Barnack

That is right for sure, specially when they are long and indirect chain. But we are talking about movie people on a movie board on a thread talking about the specific subject. That is also obviously right (99.99% of people would I imagine) but that is a different subject : ) would we do it and like it at least at first ? ) is it good on the long term that we do ? Can have 2 difference answer. There is a long list that convenience won, without endup being a better subjective experience overall for example, but human nature make it easy to predict that the most convenient/cheaper option will tend to win, from telecom to air travel to listening to music (people go back to vinyl a lot, the ritual part of the experience being seen as important).

I imagine that if they achieve to stay in the black at those price point it could make it harder to sell netflix/amazon at their wanted price point (netflix/amazon has yet to make real money), could be harder to charge $15 a month for streaming if people are paying $9 a month for unlimited movie in theater, same for blurays/vod/tv package/etc.. that could be all pressured down price wise. Could still be really good for the studios and theater chain obviously but it could make some looser (not that we necessarily need to care about them).

In the end producing the amount of movies cost a certain amount, if revenues diminish more than marketing cost (and the best scenario that it is those that get away) we would loose content, like we did in music with the budget to make albums reduced by a giant amount. I am not saying that it would not work, it would but possibly at a vastly different level of content produced than what we have now and for someone that love movies that is not a necessarily a positive and the music industry that lost more than half is revenues from is shift is not necessarily the best example to follow. Chance are if we turn movies into tv has a business model, we will have TV quality type of production. Will certainly work, but vastly different and not for the better. Enthusiasm is fun and all, but I am not sure why we should care much (as an audience member) for anything else than what movies are produced and available to see in theater. And there is not many things that have more enthusiast than the big and exclusive theatrical release in our cultural world.

It is a model that work at 40% of the revenues of the previous one, we can say "work", the movie industry it could loose more than 50% of is revenus could shit is system yes, but with the very small margin they have, it would be a destruction of the output also. With much smaller revenues and much cheaper products..

It is piracy not them (that just the cheapest people accept) and not completely.... but it destroyed that industry revenues from is 90s peak: By capita: In adjusted dollar: With spotify and youtube free to stream legally on your computer....... there is just no need to bootleg. In my market for eaxmple they were spending 200k unadjusted on an music album in the 80s with real musiciens and a lot of studio time to work on it, now it is like 80k for the big names and it is all made very quickly with lot of cheap digital tracks because you have like 60% of the revenues that went away with the Internet. The idea is that it is not sustainable at that price point and it is cheapening everything else (the longer it exist and keep creating that low of a price habit to people, the harder it will be for the industry to charge the current prices point, while the current margin are already extremely low versus 10 year's ago.

Possible you will love this place, the actual platform, the moderation and ambiance is one of the best out there.

In hindsight would have maybe been worth that 50 million paycheck yes, specially considering the replacement (I guess they didn't know who it would end up to be at that point).

South Africa production, do not know tricks to have an idea of those budgets, the Resident Evils movie released in 2012 was 75m net (around 80m adjusted), so imagine it could be around that. 55dbo/130 to 150intl would not be fantastic but a 2.35 to 2.55 it's budget would not be some big catastrophe either I imagine. Resident evil financial track record was really good.

That is probably still true (even Warcraft giant 433m run with that very low domestic performance does not seem to have much sequel talk), Resident Evils being the one exception I could think off.

I have the feeling that it could easily play 30dom/70intl split like King Kong did, for a 183m WW run, maybe even 200WW with that domestic performance. 55m is the same domestic than Assassin Creed (54/186, for a 244m WW with a 22/78 split), I imagine that one comparable that website used. Hitman was 27/73 (would make Tomb raider make 204m WW with the same performance) Need for speed/Assassin Creed 21/79 ( 262m) Angry bird: 30/70 (183m)

Are they (or someone) keeping at track record of BOP predictions accuracy ? I tend to pretty much always "agree" with their opinions.

Will be hard, late 90s prime Tom Cruise + following boogie nights success > DDL + following Inherent Vice very mixed reception. Major ticket Inflation since will help, but having 897 theater vs Magnolia 1,034 will eat some of that.

Probably because of those expansion (quite competitive for screen in the adult drama movie, with the post, darkest hours, 3 billboard, shape of water still in theater) + being a STX release and not a studio one ? 17 32 Phantom Thread Focus Features 897 +835 +1,346.8% - - - - 4 19 17 The Shape of Water Fox Searchlight 853 +130 +18.0% - - - - 8 20 28 Call Me by Your Name Sony Classics 815 +641 +368.4% - - - - 9 21 19 I, Tonya Neon 796 +279 +54.0% - - - - 7 If you look at All the money in the world theater bleed: 24 13 All the Money in the World TriStar 374 -1,034 -73.4% - - - - 4

But from the latest development he was not paid to participate to the reshoot, he was paid to sign on the new casting choice (him having a contractual right on the movie casting choice). From what I understand, both were not paid from the reshoot (possible reshoot was already included in their initial fee). 625k vs 3 million salary and I imagine around 120k for Plummer was pretty much what I though the situation looked like (500 to 800k did fit Sony previous leaked salary for Williams type of actor/movie)

I imagine they tend to be harder to track in easy to access data like youtube views or any other online buzz type of metrics. Those movies to not even require the audience that buy ticket to know the actual title of the movie.

