PlatnumRoyce

male-oriented?

A 2019 deadline article basically dumped all of the questions posttrak asks. The average is 15.3% across all films with another 18.3% being non-married couples on a date so 33.6% index versus 51% for Marley https://deadline.com/2019/08/posttrack-movie-survey-2019-streaming-exhibition-1000-movies-polled-1202667945/ That being said, I've never understood the politics/religion questions there.

Neat. Also, I've somehow missed "2021 - Garfield versus McGuire = 2 billion in profits" which is basically what happened in NWH.

I don't agree with that interpretation but I agree it's the most logical read of the NPR transcript. I've pulled the actual Sony Hack document (at least a version of the Sony-Marvel contract as amended in 2011) before looking for this exact distinction between "Spider-Man" films and "Spider-Man adjacent/non-Spider-Man character" films and I just don't see it. There's no defined legal term for films like Venom so I think all of these films count as Spider-Man films. The accurate version of the language I'm seeing simply says "The Production Term will expire on the date..." and instead of Spider-Man film, the production term relates back to the defined term PICTURE which is "one or more motion pictures (including, without limitation, sequels, prequels, remakes, serials or other audiovisual works of any nature) intended for initial theatrical release (“Picture(s)”); and" I'm not sure if I'm looking at the final version of the negotiation but I'm also positive the NPR interview in 2014 didn't actively think about the possibility of Morbius movies when deciding how to compress legalese into a quick interview hit. If films like Venom didn't count, you'd need some language in the license contract addressing it and the definition of film doesn't say something like "stars spider-man/peter parker". I could find neither (but I could have missed something). Remember, around this time Sony was making noise about a sinister six movie and if that had no impact on rights retention, I'm sure that would have been actively discussed given compressed timeline to make TASM1.

To clarify, I was talking about the early "global war on terror" mindset (or even not so early - remember the coverage of the 2010 Times Square attempted car-bomb) not "Bush/the CIA did 9/11 ("9/11 truther") paranoia. At the time there really wasn't a firm belief that 9/11 wouldn't be followed up by another major terrorist attack (something made ludicrously explicit in bush administration interviews). I also agree that either of these would have not fit at all with the film they wanted to make. The film's decision to be a period piece has nothing to do with the period, it's just driven by franchise necessities. However, what I find genuinely interesting about this is the clear lack of thought about what the timeline change meant in the context of the GWOT or 9/11. For about 10-15 years, superhero movies ranging from Raimi's Spider-Man to Nolan's Batman to Iron Man to Man of Steel to Age of Ultron were obsessed with 9/11 as an explicit or implicit backdrop to events. It seems to me that some time in the late 2010s or early 2020s we just left the (with The Batman especially illustrating the changing locus of concerns). Everything else is just playing dumb little games off of that observation. I think madame Webb can be used as an entry into this longer term story.

I don't think ceterus paribus obviously holds. Gladiator and Braveheart both won best picture with a 67/68 metascore and a sub 80% RT score. That's clearly a reflection of changing definition of what "a ___ %" means on user review sites more than it reflects the raw difference. On an aggregate level critical inflation on RT is clear and obvious and is tied to a clean conceptual story (pre-2000 films have a tiny number of web outlets reviewing films while in 2024 the critic aggregator % is a metric to be gamed and includes explicitly fandom based critics as well as intuitional ones). If Gladiator came out today I firmly believe it would get graded in the low 90s not the 70s.

I think that's more of a positive skew bias towards family scores which causes them to be included when the studio(?) wants a more positive number to skim. It's like how Ghost in the Shell randomly dropped "% who gave the film an A, B or C" instead of the normal use of "% positive" as limited to the equivalent of an A or B score

wow

just a truly amazing performance from an actor who knew exactly what movie he was in.

