "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows" are some of the major summer sequels that seemed to be made more for business reasons by studios — many of them paying a pretty penny for the intellectual properties — rather than genuine interest from creatives or fans.

"Keeping up with trends is essential for the lifeblood of a studio," Jeff Bock, a senior box-office analyst at Exhibitor Relations, told Business Insider. "This is a message from moviegoers: Stop with the formulaic sequels."

Rotten Tomatoes Editor-in-Chief Matt Atchity looks at this year's summer movie season as a big collection of ideas studios were late on.

"'Independence Day,' we needed that 10 years ago," Atchity told Business Insider. "'Angry Birds' is four years too late, 'Legend of Tarzan,' even 'Warcraft' — I think executives are not all that in touch with what the audience really wants."

And Atchity notes that when the studios took "risks" (aka original stories) — like The Lonely Island comedy "Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping" or the Ryan Gosling/Russell Crowe buddy comedy "The Nice Guys" — they got burnt. Those films have earned $9.5 million and $36.3 million, respectively.

However, some titles broke through this summer without the help of a franchise tag.

Thrillers like "The Shallows" and "Lights Out" had better-than-expected openings, and the comedy "Bad Moms" is the strongest-performing release in the 2-year life of its studio, STX Entertainment.

"I think all of these are performing because there's a level of originality to them, but also these movies deliver a great group experience," Lawrence Grey, the producer of "Lights Out," told Business Insider.

With the immense amount of content now available to binge on streaming services ("'Stranger Things' is talked about as much as any movie at the moment," Atchity said of the Netflix sensation), and the cost of movie tickets, audiences are much more selective about the movies they go to the theater to see.

"Someone who wants to get out of their house and drive to a theater, I think they want to go to have a big, visceral experience," Grey said.

***

But here's the thing: Studios aren't made to survive on modestly budgeted genre hits, even when they overperform. They need the dollars that come with blockbusters, and because of that, they have to continue to create them. Often it's sequels that come from proven franchises that continue to get the green light.

"I don't believe that what we are seeing is evidence that audiences are tired of tentpoles, franchises, and sequels," Adam Fogelson, STX Entertainment's motion picture chairman, told Business Insider.

Bock agrees.

"Despite the massive sequel slump this summer, don't expect continuing sagas to fall off the face of the earth anytime soon," he said. "In fact, the next three summers are already mapped out and look very similar to 2016. The only difference we might see is smaller studio films populating the release schedule as they attempt to make up some of the sequel slack."

In fact, Warner Bros. adjusting its summer release schedule is how "Lights Out" found its eventual release.

Grey said that originally the studio was going to put out the movie in September, an ideal time for a thriller. But after moving the tentpole "King Arthur" from its summer spot, executives replaced it with "Lights Out" following the overwhelmingly positive test scores they got from its screenings — which proves you don't have to replace a big summer movie with an equally big title.

But that's a rare case. The summer movie season will continue to be the time of year when studios show off their massive projects, frankly, because even when they are bad, we tend to go in droves to see them.

The latest example is Warner Bros.' DC Comics movie "Suicide Squad," which took in an estimated $135.1 million its first weekend — the biggest opening ever for an August release. Yet the movie has a 26% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Its press has been universally bad.

"For all the audience's complaints about being sick of sequels and adaptations, just look at the top 10 box office for the summer and see how many original stories there are," Atchity said.

The answer would be only two: the animated movie "The Secret Life of Pets" and the Kevin Hart/Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson comedy "Central Intelligence."

It was a summer of slumps. But for Hollywood, the rules of the game remain the same.

SEE ALSO: The 10 best and worst TV shows this summer

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The directors of 'Catfish' and 'Nerve' reveal how to make it in Hollywood without going to film school

On the surface, David Lowery seems like the latest independent film wunderkind to be plucked by a major studio and thrust into the blockbuster machine.

But the journey Lowery, 35, made to directing "Pete's Dragon" — Disney's reimagining of the 1977 live-action/animated musical about a boy and his best friend, who happens to be a flying dragon named Elliot, premiering this weekend — is a little different from filmmakers like Colin Trevorrow ("Jurassic World") and Gareth Edwards ("Rogue One: A Star Wars Story").

Those directors made low-budget calling-card movies to prove their competence, but Lowery's indie roots are deep. He's made movies ranging in budget from $12,000 ("St. Nick") to a few million ("Ain't Them Bodies Saints") and has over 30 editor credits.

