Barnack

Exactly, it depend on the participation structure (at CB-0, gross or at box office benchmark), that deadline does not know. Maybe the movie was at $375m when reaching $650m after the Snyders and other big producer got point, the big directors, big writers, Affleck and others getting 20% of the revenues in bonus with the movie loosing $105m before merchandise, maybe everyone was on a CB-0 pool and got nothing before it reached profitability and stayed relatively on the cheaper side at 300m and lost only $30m before merchandise if the movie helped them, it can play a lot.

Hype also come into signification, a Star Wars that loose or make 1m dollar is a flop, not an original movie. But it still all come down to a relation be being how close to the worst case scenario for the movie profitability.

Do not know the gross, net was around $264m and participation was around $44m for an effective 308m budget.

I am not sure why it would be an exception to the rules, 22 Jump Street, Amazing Spider Man 2 both shown quite a difference between rough estimate and reality. Could have lost money obviously, Amazing Spider Man 2 got close to loose money with a 308.2m budget + participation, but was a bit weaker dbo and they didn't control the merchandise sales like WB.

I would say no, making your production budget in one single market does not usually make it a dom flop, specially not for a world title with a big budget, let alone getting significantly above it. A old rules of box office that seem to be the only constant, if you make your production budget + participation bonus on the domestic alone, you should be ok pretty much no matter what.

Even a studio with all the info can have an hard time predicting a movie life revenues. They can be wrong by more than 100% of these profit estimations, they usually does not know the production cost and almost never know the participation bonus structure. At least for the profit estimate they made for the movies accounting that got leaked by the sony attack, they were quite off the mark, they are good for stuff that are somewhat public like the marketing campaign size, rental from box office, TV contract, but the rest is quite rough and can get 100m off the mark at the end easily.

Flop is a bit of a defined word on a box office message board, even has is wikipedia entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box_office_bomb In the motion picture industry, a "box office bomb" or "box office flop" is a film that is considered highly unsuccessful or unprofitable during its theatrical run, often following significant hype regarding its cost, production, or marketing efforts.[1][2] Generally, any film for which the production and marketing costs exceed the combined revenue recovered after release is considered to have "bombed" Flop is subjective, highly unsuccessful relative to the hype generated by is cost, production coverage or marketings will change from people to people, but it is still grounded from a common definition.

Lot of them do not look at the size of the legs in absolute numbers enough it is true, but at that level we could add release date there also (being often an has important factor than a 170 vs 130 OW).

About no one does.... Everyone call Dark Knight/Avenger legs great, while no one would use that word for a 38m OW having the same multi. Giant opener being front loaded is pretty much a fully assimilated concept by now. Avatar, Saving Private Ryan, Gravity, Return of the King (the lords of the rings in general) were more loved by many award body (like the Academy), but I must admit I have not followed the conversation at all, what is your point here ?

If it reach 675, I would easily agree, Dr. Strange performance always did seem a nice bar to make it a unqualified total success, it would be above 8 previous MCU movies after all (40% of them).

Doing more than your budget+participation bonus at the domestic box office alone tend to be more than ok. Think to all example of flop that came in mind, change the domestic box office and put it 10% above production budget + participation bonus and it change everything. That would be Skyscraper opening at 41m domestic with a good over 3.1 multi, Solo doing like 350m dbo, etc...

From I understand looking at Sony leaked retention rate and spending in prints/marketing by market they pay a little for extra I think specially for the Transformer type of release, but it is really small versus here, they tend to make 21-22% profit type of return (25% going to them a small 2-3% of the box office in fees), making it quite standard and in the average for a foreign market. The difference is the post-theatrical window, the theater deal in itself is quite good, much better than domestic except for the very giant box office.

Never seen a number that high in the past, even Henson on a movie offering so little else that was Proud Mary that number was at 66%. Only time I remember an movie selling more on it stars was Lawrence/Pratt together bringing 78% of the audience on a terribly reviewed Passenger movie. Did Rampage cost went up from 120m ?

Probably above Fury Road B+ cinemascore, in general but special in the US action does not work that much, you need emotion's above all and humors (and that what blockbuster do), the latest Mission Impossible bring a lot of that versus something that is more pure actionner like The Raid, Fury Road, Hardcore Henry. But like mentioned, Fury Road for a franchise entry had nice legs.

I haven't seen it, but I would imagine The Host had quite the big green screen ? But are those giant green screen set are bigger paycheck than the Lady Bird back end points or Hanna movies for that type of actor, so many stories of 300k type contract on those for the leads, when a Rose Byrne can make 500k in a supporting role in a mid budget movie, Kline made 350k on Ricky and The Flash and Melissa Leo made 200k on Equalizer 1

Because lot of movie waiting for the WC to end open next weekend ? Ant man and so on ? Because new release wise, Denzel and Equalizer is big domestic but not certain to be a 100m intl, Mamma Mia is different enough in term of target audience and MI is in 2 and 3 weeks away depending of the market. Looking at the release schedule, it will face Ant man in France next weekend, Germany the week after and the UK the week after.

