raegr Posted August 19, 2017 Share Posted August 19, 2017 IT WAS AWWWWWWWEEEEESOME 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ethan Hunt Posted August 19, 2017 Share Posted August 19, 2017 Good god why you gotta make it so hard to scroll 2 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That One Girl Posted August 19, 2017 Share Posted August 19, 2017 8 minutes ago, raegr said: SOME body once told me 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryMeyers20 Posted August 19, 2017 Share Posted August 19, 2017 I bet the all of the producers (including Channing Tatum) are kicking themselves for letting Soderbergh run the marketing campaign. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB33 Posted August 20, 2017 Share Posted August 20, 2017 BRB, having a seizure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLAM! Posted August 20, 2017 Share Posted August 20, 2017 1 minute ago, JB33 said: BRB, having a seizure. I hope you're okay! Seizures aren't a good thing at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afalconer7 Posted August 20, 2017 Share Posted August 20, 2017 Saw this today. It was really good. Not a masterpiece or anything but a really fun time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valonqar Posted August 20, 2017 Share Posted August 20, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, HenryMeyers20 said: I bet the all of the producers (including Channing Tatum) are kicking themselves for letting Soderbergh run the marketing campaign. They should. It's a very good movie and cast really brought their A game and chemistry. But it's flopping because of the late marketing with no hook and going against another comedy with much catchier title and easier sell concept (not to mention 2 actors with some boxoffice clout). Failures like this could have been avoided because there's a quality product that just needed awareness that it's a quality product. They screwed that up royally. Smaller studios didn't prove up to snuff this month. Annapurna screwed up Detroit ( a movie that needed festival push) and now Bleeker (sp?) and Soderbergh screwed up LL which needed better date and stronger marketing. Edited August 20, 2017 by Valonqar 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morieris Posted August 20, 2017 Share Posted August 20, 2017 I live in a city that is the PERFECT clientele for this. They would eat this movie up (maybe they are, we don't have the capability to check ticket sales with our theaters here). We don't get much movie advertising (Weirdly, the only movie i've seen with city advertising was Ben Hur last year....didn't help, did it.). I got the trailer in front of a 90% empty stadium for Valerian, may it rest in peace. Maybe it was in front of Baby Driver but I didn't see it. But what if so many people thought this was another movie with Hollywood playing people like this as a one-dimensional joke? Better advertising probably would have alleviated those concerns. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Futurist Posted August 20, 2017 Share Posted August 20, 2017 It s flopping because GA don't respond to that kind of movie at all. Throwing 50m of more marketing money would have not changed its box office fate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnack Posted August 20, 2017 Share Posted August 20, 2017 14 minutes ago, The Futurist said: It s flopping because GA don't respond to that kind of movie at all. Throwing 50m of more marketing money would have not changed its box office fate. Not sure about that, it could have done The Nice guys type of OW (11-12m instead of 7-8m, maybe even 14m) with a giant WB marketing, would have been likely a money loosing enterprise too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryMeyers20 Posted August 20, 2017 Share Posted August 20, 2017 It's going to be interesting to see how LL plays in foreign markets without Soderbergh marketing strategy. Tatum is in Europe promoting the film with a traditional marketing campaign. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnack Posted August 20, 2017 Share Posted August 20, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, Valonqar said: They should. It's a very good movie and cast really brought their A game and chemistry. But it's flopping because of the late marketing with no hook and going against another comedy with much catchier title and easier sell concept (not to mention 2 actors with some boxoffice clout). Failures like this could have been avoided because there's a quality product that just needed awareness that it's a quality product. They screwed that up royally. That is a bit optimistic thinking, quality has not that much to do with box office (Specially first weekend... since when does it play much of a role) a lot of the time. For example: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=kisskissbangbang.htm and http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=niceguys.htm 2 extremelly good movies, big cast, etc... Nice guys got a giant marketing campaing maybe they're was more to it about kiss kiss bang bang giant failure than audience rejecting it despite being one of RDJ best movie ever and one of the best comedy of the 2000's, not