Barnack

It is not an easy trade off and studios are not the only player's involved, and is always there for most movies. 1) Theater would refuse to have studio stream movie they play in regular theater under regular term, I imagine they would need to struck a deal with theater chain to not hit the retention rate and what not too hard if those movies would be on VOD (or studios netflix competition to come up or already there) 2) Even with a not so bad deal, it would hurt theater sales the only way studio make people pay by people instead of for a group, would probably require the VOD to be quite expensive to make up for it and a lot of people would still get the screener's/watch a stream instead to save money. I imagine that yes, studio want to make those movie available as soon as possible absolutely everywhere, but every windows will fight them to keep the exclusivity they got and studio know that in general and over the long run it is best for them to respect that theatrical windows, it is in good part what make movie event and new movie perceived as more valuable that easy to get/available everywhere older movies.

It made sense for them to go

If you would have paid full attention that score would have been much lower, you cannot imagine how little sense some of those set piece made.

Snowpiercer, Edge of Tomorrow, Kubo and the 2 strings, etc... I think there is a bit of those that were quite good before.

Having read the books, that could mean the marketing is a bit misleading, it probably won't be an action movie like Atomic Blonde/John Wick. It is not Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy level either, between those 2. Commercial prospect seem hard to predict, R-rated slow burn need to deliver quality wise to have any chance and Lawrence should not deliver a totally bad movie but he is far to have Fincher track record either nor Trent Reznor to help him elevate moments. The 26/84 million prediction of box office pro is a good target I think, with a 35/65 kind of dbo/intl for an around 240m WW result would be really good for this (Robert Langdon Inferno just did 220m, Bourne less Bourne Legacy did 276m).

I did try to took all those factor into account. There is around 240m million movie goers, an MCU movie make around 300m, did try to evaluate from those 2 numbers.

2017 domestic box office: $11,066,300,000 SW and MCU 2017 box office: $572,513,602 + 389,813,101 + 334,201,140 + 312,478,786 1.6b or 14.4% Or take it an other way, there is around 240m movie goers in the domestic market, around 14% of them go see an MCU movie, the vast majority don't care about those, many probably do not even know what they are. Where you are right is: People watching youtube videos watching people talk a long time about movies they didn't even see are probably yes, mostly about big franchise, there is little to say otherwise about movie you have not seen.

OK thanks, like the poster I find oversea BO hard to follow because of how different market by market a OW vs weekly, etc... is computed.

To be "fair" considering the level of decision that is made by people reading those (not at all ?) or the importance of the subject for the readers (near 0 importance), it is not too surprising, not sure what would be the point of good box office journalism or why a journalist would ever do this, not journalists doing not journalistic work for that subject for that audience is probably the way to go forever. Maybe someone that worked at a relevant post for at a world wide distribution level for a long time will do it... but I imagine it will be more of an hobby talking about some specific movie from time to time than a full time gig....

Quite the different era. Look at Godfather 2 drop or Back to the future, etc.... before home video was popular it was really hard for a sequel to not drop hard. I am not sure matching a 70 release sequel drop is a sign that you have a good drop. Same for looking at Clones drop, the movie being universally seen as the worst Star Wars movie ever. Not so sure how fair to Star Wars to only look at is first 14 month, when you compare it to the sequel of the biggest movie with a giant fanbase that rushed to see it. One good element of that comparison too, is how phenomenally big Star Wars and Awaken were.

Only seen the first season, one of the impressive tv production ever imo, there is some phone call scene that probably costed more to make than some small movies. Really loved it.

Not sure how it is your bottom line. I would ask you this: 1) What is your revenues estimates for this movie (excluding the hard to estimate impact on the merchandises, parks, etc...) just the direct movie revenues, from rentals to international tv. 2) What is your estimate for the movie total expenses. 3) If a 1.3 billion dollar domestic heavy title making more than 5 time it's net very large budget at the box office loose a studio money, what is the list of movie that turned a profit you think in the last year's ? Jurassic World, Awaken, The First Avengers movie, IT and pretty much nothing else ?

Yes both my example were based on popular book, showing just how big 300m still is if you start from nothing, he has a point that for a franchise superheroes title 300m is maybe getting boderline to be called a big breakouts, but outside those case it still is.

