Barnack

Its is released in August 8 (no next weekend but the weekend after), only the first 2 weekends of THB are free of competition (because Logan Lucky didn't caught up). One good thing for THB is that Mcgregor - Mayweather (August 26) does not seem to be that much of a giant event (if those event really have an effect). Looking at let's be cops legs: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=daily&id=letsbecops.htm It does seem to soon to make it officially dead. Let's be cops made 56m after the Sunday (17th august) of is first weekend and that opened a Tuesday night, THB opened the regular Thursday and need to do 68.4m (122%). Considered that is sunday was 108% the size of let's be cops, it is very unlikely but possible.

If you read the rest of is post.....

Not exactly sure if serious, but a really doubt it is something you do to mega established veteran millionaire on a assemble studio movie set in 2017 has a replacement director.

Many would have pointed Birth of a nation has an example of controversy really hurting a movie, but after how similar Detroit did open to it with almost 1000 more theaters...: Birth: 7,004,254 / 2,105 theaters Detroit: 7,125,601 / 3,007 theaters It is really unclear how much the controversy had a role here (Detroit bigger cast, bigger director name, bigger release, better reviews),maybe it would have done less than 5% more without a controversy (except if without the controversy the reviews would have been better, that is possible but that make it an indirect factor) Ghost in the shell would be an other example brought up, but apparently a really small percentage of even the social media traffic about the movie was about the controversy. I'M not sure we ever got a twitter boycott too about a movie, it was always an extremely fringe portion of the 300 million twitter users turned into something by us and the media, it was never 40 million on twitter boycotting movie X, often less than 1 million (0.3%). It is not about stopping treating twitter has if it mean anything or something, it is about stopping treating less than 1 million people has if they were something (regardless of the platform), that is an old reflex of the pass (when the media were estimating that for every complain letter of complain call you had around 100 people piss that didn't took the time and energy to formula a complain, with the Internet and how easy it is that ratio need to adjusted way way down)

Not being from (and never lived) the USA it is hard to judge, but it is probably not something that is easy for white liberals to not at, at least not all the way.

There is not math involved, purely using sony leaked accounting of Easy A. Doing 150% of the box office in revenue was around the norm back then, for a loved comedy that was very domestic heavy doing much more than that was not unusual. Easy A revenue were (in thousand) DOMESTIC THEATRICAL REVENUE 28,133 INTL THEATRICAL REVENUE 6,425 DOMESTIC HOME ENT REVENUE 40,275 DOMESTIC HOME ENT PPV REVENUE 8,898 INTL HOME ENT REVENUE 9,992 INTL HOME ENT PPV REVENUE 1,387 DOMESTIC PAY TV REVENUE 11,560 DOMESTIC FREE TV REVENUE 7,328 INTERNATIONAL TELEVISION REVENUE 22,500 AIRLINES AND MUSIC 989 NON-THEATRICAL & OTHER 223 Total: 137.712 million, 34.5m from theatre vs over 100 million after, that was the good time still in the end of the dvd bubble. Has you see box office give some clue about a movie story, but far from all of it, specially for release between 2004 and 2010 or so, almost all the money was in dvds and international tv, theatrical was mostly a publicity (run at a deficit yearly cost of releasing movies being higher for studios than ticket rental) for those 2 big real source of money for the studios. They are correlated with theatrical (R2 of around 0.8) but far from perfect. Why would anyone talk about the theatrical window in particular ? Specially someone that know how important the other are (and pre-sold some of them in this case). Almost no movie made in the last 25 year's make sense financially from a theatrical window alone point of view, and it has nothing special vs the others.

That was part of Kevin Smith speech at Sundance when he distributed himself to exhibitionner the movie Red state: He did use a bit more realistic number, you do not need to gross $140m from a $10m movie. They usually do not get a 60m world P&A the 10m movie and often 60%+ of the revenue are post theatrical for them. Take a movie like Evil Death 2013 Direct production Budget: 17.25 million Domestic P&A: 30.52m International P&A: 10.55 m Total revenue: domestic Theatrical: 26.64m intl theatrical: 13.7m World Home ent: 29m World TV: 37.31m Airlines: 5k Total revenue: 106.765 million Profit: 20.9 m to the studio, 13.45m in participation bonus or the movie Easy A Domestic: $58,401,464 77.9% + Foreign: $16,550,841 22.1% = Worldwide: $74,952,305 Domestic P&A: 35.66 m intl P&A: 9.982m Production budget: 11.128m Total revenue: 137m Profit: 42.12m to the studio, 14.8 in participation bonus Both didn't come close to 140m WW, and were really profitable.

