Barnack

Sony only advantage is to win the bid in case of a tie, they need to match Samsung and others offer for every product they achieve to place in the movie (that and well in way some of what they pay come back to them). For the last Bond, Samsung offered 50m in advertising and 5 million in actual cash (that a really big amount and not common to have actual money involved in product placement, but Bond is the biggest ads for luxury product and smarthphone the biggest product placement I think) for a complete world campaign making Samsung the official Bond smartphone and having him using it in the movie. Some of that cash would have gone directly to Craig not to the movie thought. I doubt it is possible for a Bond movie to be in the profit from the NA box office alone, yes they have really good price on budget and P&A for a movie like this, but it is still incredibly high cost. Even for something extreme like Skyfall, from Sony point of view (the marketing is so low with the help of product placement, but also half of the marketing is paid by MGM): DOMESTIC THEATRICAL REVENUE 160,905 DTH MARKETING (26,661) DTH PRINTS (COS) (3,257) DTH WPF, DUES, OTHER (COS) (1,675) DOMESTIC THEATRICAL MARGIN 129,312 DIRECT PRODUCTION COSTS (188,782) OVERHEAD (9,370) For Spectre, at 200 domestic: DOMESTIC RENTALS 106,000 TOTAL DOMESTIC ADVERTISING (51,600) DOMESTIC PRINTS (9,750) OTHER COSTS (8,090) PRODUCTION COST (220,000)

Generally liked it and I would say a good movie, around 5/10, but it did feel as if Netflix was is place to be, but I just love narrators making me the perfect audience for it.

Not sure about the ending, but loved it, it is a movie that just work mood/pace wise.

China theatrical net return is right in the average of intl market yes, around 21-22% because of how little releasing cost is there for the studio. If you do 100m domestic bo with a 40 million domestic release P&A, you do around 13 million rental net return. If you do 100m china bo with a 4 million China release P&A, you do around 21 million rental net return. If you do 200m domestic bo with a 55 million domestic release P&A, you do around 51 million rental net return. If you do 200m china bo with a 7 million China release P&A, you do around 43 million rental net return. Has you see except for very large number of 250+ China net theatrical return is not that worst than the domestic market, even better for a large portion of it of the most common smaller number, and that was with no risk to actually loose money releasing there instead of releasing on video, not a bad deal at all. The big difference is in the ancillary market, the US is special from dvd to toys versus most other it seem, and the TV market is also special in the US. I did in the past a little comparative study at the total domestic revenue vs domestic box office and the same for intl, and the rules of thumbs is that the domestic box office is worth about 1.3 times Intl box office and could be a ratio used to compare movies with different dbo/intl ratio.

4/5 biggest opening day in the much more frontloaded China market, it will probably do significantly less than T4. Transformer 4 is the 5th biggest movie ever there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_mergers_and_acquisitions According to this, it was Vodaphone buying Mannesmann ?? On 4 February 2000 Mannesmann’s supervisory board eventually agreed to a takeover price of 190 billion €, which was the largest takeover price ever paid until that date and still is the highest Exxonn buying Mobile, AOL / Time Warner were quite big also.

Fully admit really not sure what they mean (and it seam a complete empty complain to me), I'm also not sure if they consider the cinematic tool to tell the story really not something of substance. Say for them does classical music completely empty of substance ? I usually read that type of complain in comments section, without ever someone explaining themselves or giving example.

That is often the norms, not much style going on and often they are overstuffed/over complicated plot, too many character, etc... We get the Gravity/MadMax from time to time.

He is the man in charge, the main creative force, a producer, that goes in the writing room talk to them in pre-production, would not surprise me if he choose the writers and some of the movie high concept. He probably even has the power to push production if he don't like were the script is (the way they talked about him deciding to still go on with T2 during the writer strike). He is not a director for hire with little control.

Is an interesting case (I really loved is Pain&Gain and is ability to make that movie in the can at that price point is certainly impressive), he seem to be a special genius. Would be curious to see the result of him being the director of photography of someone else movie.

It had a good budget, expect to see a 40m to 50m budget number for this (it was planned for 55m gross, 46m net after a Michigan tax credit), so it could be a lot there is room. I would imagine the artist and the type of project can influence how much it cost and quantity can be misleading (sometime bands give the rights for free if they love the scene and get residual from the soundtrack I think, Louis CK said it happened to him when he used a complete long Led Zeppelin song in is tv series, they did let him use it for free).

Nothing make Star wars profit, but if we go for MCU profit, and if we go to the last 30 year's: To those in that list we can add: The Matrix was ridiculously profitable Independence Day *Men in black (kind isssh, I think it is an adaptation of a BD) Armageddon Signs *I am legend Total recall *Jurassic Park I robot Wall-e Distric 9 The Martian and the movie with * are maybe not really original (book adaptation, but that was not really the reason of their success) I could forget some that are adaptation in that list too.

From Sony point of view they estimated Bond 24 break even point at 524.5 million WW 136.5 domestic / 388 intl, for 215.51 million in rental. But they were a theatrical distributor only (with not that good of a deal), MGM break even point did seem to be significantly lower (estimated 33 million profit for them already at that point). It could be a very misleading comparable too, Spectre did less than 10% of it's BO in the China market and they must have really good and really long post theatrical life.

