Barnack

Yes no doubt, like Cameron he probably did hit fortune independence a long time ago (he is obviously in it a lot like an athlete that continue to play to cement is legacy in history and break records as well).

My oh my: https://www.slashfilm.com/solo-a-star-wars-story-ticket-sales/ The ticket presales for Solo: A Star Wars Story show why the box office tracking for the spin-off is projecting a record-setting Memorial Day weekend with a possible haul of $170 million. Considering that: https://ew.com/movies/2018/01/31/black-panther-superhero-presale-record/ I would imagine that not only the pre-sales/total are much heavier on the Star Wars franchise, but that they are first 24 hours frontloaded as well yes.

Are you suggesting that Ridley Scott, Peter Weir, Spielberg, Scorsese output is less cinematic than Suicide Squad / Venom / 50 shades ? People go even see mutli-camera filmed very not cinematic affair in mass nowaday no ?

Are we now to the point that a show that would show cops in a good light (and it is not like white supremacist group have not been heavily targeted/infiltrated by US law in the past) would be controversial ?

Django was indeed quite similar, maybe a bit cheaper at 86.8M net budget after the Louisiana tax rebate with a planned 96M theatrical release (the 2.75M planned for the awards probably augmented after the success to push it to $100M+). Sony had the international market (theatrical+home ent+Tv) for it, if their accounting to not have some pass-pass because of the market split: they made 262.5M in revenues and gave 80.34M of those in participation bonus, that almost 30% on the dot with 100% home video, no off the top. They made 50M in profits from the intl part, I imagine the Weinstein domestic profit was similar to about 50M. If similar movie with similar deal goes from 100M profit for the studios to almost $0 from december 2012 to summer 2019, those would be harsh time, but who knows maybe. At 350M of revenues that 100M movies can become a 200-210M movie with all the bonus, and if now you need to double that budget at break even you need that 400M (I imagine that the logic of the writer), back in the days for a strong domestic movie with no China, you didn't had to double the budget+bonus when that number got to the 180-200M because of high bonus and you had just a 100M release for it.

What does white or not have to do with the statement ? I quoted and yes mostly supporting (most role will be), the comparison bar was with the Marvel Studio output.........

There is much more woman and Scorsese filmography than Marvel movies no ? There is like 12 nominated performance by actress in Scorsese filmography, 2 winner among them: https://www.imdb.com/poll/1TmK9w4Z63s/

I cannot find the comscore international figure when googling anymore, where do you find those intl weekend numbers ?

Do you think prime Smith ever made "only" 20M on a movie ? Was probably usually much closer to 100M than 20M.

25% would not have been 500m+ from Avatar theater run alone. Assuming absolutely no market was pre-sold and that the first dollar gross deal had no off the top what so ever (big if) and that it got about 55% dom, 45% intl, 22% china 760*.55 + (2029-202)*.45 + 202*.22 = 1284.59 * .25 = around $320M To get example of what big name director can get paid. Danny Boyle on Steve Jobs had a $3M directing/producing fee + 12.65% from first dollar less the directing fee and final cut (with some extraordinary close that lawyer could check the movie and change could be made for legal reasons because of the true story/real people natures) from Fox Searchlight and that precedent got carried on (Sony didn't want that 12.65% FDG number at all, quite high for that level of recent success). Sony offer to Feig for Ghostbuster: Writting: 2MM for one draft, first rewrite, first polish, 350K for supplement rewrite, 100K for supplemental polish, V 3.5% Directing: 8MM + 10% of the profit pool Producing: 500K + 2 EP credits. All being boosted if Spy yet to be released performed over a certain level at the box office. The Russo's asking price for doing Gray Men before Civil War released negotiation looked like this: WRITING AND DIRECTING 7 v 7% 8 v 8% at CA3 800m 9 v 9% at CA3 1b No need for final cut (has the giant producer Joe Roth wanted it) Zemeckis on Allied asked 8m V 15%

I would be flabbergasted if Tarantino do not at least get conditional final cut, with condition looking like this: - Must be approved R or less by the MPAA - Running time must be 1h20 to 3h45 - Must look like the approved script and 2-3 names involved with the project (say himself, Pitt-DiCaprio) must appear in the final product (on screen or behind it) The biggest thing he could have is that is movie cut must past a certain score in screen test organized by a third party company , with him having a set amount of screening to try to achieve that score. Final cut isn't that rare, it is even common for the big name and absolutely for a Tarantino. He will not have final cut (but maybe the right to consult and make it) for the the TV/Airport cut that need to not be R, but on the DVD and theater absolutely. That 25% first dollar gross (or a 50% on net that ramp up a bit higher after that) is something a studio would certainly consider agreeing for a project like this, even getting higher than 20% on Home Video on it, but it would be for him and the stars. If he get 25% (15% directing, 7% writing, 3% producing), Leo 10%, Pitt 7%, Heyman 5%, Robbie 2%, well that just does not work at all anymore, as you rack up name you always tend to split down the % people get (but he movie revenues tend to get bigger at the same time), maybe the rumors got from the fact that he got 25% to play with and go around sign stars with that % budgets.