I mean by that having a movie at 65m OW is giant, that not something a Reynolds action-comedy would do. There is obviously a major element that boosted it, the superheroes genre, the actual superheroes, etc... But if you said that it was mostly an unknown and would have stayed that way with an unknown actor in the role until it's release, than fair enough, I would believe someone with that avatar over me, I thought he was a popular character (for as much popular they can be without a movie....).

Do you know any non strong IP movie that insider have it opening at 65m ? That was the same for Wonder Woman for a while, that how big 65m is.

I do not follow those stuff much but apparently he was one of the best sellers in 2015/2016 in that world and the one that was dominating the poll of the type: From every superhero that has yet to have is movie, which one would who prefer. Are we saying that the movie opened north of 100m because of Reynolds now, that it was him, that him doing a lot of voice over/4 wall breaking in a mid budget action/movie without an IP would have done close to the same ?

Come on now, Deadpool was a popular superheroes also, Adam Sandler was Jack&Jill, Deadpool was not that much Ryan Reynolds (or all Reynolds movie would play the same way)

Not following box office at all at the time, I would have to rely on you, because it does not look out of the ordinary preview or OD preview / OD / OW of super heroes in 2011 (most of them were not more well known than Green lantern were they ?) Green lantern: $3.350 / 21.387 M/ 53 M X-Men: First Class : $3.370 / 21.399 M/ 55.1M Thor: $3.250 /25.482 M / 65.7m captain america first avenger: $4.000/ $25.700 M / 65 M Is OW / opening days was lower by I imagine not as good word of mouth but not by that much OD / OW GL: 2.478 X-Men: 2.575 Thor: 2.578 Cap america: 2.53 All pretty much at 2.5 Lantern look ok at best, not particularly good at least not Hitman Bodyguard good if it achieve to do 20m+.

I did not say highest number OW number (would not have added ? at the end, would just have looked, I suspected that it was heavily implicit that I was talking about that stuff) I said best opening weekend for him career wise, if it can do this 33-50% of the time that would project him in the rare A-list category able to do 20m OW and paid a fortune upfront.

Was Green Lantern OW even good ? A 200+ million budget giant superheros movie supposed to start the DECU missing the top 10 OW of the year ? 12m below Thor, below First class, below planet of the apes. Look average to me. Co-starring Bullock or Denzel, I would imagine the industry saw those 2 being mostly responsible for those great OW numbers. Deadpool, total unknown open popular superheroes movies in the 9 figures these days... but it would be a good competition to that title for sure.

Over head is a way to amortize the cost of running a studio among all the movies: Production overhead: Studios, on average, calculate production overhead by using a figure around 15% of total production costs. To not cause "trouble" when it get time to calculate participation bonus it is usually a strong rule of thumb with no regard with the real cost (say that 15% net production cost rules), if a movie pre-sales a market or get a tax credit it will often reduce the overhead, American Hustle overhead was almost 0 for example because almost all the budget got financed with overseas pre-sales while it was 7.17 million for Captain Philips. That is one way they can "get" new filmmaker, if he do not look at that line correctly in is contract. Has for Amazing Spider Man 2, the leak happened before a major part of is revenues came in and was still 50m in the red, so it is hard to say, but they evaluated that it will in is lifetime turn one from their point of view. (If I understand those number correctly) Those were the expected final number for the movies: FINANCING BENEFIT 66,630 INVESTOR SHARE (61,030) PARTICIPATIONS (44,250) GROSS PROFIT/(LOSS) 14,523 Third party investor would have helped to finance the movie with 66.63 million and are expected to get only 61.03 million of their money back, loosing 6.6 million. The cast/director/producers (no longer marvel) get 44.25m The studio would get 14.5 million One "misleading element" for ASM 2 that yes the studio made a small profit (a least project too at that date), but the co-financier lost money and they made a profit because of the: CONSUMER PRODUCTS REVENUE 24,790 Line, that is money Marvel give them to have made a publicity for the SpiderMan brand (Sony do not get merchandising money anymore but still get a small bonus for Marvel for every spider man movie they make depending on the box office performance, remove that check and the movie would have lost money for Sony).

