Barnack

This a really really good deal for paramount, say a movie make around 23% net profit from the box office post releasing cost, the movie would need to make significantly more than 191M USD for the buyer to turn a profit, around 210M USD to make a 10% ROI.

Ok thanks (those number would be extremelly low in the US)

Not sure if you are 100% serious or on your constant trolling, not only it is a remake but we just had Green Book, those movie you see the formula, the conventional structure and so on much more than a Moonlight or Manchester by the sea. From the first 15 minutes or so, you know you gonna get the happy ending in which both caracther is now stronger from that relationship, each haven their weakness a bit less weak from the contact of that opposite type of characther, the fish out of the water situation and so on.

Hum, does that mean that the after market is getting bigger in China than before, because otherwise 60M seem way too much for a Bumblebee movie, even if it does 270m, after your releasing cost (small but still), there is not much left and a big risk.

Review make it sound good imo, you want this to be has manipulative has possible like the original and cliché has possible also.

Yep like I said completely untrue all Bay movies are some dedicated and high care story, too beloved to mess with, 2 weeks for the scripts and throwing curve ball at them in the middle of it (Ok you need to include X military new toy in the plot, etc...). The list is long of blockbuster made without a script ready when pre-production start.

Listening to the interview of the writers of the Transformer 2 script didn't scream dedication and care, it got so big that at one point putting the level of dedication and care would have meant pushing the release date and not having a little studio of people not working, not an easy decision to make.

When talking about what to offer for Uncharted to Walbergh, Sony did talk a little bit about the situation with the Transformer and is contract there: Because of all the players (Hasbro, Lorenzo, Bay, Spielberg, etc) and a 25 point first dollar cap, Wahlberg received 4%GP starting at $225M ww AGR, then escalated to 5% @ $425M ww AGR, 6% @ $725M ww AGR, and 7.5% @ $825M ww AGR. Not sure about Bay himself, but with Lorenzo, Hasbro, Spielberg ? if he was still getting some, they way they talk it seem like it could get has high has 25 first dollar gross getting away from them. If Men In Black 3 is a good comparable, on that Sony was giving 90M in first dollar gross bonuse before making a cent (at around 625m WW). To note here, some stuff are quote while some are not in that text.

McCarthy star power, like most star power ever, is deeply linked to a specific expected by audience lane, same has Will Ferrell-Steve Carrel more serious affair or Sandler or currently Kevin Hart. Star power does not easily jump out of an accepted by audience box, even Stalonne , even for the by far \biggest domestic star ever John Wayne it was not necessarily easy to sell non-western movie.

Really hard to tell, Disney is so strong at monetizing stuff, it is really domestic heavy has of now and obviously 0 from China and depend how much that very strong group of producer, director and so on are getting before break even point if anything. Could be a bit under $210M or some first dollar gross could push it at 315M...., not sure what level of precision is possible to say when we are not in the knows of those variable even in a rough way. Many musical went really high in Japan recently & Disney tend to do very well in that market.

Cinderella did about 470m outside China, under that for MPR would not be too great. I imagine that with hindsight Cinderella but domestic heavier could have been a really good comparable for some to go by. Better trailers maybe, use of music wise ?

True we are being ridiculous to look at average price tickets Jan 6.

If you ask for 2018 tickets price it goes to $133M, so yeah possible. According to mojo: 2019 Est.$8.83 2018 $9.14 2017 $8.97 2016 $8.65 Back to under 2017 average sales price. Movie pass and others services offering only 2D standard ticket type, Tuesday getting bigger and bigger, 3D shares getting smaller and smaller, older retired audience getting bigger and bigger share of the sales with rebate and matinee ?