They probably already do co-financed T5 by a good amount: Production Companies Di Bonaventura Pictures Hasbro Huahua Media Ian Bryce Productions Paramount Pictures (presents) Tom DeSanto/Don Murphy Production http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/paramount-shanghai-film-group-huahua-media-gianopulos-china-slate-1202400276/ Paramount Pictures has revived its $1 billion slate deal with two Chinese media companies The studio’s new Chairman and CEO Jim Gianopulos, who took over the studio in March, traveled to Beijing last week to try and resurrect the deal with Shanghai Film Group and Huahua Media.

But Hasbro the movie producer is, they are probably a driven force for those. I doubt that Paramount don't get any merchandising revenue, Marvel was paying sony (depending on their box office, around 25 to 30m max) for every spider-man movies they were making because those movie were partly considered big ads for the spiderman merchandise. If they don't get any, it will be indirectly still there by the way Hasbro is involved in the movie financing. A well then sure, no 250m transformer movie without International numbers, but if we would have access to those movie total revenues stream, I suspect the domestic market would look much more important than it's world box office relative weight.

Why not Fox if universal make the cut?, they are a bit bigger (in revenue and ebida) https://www.21cf.com/sites/default/files/uploaded/investors/annual-reports/2016_21cf_annual_report.pdf http://www.cmcsa.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1193125-16-452423 In 2015 and 2014 Fox Filmed Entertainment ................................................................ 8,505 9,525 Univresal Filmed Entertainment......................................................... 7,287 5,008 Disney studio entertainment was of 7.3 billion for those 2 year.

Wahlberg said he did quit the franchise, giving weight to Bay statement that it was is last.

It depends they could get a cut only from those that use the movie imagery on the box. If they do not receive anything from the toys (that is possible) that would reflect on how much Hasbro finance those movie and how much of the movie revenue goes to them, they are listed has a producer on all of them. For example if 100% of the Toys revenue go to Hasbro alone, they probably finance the movie a lot and receive little from it, turning those 250m movie for Paramount into much cheaper movie from their point of view.

Not sure a low budget Transformer movie make much sense, it is a franchise that is a bit inherently costly, or you get something like the last power rangers movie.

Not sure how truth that is, the american toy market is special and ridiculous by capita versus the rest of the planet: http://www.licensingexpo.com/sites/www.licensingexpo.com/files/static-files/i1_708.jpg A company like Hasbro in particular, in 2014 47.7% of the world sales were in the US (so I would imagine more than half were from the domestic market) http://csimarket.com/stocks/segments_geo.php?code=HAS Those movie tend to have american actor, american flags everywhere, the USA being a major part of were the story happen, US military, etc..., it is Bay auteurship but it is also having those market in mind and product placement having the US market in mind.

Rumors did put it at 217 to 260 million I think: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/box-office-preview-transformers-5-looks-biggest-bang-overseas-1014891 The studio puts the film's budget at $217 million before a major marketing spend. That change the break even point quite a bit, and Bay/Walhbergh/Hasbro/others (like Speilbergh if he got involved on that one) could be getting bonus that start before the break even point, they were in the past, that make the calculation hard (because you need to make the budget growth by that amount at BE level) The budget at the break even point could be at 300 million for example, even if it started at 230m before bonus started. Combined with the China heavy source of revenue, weak domestic the break even point could be quite high. If we start from those estimate for a rough start: http://deadline.com/2015/03/transformers-age-of-extinction-profit-box-office-2014-1201391233/ Total cost: 593.2 (with a 210 million budget, similar to the 217 mentionned above) Total revenue: 843.36 The total cost at break even point would be lower (less residual, less participation bonus than they gave on that billion dollar hit) a little bit, say at 580m (using a larger rumored budget of 235 instead of 210m for T4 deadline estimate). It would grossly do 580 million revenue by doing about 580/843 it's box office if it follow similar theatrical rental/total revenue pattern, it would be a break even point around a performance like this: 171m dom + 377m intl + 224m china = around 772m WW If it does only 145m dom, that could up the needed WW total a bit higher to around 805m Now those number start with a deadline estimate, those are not real figure, the market changed a bit, the budget is a bit secret and also there is many big partner/financier like this, the big China 1 billion partnership, Hasbro, etc... and Paramount break even point will not be necessarily be the same has for the 3rd party financier, studio often pay the distribution cost first and get a lower break even point that others taking a bigger risk (but usually having invested less and did 0 work). If someone has a better idea how China box office translate into revenue in a movie life, maybe the above scenario is really pessimistic about ancillary revenue in China and that it change since, and it would be significantly lower if everyone accepted to shift from first dollar gross bonus to a post break even bonus, to something more like 650m WW, but I doubt people want to do transformer movies to accept to take a risk like that. Also the deadline estimate put only 30m at the line Merchandise, that seem quite low for a toy ads movie.

Might be, must be difficult to have a good multiplicator to such an inflated first 5 day weekends (like would it would probably be good if it does 2.2x at around 138-143m total) ?

It is a very discerning audience too, no ? That can go really high on movie that look good and very low the other way around.

This, it would be like complaining about teenage girl making noise at a twilight Thursday night preview, there is stuff that are to be expected and that you wanted to be part of the experience if you went there at that moment. Going to a superheroes movie or other kids movie like that and being annoyed by them is to be expected (at a certain level).

DM3 will be the big comedy hit of the summer.