And which country ? (I didn't know it was actually illegal in any country)

Not sure that criteria is necessarily a good one to use, Raging Bull and Schindler List aged incredibly well, would they work much with current audiences ? If Schindler list would not work today, does that mean it didn't age well or simply that taste shifted ? New excellent movie like Drive and Kiss Kiss Bang Bang didn't work with modern audience and it is not because they have aged. There is a bit of a difference between taste shift and not aging well because movie did better and better of a very similar thing since. If we talk of a vacuum experience is hard to imagine how current audience would react hearing that incredible John Williams score for the first time, not sure it is even possible to try it (that something that age movie a lot and not really a in a vaccuum, how much classic are used everywhere in pop culture and can now feel cliche because of it).

Feel more like -43.75% than -61%

We will probably never know (we pretty much never do)

I think that WW Break even point like do not really "exist", market break down is too important at least in the sony leak the evaluation of the needed performance for a movie to break even by the accountant always had a dom/intl break down, never an alone figure of the sort. The person could be assuming a 30/70 with an average China performance in mind when saying that number but you also need to know how much performance bonus are kicking in first dollar wise (or pre-break even in general) to be able to have an somewhat reliable estimate. But it would be a reasonable figure (if it would reach that figure it would be intl heavy, making a 2.5 budget multiplier probably in that ballpark), except if a 15% is going to talents before break even, raising the budget at break even to 260-265M instead of 185 and upping that figure to 570m....

That not always (or maybe not even commonly the goal), achieving to do 60-70% of the first one is often the target (and would be a giant success in this case). And execution matter a lot, if a bad Jumanji remake would have failed we would be there talking about stupid it was for Sony to make the movie nobody was asking for. Has long has not slam dunk sequel are still much more likely to work than the original, Hollywood will learn to continue to do them.

https://www.imdb.com/calendar/?region=cn Mulan - March 2020 is an obvious candidate for a big Hollywood movie in that market. Before that only Terminator has a dark horse shot at it, last one in 2015 made 113 and back then I think we would have said that a 2019 sequel in that market featuring Arnold and with Cameron name could have a good shoot, but the market didn't grew that much since for the average Hollywood title i feel like versus what it did between 2011 and 2015.

Considering how much an extremelly USA centric affair like Billy Lynn's made 77% of is box office in that market, it was quite expected for an Ang Lee release to have China has the by far is best market.

I feel like he is in many market, low exchange rate do not show it fully, Ad Astra opened higher and is already ahead of First Man total in many market because of Pitt presence I think. That sound quite low for a sequel (except if Netflix created a bonus structure recently but I doubt it), rumor are a more reasonable 35M (what A-lister were paid when their movie flopped not so long ago with their 20M + 10% first dollar gross typical deal)

This is Disney shell company for that production: https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/10986069/filing-history Gross spending seem to have been 121.4 million pound has of september 30, 2018, around 158m USD (1.3036 * 121.4) with what seem a good 24M pound in tax credit. Film wrapped august 24, 2018 so it must be most of the budget, but you have a year of post production and I imagine some form of pick up, would imagine a net budget similar to the rumored first one 180m ? Will maybe have an better idea on the next account update (ideally dated before any bonus kick in) Break even is quite dependent on Joe Roth/Jolie/Woolverton deal (how much bonus if any start before break even, for such giant names and on a sequel of a giant success it can be big) and market's breakdown, could happen at 385M, could be at 550.

So the millenial complain with the extra easy life when they went about 100% of their adult life was lived in an literal economic crash at the same time ? You need to keep the balance in the hot take's.

Not sure what you mean by that, the success right % is all that matter and it is still quite higher on IPs and sequels potential are more often there (Crazy Rich Asians is an IP-driven affair with the sequels already in place)

Gold track record in the last 50 year's as a source of investment for an individual (specially) if you are young has been really terrible: But being all time low could mean that it is not a bad time to buy if one would really want too, people that invested in it in the 70s to 1990 lost a fortune. I would say to simply go with low cost index fund / ETF

Didn't say I did, I just say that what I asked was indeed pretty much the equivalent (how to know if you have issue with black bar, if you liked 4:3 stuff on your 4:3 tv more than now, it would be a clear sign)