Does Hollywood Make Too Many R-Rated Movies?: Risk, Stochastic Dominance, and the Illusion of Expectation

173 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Do Marketing Media Have Life Cycles? The Case of Product Placement in Movies (2011, background): “The sample does not include any G-rated movies, which traditionally comprise about 3% of all films (De Vany and Walls 2002).”
Social Structure and Exchange: Self-confirming Dynamics in Hollywood (2006, background): “Both industry participants and researchers widely believe that family-oriented films (G-rated) perform better and that features produced for mature audiences (R-rated) perform worse at the box office (Litman, 1983; DeVany and Wallis, 2002; Ravid and Basuroy, 2004).”
The Economics of Movies: A Literature Survey (2012, unknown): “De Vany and Walls (2002) investigate the distribution of revenues, ratesof-return (defined as revenue/budget), and profits (approximated as 0.5*revenue – budget) across the same sample of 2,015 films considered in De Vany and Walls (1999).”
Managerial Objectives, the R-Rating Puzzle and the Production of Violent Films (2004, unknown): “14 De Vany and Walls (2002) find that R rated films in general are cheaper to produce and they are stochastically dominated by other categories.”
The Motion Picture Industry: Critical Issues in Practice, Current Research, and New Research Directions (2006, background): “The issue extends to finding the optimal portfolio of movie types—in terms of genre, storyline, age restriction (e.g., De Vany and Walls 2002), star power, and so on—that protects a studio against changing audience tastes.”