"I felt I had found my niche," Lowery recently told Business Insider. "If I had spent the rest of my career making movies like 'St. Nick,' I was OK with that."

But sometimes opportunities arrive and seem more like fate than good circumstance. For Lowery, that happened when he got an agent off of "Ain't Them Bodies Saints," a Sundance Film Festival award winner.

Lowery rejected a lot of writing and directing jobs (mostly remakes), but in December 2012, the agent finally struck gold with an idea Disney had for one of its older titles.

"I wasn't interested in the remake game, but I remember while editing 'Ain't Them Bodies Saints' my agent emailed me that Disney was interested in remaking 'Pete's Dragon' using only the title," Lowery said. "Outside of that title, they didn't want to have anything to do with the original, and they definitely didn't want it to be a musical. If Disney truly wanted to use the title of the original as a means to get an original movie made, that appealed to me."

While at Sundance in January 2013, Lowery and his producing partner, Toby Halbrooks, got on Skype at their condo with "Pete's Dragon" producers James Whitaker and Adam Borba about the potential of being screenwriters on the project.

"We found Jim and Adam were far more interested in hearing about the tonal aspects of it than plot or story," Lowery said. "But I remember a big idea from that call was that Pete would spend a lot of time with the dragon in the woods."

Disney was impressed and hired the two to write the script. After Sundance, Lowery and Halbrooks began making trips to Los Angeles to start an outline. Lowery wanted the movie to have a mythical quality that he successfully pulled off in "Saints." (Lowery admits that no one at Disney had ever seen "Saints" until months into he and Halbrooks writing the script.)

They placed the movie in the Pacific Northwest and, in one early draft, during the Great Depression. They later changed that to a more 1970s feel. (It's not specified when exactly the movie takes place.)

But one thing Lowery drove home in the early drafts is that Elliot the dragon would be furry.

"I drew pictures of a furry dragon and brought them in and said, 'This is what he's going to look like,'" Lowery said.

He felt the only way a kid would gravitate to a large dragon and create a bond is if the dragon looked like something they'd want to cuddle up to, grabbing inspiration from the luck dragon Falkor in "The NeverEnding Story."

By Christmas 2013, Lowery and Halbrooks handed in the script, and Disney couldn't have been happier.

The new "Pete's Dragon," with a reported budget of $65 million, is a tearjerker family movie that doesn't try to be anything more or less than that. Pete survives a car crash that kills his parents deep in the woods of the Pacific Northwest.

The dragon, also displaced from his family, comes across Pete, and the two live in the woods for years. (Are you crying yet?) Then, one day, a park ranger discovers Pete in the woods while, at the same time, workers at the local mill discover Elliot the dragon, leading to a journey to find who Pete really is and a race to help save Elliot.

The cast includes Bryce Dallas Howard as the park ranger; Robert Redford as her father, who has a past experience with the dragon; and Oakes Fegley as Pete.

Disney was so impressed by Lowery's script that the studio asked him to come on and direct the movie.

Lowery immediately turned down the offer.

"I thought it wasn't the right idea," Lowery said. "I didn't think it was going to be a movie that I could excel at, and I didn't want to wind up being one of those indie directors who makes a big studio movie and find it's compromised."

But after some talks, Lowery realized he had put too much into the project to hand it off to another director.

"The script had become incredibly personal and something that I felt was mine and something I should make," he said.

By the middle of 2014, Lowery and the cast and crew of "Pete's Dragon" were off to New Zealand to shoot the movie.

Indie filmmakers who make the jump to studio movies might assume that all the hardship and struggle of making a movie suddenly disappears thanks to the embarrassment of riches that comes with being backed by a Hollywood heavyweight. Lowery certainly thought that would be the case.

"I expected there to be a moment where the magic of the studio process revealed itself and the largeness of the entire machine kicked into gear," he said.

But that turned out not to be the case. Though Lowery had crane shots and could helicopter at any moment to get the right shot at a far-off location, the process was generally no different than on his earlier low-budget movies.

The biggest difference, and what took the biggest toll on him, was the length of production.

"'St. Nick' was 14 days. 'Ain't Them Bodies Saints' was 28 days. This turned out to be 89 shooting days," said Lowery, who compared the experience to a sprinter transitioning to a marathon runner.

"You just have to physically and mentally prepare for the endurance test that making a movie on this scale will be," he said.

For every good day, Lowery was hit with a slew of challenges the next.