At least during that time, that not really what happened, TV/PPV, DVD-blu ray sales, EST and rentals were way bigger than P&A cost, there jobs were not to broke even the theatrical releasing cost of a movie, that were the money was actually made. Source of expense Total DTH MARKETING $5.866.385 DTH PRINTS COS $871.294 DTH WPF DUES OTHER COS $340.165 ITH MARKETING $2.601.562 ITH PRINTS (COS) $1.062.961 ITH WPF, FREIGHT, OTHER (COS) $2.708 DHE MARKETING $1.044.398 IHE MARKETING $486.013 TV MARKETING $43.802 Total $12.319.288 Source of revenues DOMESTIC HOME ENT REVENUE $7.151.339 DOMESTIC HOME ENT PPV REVENUE $591.133 INTL HOME ENT REVENUE $3.167.917 INTL HOME ENT PPV REVENUE $173.369 DOMESTIC TV PPV REVENUE $263.639 DOMESTIC PAY TV REVENUE $1.656.035 DOMESTIC FREE TV REVENUE $1.088.838 INTERNATIONAL TELEVISION $4.659.861 Total $18.752.131 Lot and lot of money in international TV. Source of revenues looked like this: Source of revenue Amount % Domestic Theatrical 5,359,831 18% Intl theatrical 4,896,173 17% DOMESTIC HOME ENT REVENUE 7,151,339 24% DOMESTIC HOME ENT PPV REVENUE 591,133 2% INTL HOME ENT REVENUE 3,167,917 11% INTL HOME ENT PPV REVENUE 173,369 1% DOMESTIC TV PPV REVENUE 263,639 1% DOMESTIC PAY TV REVENUE 1,656,035 6% DOMESTIC FREE TV REVENUE 1,088,838 4% INTERNATIONAL TELEVISION 4,659,861 16% AIRLINES AND MUSIC 217,513 1% CONSUMER PRODUCTS REVENUE 270,395 1% Total $29,496,043 Theatrical being a little bit of an higher percentage of the revenues (35%) than the production budget (33%) are for the expense, with studio getting around 50% of the box office explain why the rules of thumb of doubling your budget at the box office to break even work. We do not have recent leak to see the trends, but at least according to studio annual financial statement (most studio break down revenues from theatrical, home ent, TV, merchandising) it didn't change much since the DVD crashed post 2005 peak, when theatrical could down below 22% of total revenues during the peak. Has you can see Sony spent more in theatrical release (P&A) that they got back from theatrical revenues domestic, making the expression "turn a profit from theater or you are failure type of talk look extremely silly", for many movie making what it cost to release it back from ticket sales alone is already a big success, let alone starting to pay for it production, overhead and so fort, the next much more profitable windows are there for that.

Tax credits are a reason production cost are only 33% of the total cost, they are in studios movie accounting used to reduce a production cost, not added has a revenues, same tend to go for product placement if money is involved. The number here is the Net production cost, post rebate, not gross. Marketing isn't 200% of the production budget, only 110% of it in average if you include all marketing occurring, there is many non marketing, non production cost involved with a movie (in the past obviously prints, but now print like prime paid to help theater transfer to digital, participation bonus, overhead to pay for the world distribution studio expense and so on)

It is not necessarily harder to reach 1B now for an original movie than in the 90s, no one was doing it back then. But today for one, arguably they have bigger competition from the 200m-450m budget franchise entry releasing at the best release date and for the studio that own good one, putting money into those is probably way less scary than choosing to go on something else and the best studio at selling movies worldwide tend to have nice franchise to spend money on right now. Try reaching 1B during an holiday season when you compete with an Avatar 2 or a summer against some Marvel affair that is outspending you and getting much more product placement sponsors everywhere.