necessarily, those are really really hard to sell to audience even with Crowe+Gosling+the writer of lethal weapon+big production+big release with big marketing. Other example: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=kuboandthetwostrings.htm IF they would have spent on marketing, chance are good they would have lost that money, going very cheap and see what WOM can do is maybe not a bad plan. Edited August 20, 2017 by Barnack 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOOYAH SUCKAS Posted August 20, 2017 Share Posted August 20, 2017 Sad to see this fail, it was quite enjoyable. Plus it was nice to see the comedic side of Daniel Craig, he's always so serious in the bond flicks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryMeyers20 Posted August 20, 2017 Share Posted August 20, 2017 On second thought, maybe Soderbergh is doing the right thing. Maybe he knew this type of movie wouldn't appeal to the GA, despite the all star cast. There is a couple of articles saying Soderbergh is looking for how well the movie does the first 10 days and it was'nt marketed for a giant opening weekend. The marketing strategy is unconventional, so maybe we should stop judging it by conventional means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeCee Posted August 20, 2017 Share Posted August 20, 2017 (edited) 8 hours ago, Ethan Hunt said: Good god why you gotta make it so hard to scroll Exactly. Can a mod edit the post? @grim22 @Stutterng baumer Denbrough @Squadron Leader Tele @CJohn Edited August 20, 2017 by DeeCee 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Old Tele Posted August 20, 2017 Share Posted August 20, 2017 53 minutes ago, DeeCee said: Exactly. Can a mod edit the post? @grim22 @Stutterng baumer Denbrough @Squadron Leader Tele @CJohn @raegr, please don't do that again. I get that you were just goofing off, but it's a huge hassle and inconvenience to all other users. 1 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valonqar Posted August 20, 2017 Share Posted August 20, 2017 7 hours ago, Morieris said: I live in a city that is the PERFECT clientele for this. They would eat this movie up (maybe they are, we don't have the capability to check ticket sales with our theaters here). We don't get much movie advertising (Weirdly, the only movie i've seen with city advertising was Ben Hur last year....didn't help, did it.). I got the trailer in front of a 90% empty stadium for Valerian, may it rest in peace. Maybe it was in front of Baby Driver but I didn't see it. But what if so many people thought this was another movie with Hollywood playing people like this as a one-dimensional joke? Better advertising probably would have alleviated those concerns. Exactly. They are very smart guys in the movie but the trailer didn't get that across at all. I thought they were all slightly dumb which is a huge misdirection. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryMeyers20 Posted August 20, 2017 Share Posted August 20, 2017 Like any product, you have to go where the are people live. Selling mainly in low populated places is not going to cut it. This movie open at only $8m with an all star cast. Most of that came from rural America, very little came from the cities. However, this movie is still not in bad shape financially. the budget and the marketing cost has already been recovered before release. Soderbergh cut out the middle men by doing self distribution. The only thing left is how much the cast and crew gets. If they had went with a studio conventional distribution, this movie would had been a true flop. They would have spent $30-$40m on P&A and open only at $18m. A conventional strategy would look like this: (-$29M budget)+(-$35m P&A)+(-$35m Foreign P&A)+($18m b/o)+(-15% b/o distribution fee)+(-50% Theater take)= -92.7 Steven Soderbergh strategy: (-$29m budget+Foreign distribution sell)= $0 (-$20 P&A+Amazon first right streaming sell)=$0 (distribution fee)=$0 ($8m b/o-50% theater take)=+$4m This shows even an studio type P&A and $10m more ow would have been worse. Soderbergh's experiment actually works. The media focus on box office numbers in the tradition and conventional way, they should focus on the actual finances of each movie. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnack Posted August 20, 2017 Share Posted August 20, 2017 39 minutes ago, HenryMeyers20 said: If they had went with a studio conventional distribution, this movie would had been a true flop. They would have spent $30-$40m on P&A and open only at $18m. A conventional strategy would look like this: (-$29M budget)+(-$35m P&A)+(-$35m Foreign P&A)+($18m b/o)+(-15% b/o distribution fee)+(-50% Theater take)= -92.7 Steven Soderbergh strategy: (-$29m budget+Foreign distribution sell)= $0 (-$20 P&A+Amazon first right streaming sell)=$0 (distribution fee)=$0 ($8m b/o-50% theater take)=+$4m That is very misleading (For example you use a very high foreign P&A but no foreign revenue) only the first weekend BO, not take into account how much box office influence what you get from international TV. A 18m opening weekend on a 29m budget movie would not have been bad at all. That is quite similar to Hitman Bodyguard... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