That still the lead on a 102 million spent in California on bottom the line item giant franchise movie directed by Travis Knight (live action debut, but still an impressive career) and produced by Bay/DeSanto/Bonaventura. That is really big and not a bad opportunity at all imo.

Not sure about that, it did quite well in people award show type: http://www.imdb.com/event/ev0000453/2017/1 http://www.imdb.com/event/ev0000644/2017/1 Maybe it did found an audience after the theatrical release.

If Fox sell Fox Studio, it make Fox News have a very large amount of capital it can use to grow and even more focus from Fox, chance are more a potential growth than a shut down no ? at least I do not see any potential link between those 2.

It is hard to judge the around Christmas time release OW (the way the calendar fall and so on), but: Joy: $17m Wolf of Wall Street: $18m American Hustle: $19m (And the others 2 movies on that list had much better reviews and Best pictures candidate Oscar buzz) Look at say Will Smith Christmas opening around the same times: Collateral beauty: $7.1m Concussion: $10.5m She was certainly a big domestic draw in 2015, Joy OW numbers leave almost no doubt about it, look how high she scored in favorite actor among adult pool around that time (while being the biggest actor among the 12-17): https://web.archive.org/web/20160205221440/http://www.theharrispoll.com/health-and-life/Tom-Hanks-Favorite-Movie-Star.html How much is left, that an unknown, but her metric were still bigger than Chris Pratt for Passenger first weekend.

Serious, not comedy-action spy movie is not an easy sell and it is not the kind of trailers that tend to do really well either (I imagine it could change with the future one), outside Argo... not easy to think of a recent comparable reaching 100m domestic and that was a best pictures winners with incredible legs. Even a Tom Hanks/Spielberg nominated for best picture one like Bridge of Spy didn't reach 75m, that gave an idea. http://www.boxofficemojo.com/genres/chart/?id=spy.htm&sort=date&order=DESC&p=.htm Atomic blonde: 50m Jack Ryan: 50m tinker tailor soldier: 24m Going back to Salt I guess: 118m And the first 2 and Salt still relied on a lot of action and/or fantastic element. Those 100m type of prediction does sound extremelly optimistic, 80-85m (Mummy/Power Rangers) seem more likely if things goes well, that is still above Hanks/Spielberg.

Wait does that mean the -100% yesterday drop was not a typo ? 2018/01/12 - $134,619 +13,707% 378 $356 $9,618,807 92 2018/01/13 - $137,447 +2% 378 $364 $9,756,254 93 2018/01/14 - $138,862 +1% 378 $367 $9,895,116 94 2018/01/15 - $155,521 +12% 378 $411 $10,050,637 95 2018/01/16 - $354 -100% 378 $1 $10,050,991 96 2018/01/17 - $290 -18% 378 $1 $10,051,281 97 Over 80% on RT, PTA grew everyday of the holiday weekend...., then -100% Has anything like that ever happened before ?

Growth could stop obviously, but streaming could get bigger than box office in 2018 in american dollars spent, already at 9.55b with an over 30% growth last year (and this is US not US + canada like the domestic box office), must be already quite close.

Those numbers are from the company leaked account: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Pictures_hack I do not take any numbers outside leaked one without a giant grain of salt.

Smith, Jones, Spielberg, the director, the writers, the movie was giving 90m in bonus before the studio made is first cent (and the co-financiers still 11m in the red) That make the effective budget of the movie at break even point: 340m net. That movie was announced in 2009, still in the bubbles were studio were ready to give a lot to keep people away from the dvd money that just went away a bit surprisingly on them. They must be getting healthy points yes (johnson production company is involved after all), 400m in profit is a lot for just one players, Radar Picture, Johnson production company and other people will get a share, to give an idea big studio like universal made 697 million gross profit for all their filmed entertainment in 2016 and 1,234m in their giant 2015 year, that include Fandango and revenus made from all the movies libraries not just the new one. 1,234m for the Jurassic World + Furious 7 + minions + pitch perfect 2 + 50 shades of grey + straitght out comption + trainwreck + their movies libraries (obviously some of that success bleed into the 2016 result also)

The studio actually lost 28m on that one, it was budgeted to do 760m WW, it was expected to break even at 625m but it didn't achieve to get has good has an retention rate the studio expected and kind of flopped on home video. MIB 3 and Angels&Demons loosing the studio moneys (while movies like The Other Guys made studio moneys) are 2 big example: We never know, people from the exterior, except from the most obvious case if a movie was profitable and for who.