I am not sure where that rules of thumb come from, but it look extremely optimistic imo, completely underestimate the movie total budgets. In the 10 year's or so of leaked accounting of sony, they spent 28 B on the movie they made/released, breakdown of cost looked like this: Source of expense Total % DTH MARKETING (5,866,385) $ 21% DTH PRINTS COS (871,294) $ 3% DTH WPF DUES OTHER COS (340,165) $ 1% ITH MARKETING (2,601,562) $ 9% ITH PRINTS (COS) (1,062,961) $ 4% ITH WPF, FREIGHT, OTHER (COS) (270,762) $ 1% DHE MARKETING (1,044,398) $ 4% DHE RELEASING COSTS - MFG COS (1,280,725) $ 5% IHE MARKETING (486,013) $ 2% IHE RELEASING COSTS - MFG COS (820,764) $ 3% TV MARKETING (43,802) $ 0% TV OTHER COSTS COS (68,834) $ 0% DIRECT PRODUCTION COSTS (9,256,003) $ 33% OVERHEAD (808,450) $ 3% PARTICIPATIONS (2,234,617) $ 8% RESIDUALS (1,024,544) $ 4% Total (28,081,279) $ 100% In average you had to add 200% of the production budget to get to it's final cost has they tend to be around just 33% of a movie total expense, obviously higher the budget lower that amount get, but your total cost estimate for MPR is not much above a small movie like Moneyball (170M) and below a Captain Philips (225m). At certain point in the late 2000, the budget for prints alone of wide world release was of $70m.

The nuts with the sliding retention rate system almost systematically stopped in the 2000s, the industry became too OW heavy for theater chain to keep it, it tend to be a flat rate now, extreme leggy movie like David Fincher Girls with the dragoon tattoo did not had a worst studio retention share than OW heavy affair release the same year, studios would not love Christmas time that much if that was the case. A bit like theater make their money only from food & beverage, that a bit of a Internet myth the importance of the OW, build from exaggerated truth from the past not longer in play. Now I am a bit curious for how much you think the 260m with a 150m P&A transformer needed to do to break even, specially considering this one will be domestic heavier. It depend obviously what is Hasbro deal here (they had first dollar gross in the past, many people had them, Spielberg, Bay, etc... raising the BE point quite a bit), this one seem way more on the low scale. 135m net Budget with a 100m WW P&A is almost exactly what the movie Elysium of Matt Damon had if we leave merchandising aside for the Transformer. Elysium with a 125.6m net budget and a 97.8M WW theatrical releasing cost had a estimated break even point by the studio at 219.9m (91.6 dom, 128.3 intl) and a return break (15.5% ROI) at 348m WW.

It is a powerful team of producers with a super long relation with WB (cooper-philips), I could see them having that kind of option available to them (one and done) if they asked hard for it.

Bigot tend to be more detectable with how they react with something they do not like than with stuff they have no problem with. That said SW fanbase is rich on psycho and sociopath that can go on and mess a white male kid life, so who knows.

Would you say that it is much better than most of the crap Hollywood cranks out into TV every year now ? For TV a lot of people tend to mix caring about what happen and narrative with being particularly good,

Solo was so far from Last Jedi and going full Abrams on episode 9 is the maximum LF can do.

In Hindsight that the Last Knight was the end of that main batch I think you are making sense. But early 2016 when it was decided, that was supposed to be a spin off running concurrently to the Bay style main series, like Rogue-One for Star Wars and in that context, and in the context of not building expectation among hte audience of an actual classic Transformer movie and going after mostly a different audience, having it that close was not a bad idea.

Yes but (if you mean by ranking market importance-revenues), it can be misleading. The domestic market can tend to have a very slim one, even had a negative margin some year's and it is still by far the most important for american studios. That profit margin is a bit of a misleading one, it is (studio share of the box office - theatrical window marketing - prints, shipping, special taxes and other cost of the sorts) / Gross box office It consider the marketing spent before and went the movie is playing as a pure theatrical expense in the theatrical margin, but that theatrical run and all is marketing-attention tend to historically be the best marketing possible for the next windows as well (i.e. movie that had a theatrical release tend to have a much better dvd, merchandising if any and tv performances than the direct to video one and not just for quality reason)

Not in the United State according to the annual report of movie theater chain, despite the much higher margin in absolute number it tend to be smaller than money from ticket sales, looking at Cineworld 2017 report: https://www.cineworldplc.com/~/media/Files/C/Cineworld-PLC/reports-and-presentations/cineworld-ar17-180405.pdf 50% retention rate on the ticket sales give an significantly higher figures than 100% of the food&beverage sales.