Do you think it matter in any way how and why the revenus come in. Someone said TLJ needed around 800m in box office WW to break even I think (I would assume that is not considering merchandising at all), you could be refering too, not that it costed 800m. Well for one, by assuming how much is still to come, there is some rental to come in, but more so, the movie industry is not just box office. Read a couple of studios annual report to have some idea of the revenue a movie make relative to is box office. WB in 2016 for example: They made 5.6b in theatrical product. Rental: 2.18b Home video: 1.48b TV: 1.63b Consummer product: 321m In 2015: Rental: 1.58b Home video: 1.7b TV: 1.58b consummer product: 269m In those 2 year's, rental was 35% of the revenues from the Warner Brother movie division was theater ticket, most of the money is still outside that, the movie industry is an higher than 80b world industry with most of it having higher return than the theater. Sony leak showed that breakdown for revenues sources from the movie they released between 2006 and 2014: 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 35% from selling tickets, 65% after that windows and I never seen a difference made from money made from theater ticket or other source, that is mostly a construction that is made from box office "fans" because it is the only public numbers we see. Looking at those number you see that a movie doing 700m in rental will go way over 1 billion in revenues without even considering the merchandise, a huge commercial success already, even with a total cost going over 700m like I imagine they will.

How so. Revenues: 549*.65 + 573.5*.45 = 615m How much more than 615m do you think they spent to make and release that movie ? What kind of first dollar bonus do you think Kennedy, Hammil and co. got ? It could get above 700m from theatrical rental, and say we give it a terrible ratio were the movie does 60% of is revenue from theater if you exlcude all form of merchandise, that would be 1166m in direct revenues for that movie, before merchandise, you really think is total cost will be that high ?

It is not necessarily that easy to calculate how much a movie make (you need to compare how well star wars merchandise would have sold this Christmas without a movie for example). Foreign retention rate is much higher than 10% (again you are probably just trolling), specially for a giant title like Star wars getting special high deal in most market and has no box office from China yet, probably around 45% like the Potters movie tended to get. That was the expected James Bond retention rate by market found in the leaked Sony hack: Japan 49% South Korea 47% Germany 45% Austria 45% Australia 44% UK 44% Switzerland 44% Belgium 43% Spain 43% Russia 42% Brazil 41% Italy 41% Netherlands 41% France 39% Mexico 38% China 25% Has for how much Last Jedi cost to make and market, what are the producer Hamill and others points, etc... we will never know. If we use deadline estimate of Force Awakens for a reference it was around 260m net production cost and 185 world theatrical releasing cost, 25m overhead. Obviously you need to take into account people participation bonus kicking in as soon as first dollar possibly, but you could imagine something around just 500 to 550m, below an current rental that is probably around 550m to 620m Most of the star wars revenues does not come from ticket sales: https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-star-wars-force-awakens-revenue/ Movies do not tend to hit profits zone before world tv revenues come in, to even be in talk of breaking even already at this point is a rare phenomenom. If a movie doing over 1 billion while being very strong domestic, giant merchandising, getting special very high proportion of the box office from theater would not turn a giant profit ?, what would, what kind of horrible business model blockbuster would be ?

Pretty woman did 463m.

I imagine your simply trolling, but you do realize how big 356m in rental is, in one market alone. If they would have got a more regular 53% dbo retention rate like others movie tend to get instead of a special 65%, they would have needed to do 671m, something only Avatar and Force Awaken did..... Even with a say 500m cost to make and market, yes they are going to the bank big time and when you add foreign rental, it already covered movie cost and marketing cost just from rental, something almost no modern movie do.

For not expected to get that high a year in advance because of the IP itself, it is still quite the achievement that rare movie did in recent year. In live action IT is the only movie reachging 300m since American Sniper outside superheroes / sequels / remake of very popular movies.