Depend what you mean by mid budget level (considering this is a 29m budget movie) I imagine you mean movie with a 20 to 60m type of budget. last 3 year's according to the-numbers there is 175 of the them (many of not from major studios and we would need to clean it but), with a success rate above 50%, list: But logan lucky (or THB) are more low budget movie than mid-range, the fact that we would call a movie below 30m mid range instead of low budget show just how the mid range became rare, the mid budget 80m to 120m non franchise movie almost went away. If we look at the prime Russel Crowe filmography: A beautiful Mind: 58m (80m in 2017 dollar) Master and commander: 150m (200m today) Cinderella Man: 88m (110m today) The insider: 90m (132m today) American Gangster: 100m (118m today) 3:10 to Yuma: 55m (65m today) Body of Lies: 70m (80m today) Except for Master and commander that was more in the blockbuster range, the other movie were what people thought of mid range / non tentpole big adult drama production. Those are getting rarer and rarer, the 20-30m movie is still common (arguably too common and that is the problem, not enough of those 60-120m movie like in the past). Looking at that list how many of those movie would get greenlight in 2017 under the adjusted price for inflation ? If Nolan or DiCaprio don't get involved. Maybe 0.

Would be curious to see that newspaper (think I found it: http://www.lejdd.fr/culture/cinema/luc-besson-sur-le-pen-jai-de-la-competence-pour-demasquer-une-mauvaise-actrice-3395120. French movie that asked for state help devis are public, no ?: http://www.profession-spectacle.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/La-production-cinématographique-en-2016.pdf I'm not sure why we would doubt the 197,47 M€ it is directly from the Centre national du cinéma. It is doing well enough in France for that for sure

Usually yes, some factor are important. Size (that would be true just for relevant in the cost budget, very small movie have a different set of rules) Domestic/intl box office, if all the theatrical revenue is from China like Warcraft it is not the same story.

that one ?:

Isn't capped at 30m euro the tax credit ? 197.7m-30m = 167.5m Euro no ? for a 175 to 180m net US budget.

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...

Would need to be around the same price, that would be an extreme rebate, one Disney would refuse to have is next Star Wars ticket rental to be .53* 10/number of movies seen that month.

The best opening weekend of Reynolds career ? Low competition/easy weekend, but still a bit of a death time a LG release and a really big number.

I wonder where/how you calculate those number, over 200m people go to the theater at least once in a year, the average ticket by people is going below 4, most people go 1-5 time a year. There is a big group but a minority of 40m people in the domestic market that are frequent moviegoers (the movie pass people) they go in average 16 time a year I think the last I calculated, they buy half the ticket. It does not matter directly (you could give free ticket to people you think would have never paid also, and be winning short time), but it could hurt the value of your product, like Netflix did, like the dvd rebate bin did. It is much easier to sell a $1000 GPS at the same time you are selling a 35k cars to someone than after (because relative to the total price it look like a smaller amount, that human nature), counter intuitively usually reducing price of something will put pressure into reducing all price. 60 to 70% of studio revenue does not come from the theatrical tickets, it is a way to give prestige and high value to movies, a publicity for the others windows, they also need to think about were most of their revenue come from. Can they sells a bluray 14$ if a month of movies in theater is 10$, can Netflix be the same price, can HBO go be 17$, etc..... Can the ticket to the non frequent movie goers (that buy half the tickets) can stay above 10$ a piece if they know that a month pass is only 10$......

They are affraid if it succeed (large amount of people now used to buy 10$ a month), now what ? Moviepass ask them for a rebate by tickets, they bring a lot of business, etc... and those people would never go back to buying ticket over 10$ for just a movie now they are used to a whole month a that price, so what can the theater chains do except accepting giving them a rebate ?