When was the last time Johnson starring vehicule outright flopped domestic ? Doom in 2005 ? He did not had an RIPD/Warcraft/Valerian/King Arthur domestic outright flop in a very long time.

First one made 88.5m in profit from a 358m WW box office on a 104m net budget and a 108.2m WW P&A. Second one quite overperformed the 325m expectation at greenlight and 150-250 budgeted to do, 170/300, quite impressive. Break even point was estimated at 78dbo /129 intl, 207.7m WW with a 84m budget and a 120m releasing cost, it more than double it. For HT-2 at 175dbo / 291intl they expected to make around 150m in profits (114m to the studio 36m to Lone Star), those movies seem really extremely profitable because they give very little in participation bonus.

If it open at 25, 60m is quite the low 2.4 multi for a non-sequel family movie. 200 intl-China would require a near 5x legs on a almost all market opening (missing japan-italy), Rampage did 170m intl-China from a 60m start in the markets Skyscraper opened for a comparison. 5x can happen but usually you have more markets yet to open to help it. skyscraper early estimate OW vs Rampage vs Hercule (160m intl-China, same as Rampage) actual South Korea - $4.7m vs 5.029m vs 0.35m Mexico - $3.7m vs 4.932m vs $3.8m Russia - $2.6m vs 2.87m vs 11.34m (world cup here being really relevant I would imagine) Australia - $2.4m vs 2.58m vs 3.3m U.K. - $2.4m vs 5.85m vs 2.45m (world cup here being really relevant I would imagine) Indonesia - $2.1m vs not on mojo but 5.8m total Taiwan - $2.1m vs not on mojo but 4.6m total My guess would be doing around 70% of Rampage pretty much all around, around 70m dbo (that a 2.8x multi) and around 120 intl and big who knows in China but I could see 100m happen for a 290m WW type of run. Very similar to what Damon/Cruise did in 2013 with their non franchise movie with a similar 125-130m budget (Elysium - 286.1m / Oblivion - 286.2m) but way more China heavy this time.

They get to finance sure hit like a bit of Fast 7 or Jurassic World because they take a lot of the lost also (blackhat, 7th son, etc....) hard to get people to share the risk on your riskiest stuff without making for them possible to be part of some of the safer stuff.

There is no floor really for a box office star these days (and no so much in the past either even 90s Julia Roberts had under 3m OW and movie not reaching 10m it is a bit overrated how certain box office clout was in the past, always had the good star in the good vehicule element to it), Denzel recently made 4.45m on a 1670 theater studio release OW, Bullock 3.23m on a 2,200 theater studio release, Dicaprio went below 13m quite often, Damon just went under 5m two time last year. With a 125m pg-13 with a well proven high concept production type movie, summer release with over 3,500 theater, the BO star and the type of marketing budget that usually come with that, now that give you some OW weekend floor, that just having a BO star does not. If Walbergh/Jonhson would have made 25m with Pain&Gain that would have been great for example. But even for this, 25m isn't bad: Valerian, King Arthur, Geostorm, Great Wall, Ghost in a shell, there is a list of big over 100m budget movies not getting close to that, a bit like Cruise with American Made last year, at least the movie did open, was seen by many people and if it is good it could have a good multi (summer release, non holiday OW, can do 4.0x when they work) and be ok.

It has other player's that those 2, but largely yes it is talked if it was at large a 50%-50% split of the production cost. When you have 2 distributor splitting the cost (Monument Man, Braveheart, Blade Runner 2049) often the distributor keep their market for themselve, and it become a 62 million movie on the domestic for one and a 62 million worldwide-domestic for the other. Or one has home video and not the other (like Sony on James Bond, Carrie and other MGM co-production) When it is a co-distributor collaboration but a co-financier it can play in many different way. Simplest case they do an almost even split of all the expense and revenues together, including marketing cost. Has for is Skyscraper end up being profitable, it does not require to know the financement / distribution deal, that is more to answer was the movie profitable for a particular person, the movie itself is profitable as a whole or not. If Skyscraper do 100m in China you can expect a profit of 21-23m for the distributor, probably split 50-50 among the 2 financier.

Are you even half serious ?

That just because marketing make sure to not reveal he had his hair too:

Derbez do crazy business there also: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/people/chart/?view=Actor&id=eugenioderbez.htm 7/2/17 Mexico Videocine 5/5/17 $7,264,588 29.1% $24,928,324 6/11/17 Mexico Videocine 5/10/18 $11,213,179 42.8% $26,170,477 6/24/18 A movie like overboard going over 25m there.... close to Force Awaken.