Steven Seagal : How does he still make movies?

First off, this is a serious question and not a thread to make hurtful opinions and bash his recent work. I really do want to know how he's able to make movies dispite the various factors.

For one, his recent DTV (Direct to TV/DVD) movies only cost a few million to make, but even then they only gross less than $100,000 in sales. So production companies aren't getting any profit from his films. Then again, Steven Seagal has served as a producer on most of his recent DTV films, so he's probably investing some of his own money into these films.

Another thing is that5b4 production companies aren't getting their money's worth. They cast Steven Seagal, but it might as well be anyone since many films use fight doubles, close-ups and any actual shot of Steven Seagal is some weak ass slap, punch or kick followed by a guy being flung across the room and into a breakable object. Steven's early work focused on his actual aikido skills, even if it did look one sided.

As for casting anyone but Seagal in these movies, He doesn't even look believable in the characters he portrays. To be honest, Steven Seagal has never looked like an action star, even since Above the Law. In fact, I heard that's how he got his big break was that his agent believed he could make anyone a star. I don't believe his weight gain hindered his physical performance. I think that has been down to age. But, his large size probably prevents him being cast in more roles.

I've noticed that Above the Law 2 is listed on his credits. But, I doubt this will be his comeback. He won't bother losing any weight or ppear any older. He won't be able to secure any decent director, producers or co-stars and this will go straight to DVD.

I'm a huge fan of Seagal (even his DTV work) and will try to answer your question:

Maybe his latest releases don't sell as well as they used to, but (if going by your sales figure of $100,000) you have to remember that's just U.S sales. Seagal (like him or hate him) is still pretty popular overseas (and each of those countries have similar, if not considerably higher 'sales figures' for these movies) Lots of far east countries still hold a lot of 80's action stars in high regard, and shun (otherwise, successful) A-listers. And to be fair, a lot of his early DTV releases (however bad) probably made a lot more than 100k in sales. Seagal was making around $5m a picture back in the ealy DTV days

Then there's the TV rights, Netflix, etc revenue to take into consideration?

It's hard to believe, but when the DTV market came into it's own (around 2001-2002ish) that budgets were STILL in their tens of millions (largely due, to some of the still famous faces that popped up in them) I dare say that most of these budgets were vastly exaggerated in the first place.

Seagal's problem was he got too comfortable in the DTV zone. So whilst it was (at first) refreshing to bypass the wait for a cinema release for his latest titles.the guy started churning them out (this is probably because he still gets to call the shots on smaller productions.unlike his Warner Bros blacklisting.which pretty much put paid to any further UNDER SIEGE movies) plus he doesn't have the crossover appeal that say, Bruce Willis has (who despite churning out just as many DTV movies, can easily shift back and forth into cinemas)


Then of course there's the funding to these movies:

But by and large, these DTV movies are just sold at festivals as 'mock-up' posters (which is why so many of his rumoured projects bite the dust, not long after they're announced) I'll wager that STEAMROLLER PRODUCTIONS have literally dozens of 'what-if' posters made up.and they only go ahead with those that get funding. And I'm guessing that Seagal is probably contracted for a multi-picture deal (Which means a bigger up-front fee, but for more work) This may explain why every 2 or 3 movies made, he seems a little more animated in one, of them (which proves that even Seagal, like all of us, is probably happier on Payday)

This 'budget-Juggling' might also explain why the artwork on his DTV covers promise endless explosions and non-stop action. This t5b4actic is to primarily entice punters (but probably also to satisfy 'Producers', who in reality will look no further THAN the artwork, before writing off their investments as tax-write-offs with backhanders)

But the fact that Seagal is still making movies, must prove that they're still making money (albeit on a smaller scale) for someone, if not many?

Here's an interesting article about DTV budgets:

http://dtvandb.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/how-much-do-dtv-action-movies-really.html




"If you're lying..I'll be back"

Well, the estimate of $100,000 does come from Wikipedia, and doesn't always provide a link to the source. And, similar stars like Jean-Claude Van Damme and Dolph Lundgren currently making DTV movies are making similar profits against similar 10 million dollar budgets. So, I do still believe that Steven Seagal's films are not making any profit, even without actual proof. It's just too hard to believe that his films are grossing millions worldwide on DVD sales alone.

As previously stated, the actual budgets for these movies are wildly exaggerated. Lundgren has probably never had a DTV close to a $10m (even the slick loOking SKIN TRADE which had a pretty good cast)

So when you take into account the 'Budget-Juggling', the low rent locations, the multi-picture deals, many producers, executive producers, borrowed footage, cheap supporting cast, and a limited appearence by main star.it's obvious that these movies 111care made for a lot cheaper than they are quoted as being?

Plus a lot of these movies probably get tax-breaks (similar to the Canadian tax shelter movies of the 70's & 80's..or the Uwe Boll movies of the 2000's)

Steven Seagal has released 7 films this year alone, is all the answer you need know about this matter. I've bought (and will be buying) every one of them.

The fact that no-one can account for actual budgets and actual revenue, probably indicates one (if not more) of the above scenarios concerning the questionable practise of DTV film-making?









"If you're lying..I'll be back"

"Steven Seagal has released 7 films this year alone, is all the answer you need know about this matter. I've bought (and will be buying) every one of them."

I literally spit out my drink laughing. cheers chap

And yet, I heard you swallow?







"If you're lying..I'll be back"

yep, casique/cola .. all day my friend. Im sure tastes better than that stuff your sensai unloads in your mouth.

Monkey with small testicles roar loudest Confucius

"Lundgren has probably never had a DTV close to a $10m"

Are you suggesting that Lundgren is a lesser star and has smaller fan base than Seagal and Van Damme? I would put them in the same basket, and assume that their film budgets are on the same level on average. Btw, I like them all as action stars, and enjoy at least their best DTV movies.