Yes and no, the reason China success tend to be treated differently (see resident evils or warcraft giant world box office numbers not leading to some special higher budget sequels announcement) is because success there tend to mean less money for the studio. And not specially for the 25% return (in fact when you look at theater rental - releasing cost, China market is not particularly bad, in the world average for most title), Star wars being an exception because of how good returns it get in some market, like 65% dom and with is giant numbers would prefer paying marketing cost and getting that high share vs China model, but more so for the post-theatrical windows. Has for is it worrysome for Disney that Star Wars didn't became popular in China and some other growing market, I would imagine that it must considering all the efforts they made to help that happen, but would not be surprised if they were ready for that possibility also and saw those as a possible bonus, that failure easier to accept with how much Awaken/Rogue One overperformed in is traditionnal market's. When you make what 2.5 to 6 times more money for the same BO numbers in the US vs China for a movie like Star Wars it is a good reason to threat those number differently.

No way to know if you are right or wrong, but that predictions was made many time in the past, specially during the 60/70s crash (caused by many things with leading major factor like TV and urban sprawling): They were right that moviegoing (that was not just about the movie but also news for a while) never got back to anything close to is peak, but the downfall did stabilize to a very constant new reality. Will the newest generation reject it or will they be so device dependant at home that it will be impossible for them to fully enjoy a movie (you often see them litterally using the internet and texting during a watch, even posting on message board like this one during a movie) at home and will prefer their experience in theater, easier and a bit more forced to give something their attention, maybe going out and dating will make a come back.maybe someting similar to 3D will happen again, maybe people will even go to theater to watch Game of thrones type of shows season finals. Or maybe theater will take the next by capita step down and become more niche.

Did is maybe the more appropriate word, did they have even only one lower budget adult film in 2017 and 2018 ? ROI on those would hurt their annual ROI I suspect, even when they are successfull.

Would it not be 4 domestic and less WW ? Rank Title(click to view) Studio Lifetime Gross Year^ 1 Star Wars: The Force Awakens BV $936,662,225 2015 2 Avatar Fox $760,507,625 2009^ 3 Titanic Par. $659,363,944 1997^ 4 Jurassic World Uni. $652,270,625 2015 5 Marvel's The Avengers BV $623,357,910 2012 6 Star Wars: The Last Jedi BV $544,613,735 2017 7 The Dark Knight WB $534,858,444 2008^ 8 Rogue One: A Star Wars Story BV $532,177,324 2016 9 Beauty and the Beast (2017) BV $504,014,165 2017 10 Finding Dory BV $486,295,561 2016 Rank Title Studio Worldwide Domestic / % Overseas / % Year^ 1 Avatar Fox $2,788.0 $760.5 27.3% $2,027.5 72.7% 2009^ 2 Titanic Par. $2,187.5 $659.4 30.1% $1,528.1 69.9% 1997^ 3 Star Wars: The Force Awakens BV $2,068.2 $936.7 45.3% $1,131.6 54.7% 2015 4 Jurassic World Uni. $1,671.7 $652.3 39.0% $1,019.4 61.0% 2015 5 Marvel's The Avengers BV $1,518.8 $623.4 41.0% $895.5 59.0% 2012 6 Furious 7 Uni. $1,516.0 $353.0 23.3% $1,163.0 76.7% 2015 7 Avengers: Age of Ultron BV $1,405.4 $459.0 32.7% $946.4 67.3% 2015 8 Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 WB $1,341.5 $381.0 28.4% $960.5 71.6% 2011 9 Frozen BV $1,276.5 $400.7 31.4% $875.7 68.6% 2013 10 Beauty and the Beast (2017) BV $1,263.5 $504.0 39.9% $759.5 60.1% 2017 2015 had quite the movement with Ultron, Jurassic World, Awaken and Furious 7

Maybe, Think Like a Man Too did 29m OW on 2,225 theater, Perfect guy made 25m on 2,221 theater, you are right not sure 2,200 theater is that special for a S gems release, they have many big OW with around 2,200 theater (Takers), it is not like a regular main branch studio release theater counter wise. Wedding ringer got 3,000 too.

Yes and does not need 250m to do it, a wikipedia page tell a story really well.... you make 2.7b mostly because of how good visual, rhythm/mood/feel, world and often mostly character's are a lot what make a movie work or not, story can easily get overrated in people mind on why they liked or disliked a movie, lot of people love The Big Lebowski, many could not even tell what is the story in that movie, many movies with the exact same stories got very different result, Avatar being a fantastic example of that or Rought Night vs Girl Trips, Hangover vs Hangover 2, etc....