HenryMeyers20

What about the Golden Globes? Does LL have a good chance to be recognized in the comedy and musical categories?

Could LL be recognized at awards times? The Independence Spirit Award may give it a few nominations. Also Golden Globes in its best comedy and musical categories. The Oscars is going to be kinda tough, because they don't seem to be in to comedies. But they did give a few nominations for American Hustle, which is a similar movie.

What Soderbergh did is different than Sony, because Sony dished out their own money for domestic P&A. With Logan Lucky the P&A was paid for by streaming sell to Amazon. As far as the cast and crew, no one loses. They choose to work for scale and profit sharing. They knew it's a gamble, but they believe in this project.

I love what Kevin Smith and Steven Soderbergh are doing. I wished more filmmakers now will follow their lead. The fact you can make a profit at the theatrical window is unheard of in today's environment. What's even more incredible is that a good film with an all star cast can make profit opening weekend with just $7.6 million box office. Big Hollywood must be hating this. Even an inside Hollywood publication "Hollywood Reporter" is saying that Soderbergh's self distribution is a failure. Some publications is sticking to the false claim that LL needed to make $15m to be successful. But Soderbergh was never quoted saying that figure. This shows that big Hollywood don't like self distribution.

We have to wonder why they even open Logan Lucky in theaters at all. Why not go straight to Amazon Prime. Or why do any movie open in theater these days. The big money is in video and tv revenues. LL box office shows movies made for adults are big loser in the theatrical window, maybe streaming would have been better for this type of movie.

Weekend 8/25-8/27 1. Hitman's Bodyguard $10m 2. Annabelle $6.8m 3. Logan Lucky $6m 4. Dunkirk $3.7m 5. Nut Job $2.8m This is probably the weakest weekend in a long time.

Technically, it's not a flop because it's already on the profit side.

Soderbergh in The NY Times Sunday is quoted as saying the weekend is not problem, LL made profit soon as the first ticket were sold. The problem was the South and Midwest did not support it, the very people it was made for. What I find weird was the top 10 theaters with the biggest audience for LL was in LA and NY. 7 in LA the other 3 in NY. Soderbergh made a mistake by not marketing it in the big cities. Thats were the real audience was for this movie. He also should have open it in limited release. The big cities came out for the cast, but rural folk don't care about cast. Soderbergh miscalculated people in the South and Midwest, he thought they would like it, but they were probably insulted by it.

I don't know why Soderbergh only talk about the theatrical window, maybe he just old fashion. But I see your point, only 25% of most movies revenue come from the theatrical window. I think Soderbergh believe a movie should be profitable in that window.

It depends on the movie, Soderbergh only works with big name stars. So the foreign distributors will throw on money into marketing. When Easy A came out Emma Stone was not consider a star. I don't understand your math, how is "Easy A" total revenue is $137m when it only gross $75m? Also Soderbergh was only speaking about the theatricial window, not tv .

Your are lucky, one time I got 15 trailers

My definition of mid level is $80 million and lower. Major studios mainly produce big blockbusters and only distribute lower budget movies. Even Hitman's Bodyguard is an independent movie, Lionsgate is only distributing it in some markets. You said success rate is over 50%, well maybe not. In a speech Soderbergh made in San Francisco a few year ago he give an example why big studio don't make low and mid level movies. He said: Movie AA budget is $10m It cost $30m to open domestically It cost another $30m to open in foreign markets A studio is not going to spent $60m to open a $10m movie The movie now has to gross $140m just to break even, because the theater get 50% of ticket sales. Now how many $10m movies gross $140m, not many. What Soderbergh did with LL was to cut out the middle man by selling foreign distribution rights, instead of making distribution deals, he sold first streaming and self distribute the film domestically. This is why today he can brag that LL is profitable even with a dismal box office performance.

One thing about the South and Midwest, they are more laid back than city folks. They take their time, they don't run out to see a movie on the first weekend like city folks do. I think the South and Midwest will pickup a lot in the coming days and weeks. Big studios ignore these areas because they want a big opening weekend. The marketing strategy is unconventional, so the box office is behaving unconventional.