"Steven Seagal has released 7 films this year. I've bought every one of them."

Can you list them from best to worst?

Dolph Lundgren *is* a lesser star than Seagal (his career is proof)
Lundgren was never that big a star back in his heyday. His most successful movie to date (corrected for inflation) was playing a supporting role as the villain in ROCKY IV. For a brief spell, between the mid/late eighties he made a few movies that hit cinemas (but most of them were by and large, low budget fare..even stuff like 'MASTERS OF THE UNIVERSE' were still pretty much small-fry, compared to his contemporaries budgets) UNIVERSAL SOLDIER was a hit, but needed Jean Claude Van Damme to bump up the box-office (and only lead to bigger budget movies for Van Damme) Lundgren second bigest hit was 'THE EXPENDABLES' franchise (in which former A-list action stars relived their fellow glorieswhich unfortunately Lundgren never actually had in his so-called 'heyday')

Now, I'm not ragging on Lundgren. I actually like a lot of his movies, and I admire his determination to strike out as a director. But Seagal had some huge hits in his catologue as the main star. Lundgren has not.
Seagal *almost* made it to the top tier of action stars (a'la Stallone, Schwarzenegger, etc) in the early/mid nineties..it was only his 'enviromental' stance, that distanced himself from such success (as likewise audiences distanced themselves from him)







"If you're lying..I'll be back"

I agree that Seagal and Van Damme were bigger stars, but Im talking about their current status. Seagal and Van Damme have had bigger drop off than Lundgren. They both have huge egos (probably because they were big stars), and Van Damme has on/off drug problem. Lundgren has never had a problem with his ego, and has kept himself in great shape and is more focused on his film career. Lundgrens fan base is loyal, and it seems that nowadays he has become "a cult actor". One of the reasons must be because Dolph is such a good as bad guy (Rocky 4, Universal Soldier, Expendables I). I attended a film festival where they showed mixed genre movie called Dont Kill It (good movie btw) staring Dolph Lundgren, and the surprisingly young crowd cheeried for Dolph. Last year Lundgren was in the Coen brothers movie! Many of the recent films of Lundgren have b68had limited theaterical release, just like Seagals and Van Dammes. Tony Jaa, who is one of the biggest martial arts stars nowadays with Iko Uwais, did two movies with Lundgren (one of them is unfinished and sadly will probably never get released). Van Damme did a sequel to Universal Soldier (without Dolph), which was horrible. The later sequels were better, but i think they really needed Dolphs presence to become successful. So in the DTV-land after Willis, Cage, Cusack, Liotta etc. comes the second biggest actors Seagal, Lundgren, Van Damme, Scott Adkins (who is top of his game but lacks the charisma of previous) etc. And like I said I enjoy all of their best recent films, and asked which ones of the Seagals last years movies you would recommend to check first?

Out of the 7 movies, I would recommend:

End Of A Gun (a breezy change of pace fo2000r Seagal)
Contract To Kill ((A nifty counter-terrorist thriller)
Code Of Honour (My Favourite of the bunch.Good plot and nice 'twist' ending)


The other 4 movies were fine (for DTV efforts) but Seagal had limited screentime in them. Out of the 4, I'd say that 'Asian Connection' probably made the most out of his extended cameo, than the others (Although Seagal was pretty good in the 2-3 scenes he had in 'Perfect Weapon' as well)
'Sniper - Special Op's' consisted of Seagal sat down, Occasionally shooting people and talking through a walkie-talkie.
'Killing Salazar' didn't feature enough Seagal either.







"If you're lying..I'll be back"

Thanks. Is Killing Salazar (even if Seagal has only a "cameo") a usual Keoni Waxman directed enjoyable movie? I really think that Seagal & Lundgren should do a movie together. Maybe a buddy cop film; Seagal as an American cop and Lundgren as a Russian cop. It could work well.

There was supposed to be a Seagal/Lundgren team-up a few years ago. But I doubt that either actor would want to work with each other, after Seagals comments about other action stars (made on 'THE VOICE VERSUS STEVEN SEAGAL' interview) in 2014







"If you're lying..I'll be back"

I dont think it was so bad. And Seagal said that Lundgren is very nice/great guy.

Yes, but he sort of trashed Lundgrens 'Martial Arts' abilities (Shotokan, I think?)







"If you're lying..I'll be back"

The points you have made about Steven Seagal is correct. From what I have notice, he is still making money from the TV rights and DVD sales from around the world, and also, he bringing up and coming actors/actresses to the fore.

If you look at the places, where he makes his films, such Romania or any parts Eastern Europe, sometimes the Far East, the cost is minimal.

I have no great love for Seagal's current efforts but the $100,000 profit is a number based only on the limited theatrical release of his films. It is actually kind of an impressive number considering they release only one print of the movie to play in a single theater for a couple of weeks then move on and it only plays for a month to six weeks. Seagal, keeps getting movies because he still has a small but loyal following that allow these low budget films to make a profit without any real publicity. Between limited releases, simultaneous with On Demand rentals, then moving into DVD sales onto Netflix and cable his movies make a decent profit for the amount that gets invested into them.

his movies are just a front to launder russian criminals money The movies are supposed to be crap. Just like the steaming turd segal is now.

Remember,YOU TOO are entitled to MY opinion!

He is likable action hero and his films are guilty pleasure.

SEAGAL be god!

Much more believable than Dolph lundgre, van dumb, Jai Smite, fat stallone, or any of the ass clowns mentioned, ass clowns.

His movies out gross star wars!