But that hasn't turned him off the studio system.

"It was grueling. It was really, really tough," Lowery said. "But the second the movie wrapped, all that pain and early mornings and cold nights all fell by the wayside, and I felt a great sense of peace. If they had asked me to shoot another 10 days, I would have said yes."

Now he's ready to do it again.

Lowery has signed on to direct Disney's latest live-action version of "Peter Pan." Like "Pete's Dragon," he and Halbrooks are taking their time writing the script with no plans of making the movie anytime soon. (Lowery will likely make two independently financed movies before "Pan.")

But Lowery insists he's going to deliver a "classic Walt Disney Pictures version" of "Peter Pan."

A filmmaker who was content with an audience much smaller than the one that will see "Pete's Dragon" this weekend, Lowery has taken time in the past few years to reflect on his career — and he's confident that he's right where he should be.

"The reason I got into making movies was I fell in love with 'Star Wars' and wanted to know how lightsabers worked," Lowery said. "Then my interests expanded, and I saw myself as an independent filmmaker, but I still carried that flame of wanting to do something big that would set imaginations the same way mine had been watching 'Star Wars.' So there is part of me that always wanted to do this."

SEE ALSO: Why Hollywood hasn't learned anything from a miserable summer of box-office bombs

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The directors of 'Catfish' and 'Nerve' reveal how to make it in Hollywood without going to film school

World famous magician Penn Jillette of Penn & Teller dropped by Business Insider to talk about his new book "Presto: How I Made Over 100 Pounds Disappear and Other Magical Tales". 

We asked him how he was able to lose the huge amount of weight in such a short time.

Follow BI Video: On Twitter

Join the conversation about this story »

Going to the movies is too complicated.

That's why a former Lionsgate executive and veteran Amazon engineer built Atom Tickets, a Santa Monica startup that wants to simplify every part of the movie theater experience down to the line for popcorn.

“A lot of people are going out to the movies," Atom co-founder Matthew Bakal told Business Insider. "But between getting your friends together and picking a movie and a time and a place, all that stuff is hard work.”

After quietly testing its platform a few dozen theaters over the past year, Atom announced on Monday that it's expanding to hundreds of theaters in more than 70 cities with plans to work nationwide by the end of the summer. Its launch partners include Regal Cinemas, AMC Theaters, and Studio Movie Grill.

The Atom app, which is free to download in the App Store and Google Play Store, lets you order movie tickets like Fandango. You can also you invite friends to go with you, poll them on which movie to see, plan around the night with an in-app chat interface, and order concessions in advance.

When you show up to the theater, you scan your ticket's barcode at an Atom-branded iPad kiosk and pick up your popcorn and candy from an express line. Besides a small convenience fee at certain theaters, the app is free for movie-goers.

A Netflix-like recommendation system in the Atom app suggests movies to you based on the genres you like and what you've watched in the past. It learns the theaters you frequent with certain friends and can send suggestions on what new movies you might want to see.

Sweet tooth? The app knows which concessions you like so it can lure you back to the theater with free candy.

The backdrop to Atom, which Disney, Twentieth Century Fox, and Lionsgate invested a combined $50 million into earlier this year, is that movie ticket sales have remained relatively flat for the past decade. And besides the advent of Comcast-owned Fandango and subscription services like MoviePass, there's been little tech applied to simplifying the movie-going process.

“There just wasn’t a lot of technological innovation going," said Atom co-founder and CEO Ameesh Paleja, who previously worked at Amazon for 11 years on products like the Kindle and Prime Instant Video.

Paleja and his team tested Atom Tickets at a handful of theaters for the past year to determine whether their app actually lead to more ticket sales. The results were better than they expected.

“We were hoping for a two to three percent incremental attendance increase, and we got double digit growth," Paleja said.

Paleja and Bakal are hopeful that their service's ease of use (the app currently has an average rating of 4.5 stars in the App Store) custom recommendations, and streamlined concessions ordering will ultimately lead to more people going to the movies. To attract new users, they're giving away the first ticket ordered in the app for free.

SEE ALSO: I got a MoviePass subscription to see in-theater movies and it's saved me $50 in 5 months

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: We tried the app that's like Netflix for movie theaters — and it's totally worth it

One of the biggest video games of 2016 just got pushed back by several months.

The latest entry in the long-running, enormously popular "Final Fantasy" role-playing game series was supposed to launch this September.