Interesting quotes from Steven Soderbergh and EP Dan Fellman about LL opening. “This weekend’s number is not a problem; we were in profit as soon as someone bought a ticket,” Mr. Soderbergh said, noting that 46 percent of total domestic ticket sales “will go into a pool shared by the cast and crew.” He added, “The entire experience has been a blast, which was also one of my goals.” Dan Fellman, a “Logan Lucky” producer and film distribution consultant, said by phone that turnout was strong on the coasts. “Where we didn’t connect was in the South and Midwest, which is frustrating because the movie was made for that audience,” he said. This is why big studios ignore the rural areas. Soderbergh also said he will do things different on his next movie. I think this is a learning experience for Soderbergh, sound like that $8 million mostly came from NY and LA, which is surprising. Here is the link to the article: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/20/movies/hitmans-bodyguard-logan-lucky-box-office.html

Interesting quotes from Steven Soderbergh and EP Dan Fellman about LL opening. “This weekend’s number is not a problem; we were in profit as soon as someone bought a ticket,” Mr. Soderbergh said, noting that 46 percent of total domestic ticket sales “will go into a pool shared by the cast and crew.” He added, “The entire experience has been a blast, which was also one of my goals.” Dan Fellman, a “Logan Lucky” producer and film distribution consultant, said by phone that turnout was strong on the coasts. “Where we didn’t connect was in the South and Midwest, which is frustrating because the movie was made for that audience,” he said. This is why big studios ignore the rural areas. Soderbergh also said he will do things different on his next movie. I think this is a learning experience for Soderbergh, sound like that $8 million mostly came from NY and LA, which is surprising. Here is the link to the article: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/20/movies/hitmans-bodyguard-logan-lucky-box-office.html

My example is why major studios don't make mid level budget films anymore, it's not financially feasible.

I understand what you are saying. My numbers aren't completely accurate, I was just trying to make a point. I've should made that more clear. Your are right, I forgot about the foreign revenue. Let put that at $20m b/o while probably too high with a 55% theater take. That still be would $83.7 million in the red. I know this just the first weekend, very few movies make profit ow. But my point is, even with a low box office, LL is in better shape than most movies.

Why Logan Lucky opening is not bad as has been reported and Steven Soderbergh marketing plan actually works: If they had went with a studio conventional distribution, this movie would had been a true flop. They would have spent $30-$40m on P&A and open only at $18m. A conventional strategy would look like this: (-$29M budget)+(-$35m P&A)+(-$35m Foreign P&A)+($18m b/o)+(-15% b/o distribution fee)+(-50% Theater take)= -92.7 Steven Soderbergh strategy: (-$29m budget+Foreign distribution sell)= $0 (-$20 P&A+Amazon first right streaming sell)=$0 (distribution fee)=$0 ($8m b/o-50% theater take)=+$4m This shows even an studio type P&A and $10m more ow would have been worse. Soderbergh's experiment actually works. The media focus on box office numbers in the tradition and conventional way, they should focus on the actual finances of each movie

Like any product, you have to go where the are people live. Selling mainly in low populated places is not going to cut it. This movie open at only $8m with an all star cast. Most of that came from rural America, very little came from the cities. However, this movie is still not in bad shape financially. the budget and the marketing cost has already been recovered before release. Soderbergh cut out the middle men by doing self distribution. The only thing left is how much the cast and crew gets. If they had went with a studio conventional distribution, this movie would had been a true flop. They would have spent $30-$40m on P&A and open only at $18m. A conventional strategy would look like this: (-$29M budget)+(-$35m P&A)+(-$35m Foreign P&A)+($18m b/o)+(-15% b/o distribution fee)+(-50% Theater take)= -92.7 Steven Soderbergh strategy: (-$29m budget+Foreign distribution sell)= $0 (-$20 P&A+Amazon first right streaming sell)=$0 (distribution fee)=$0 ($8m b/o-50% theater take)=+$4m This shows even an studio type P&A and $10m more ow would have been worse. Soderbergh's experiment actually works. The media focus on box office numbers in the tradition and conventional way, they should focus on the actual finances of each movie.

On second thought, maybe Soderbergh is doing the right thing. Maybe he knew this type of movie wouldn't appeal to the GA, despite the all star cast. There is a couple of articles saying Soderbergh is looking for how well the movie does the first 10 days and it was'nt marketed for a giant opening weekend. The marketing strategy is unconventional, so maybe we should stop judging it by conventional means.

It's going to be interesting to see how LL plays in foreign markets without Soderbergh marketing strategy. Tatum is in Europe promoting the film with a traditional marketing campaign.

It's going to be interesting to see how LL plays in foreign markets without Soderbergh marketing strategy. Tatum is in Europe promoting the film with a traditional marketing campaign.

I bet the all of the producers (including Channing Tatum) are kicking themselves for letting Soderbergh run the marketing campaign.

I'll say 50%for HB and 45% for LL. I think LL will makeup a little ground Monday-Thursday, because it will attract a more older retired crowd.

This is an excellent movie, it's ashamed Soderbergh decided to hide LL from most of the public just to prove a point. The inept marketing is focus on low populated areas and the box office is showing this.