But the game's developer, Japanese company Square Enix, just announced a new release date: November 29. Sorry, "Final Fantasy" fans!

Games get delayed all the time, of course. The delay is especially notable with "Final Fantasy XV" because it's been in development (in one form or another) for nearly a decade. 

The game's director Hajime Tabata posted a personal address to YouTube about the delay, wherein he apologized to fans and explained the new release date as a means of making the game in the best way possible. 

"We have put our whole lives into developing this game, with the intent of bringing the highest quality of game experience to every single player who buys it," Tabata says in the video. "And I personally started developing 'Final Fantasy XV' from a desire to let everyone play a 'Final Fantasy' game that was so outstanding and amazing, that it would send other games running in panic."

In case it wasn't already clear, Tabata doesn't believe that the version of the game that exists now will deliver on his goal of sending "other game games running in panic." But he and his team are going to make sure that the game that arrives on PlayStation 4, Xbox One, and PC this November lives up to the high expectations he's set for it.

Fans are seemingly on board for the delay. "Take the time you need to make it the game you want. We've waited ten years, what's another two months?" writes one of the most recent commenters on the YouTube video. Indeed!

Here's the full video from Tabata (turn on subtitles for English translation):

SEE ALSO: RANKED: The 20 most beautiful PlayStation games ever made

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The most anticipated game of the year was designed by Brits and it will take you 584 billion years to finish

When I sat down to play "Bound," all I knew about it were the (admittedly gorgeous) screenshots I'd seen online. I could tell that the game itself was visually inventive and not really like anything else out there, but I was nervous that the actual moment-to-moment gameplay wouldn't be enough to make the a coherent experience.

I am very happy to report that my fears were unfounded.

On paper, "Bound" closely resembles games like "Super Mario Galaxy" or "Ratchet and Clank." You spend a lot of your time hopping around on platforms, trying to figure out how to travel through its levels without plummeting to your death. But the modernist art direction and surprisingly moving motifs of abuse, family, and loss elevate the experience to a place that most video games don't usually venture.

If this is the first you're hearing of "Bound," it's definitely worth your attention. Here's what it's like to play.

SEE ALSO: These are the 20 best games for less than $20

All the trappings of a normal exploration-based platformer are here: Precarious ledges? Check. Moving platforms? Check. But the similarities to "Super Mario Bros." end there. Abruptly.

In "Bound," the joy comes not from perfectly landing a difficult maneuver, but rather from observing how your character's movements shape the physical space around them.

For example, the walls will dynamically shift as you walk around so that your character is always in view.

RAW Embed

The commercials are all over TV, the ones for car dealerships that will buy any car, even if you push it into their lot. And they'll sell you a car even if you're bankrupt or have a horrible credit score.

That's all thanks to subprime auto loans, the focus of Sunday's episode of "Last Week Tonight with John Oliver."

Oliver describes how some in the industry have taken advantage of people who are poor and in desperate need of a car just so they can get to work on time (instead of taking three buses and a train) or get groceries for their families.

People with terrible credit can turn to so-called buy-here, pay-here dealerships. But buyers are at the mercy of the dealers, who take advantage of their economic situation by providing the potential buyers with insane interest rates, averaging 19% and at times up to 29%, according to the show.

The show points out that these people are often buying their cars at two to three times the cars' Kelley Blue Book value.

A remarkable example of how far these dealerships can milk this kind of deal is when the show highlights a 2011 Los Angeles Times story that tracks the sale of a 2003 Kia Optima from a Kansas City buy-here, pay-here dealership.

The car, which the show points out had a Kelley Blue Book value of $5,350, was sold in April 2008 for nearly $11,000. It was then repossessed (or returned to a dealer) and resold eight times in three years, each time at a price that was double or triple its Blue Book value.

"At which point you almost feel bad for the car," Oliver jokes.

But the show didn't stop there. It tracked down the car that was featured in the Los Angeles Times story and learned that it has been sold, repossessed, and sold again, with the most recent listed owner saying it had been stolen.

And if this sounds familiar to what happened with subprime home loans that led to the housing-market crash in 2007, Oliver said we might see a repeat of that as companies are now bundling those high-interest subprime loans and selling them on Wall Street.

Time for everyone to take a break and go watch "The Big Short" again. But before you do that, watch the full "Last Week Tonight" segment below:

SEE ALSO: The 10 best and worst TV shows this summer

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The cheapest new Ferrari money can buy is absolutely gorgeous