Let's use a real-world examples from 2016 Goosebumps - 68.5M budget = breakeven at 118.7M WW (1.73)1; "return threshold" at 156M WW (2.27) & "target" at 163M WW (2.37) Grimsby - 70M budget = breakeven at 123M WW (1.78) ; return threshold & target 188.8M (2.7) Pixels - 110M budget - 190M breakeven (1.73x) & 311.3M (2.83) "return threshold" & 282.5M "target" (2.57)

This film has weird potential 9/11 stuff that went completely unexplored (for good reason - this would in no way fit with the story they wanted to tell). Based on other information, it's clearly an unintended side effect of moving the film's settings from the late 1990s to early 2000s but if you're talking about NYC first responders in the early 2000s, 9/11 immediately comes to mind. Based on timeline cues this film implicitly took place within a month of (and likely within a week of) the invasion of Iraq and/or the announcement that the government foiled a plot to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge for Al-Qaeda (also 6 months after the DC sniper). This would be understood in MCU world as another foiled NYC terror attack that was at least initially presumptively tied to Al-Qaeda. Given that one of the abducted girls is J. Jonah Jameson's niece, are we to infer this is why the MCU's version of JJJ went off the deep end especially when tied to Spider-Man?

I don't think Luiz is right here. In 2021 (before a lot of inflation), EntTelligence clocked Dune 2's OW ATP at $14.41 per ticket, at least 80 cents higher than any other film with >40% of all tickets sold going to "PLF" screens (52% of OW gross). That's higher than oppenheimer whose OW was 47% PLF driven. By way of contrast, Wakanda Forever only had a $13 ATP, & Average ticket price for Barbie was $12.65, while Oppenheimer went for $13.65. Dune was able to gross so much in a bad point in the pandemic because it was driven by PLF to an unparalleled degree. The upper bound should be sky high on PLFs from people in the film's core interest group (the question is if WB can activate a more general audience).

Isn't the default assumption is that this is all related to Disney corporate politicking (combined with having things spaced out to air alongside the superbowl)? https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/disney-board-shareholders-letter/ It could also be attempting to use goodwill of Deadpool 3 trailer (given insane viewership) as a shield to launch attention to weaker projects (regardless of the timing of stuff like F4 or Mando, I suspect they always wanted to pair D3 with the more niche X-Men TV show to increase basic interest awareness among people who watched X-Men movies).

And unlike Gods of Egypt, Madame Webb seems to not be saved by Chadwick Boseman just 180% hamming it up.

I really find the Houston Bio bombing to be interesting. I don't organically get how big she was, it really does seem as if she was a massive cultural force in the 1990s. The problem is more that when reading this line (without the prior context), I'd interpret it as significantly elevating Whitney up instead of an argument for being lower on Marley because his ongoing cultural relevancy just feels so self-evident.

Plenty of hit TV shows have generated successful films and Mando was clearly one of the biggest TV shows of 2020 with large follow-up seasons. I think it's notable this is being sold as "Mando: the movie" and not "the theatrical conclusion of the Star Wars TV universe (building off of old cable TV kids shows)

So is Jat saying this doesn't include TV because it wouldn't make conceptual sense to given the numbers you can find for various social media sites or is this private information for some of these social media sites (I read it as the former)? Disney's press release doesn't explain anything so I think it's easily plausible the trades writer just misinterpreted it (though I'd have thought Disney would have wanted them to correct it given excluding TV is more impressive).

IDK but both El Meurto and Hypno Hustler seem to have been conceived of as star vehicles where the lack of a pre-existing storyline was sold as a plus. Does the death of El Muerto mean Sony ditched this new concept or did they just reject bad bunny?

I don't know about aquaman but tell that to John Wick. JW 4 was basically responsible for Lionsgate's $50M increase in home entertainment spending the quarter it was released on VOD & (first few weeks of ) DVD. Similarly, using the-numbers & media play news' year end estimates, it made about $35M in 2023 on DVD instead of the $8M-$10M creed 3 & AM3 made on physical [with John Wick 1 slightly outselling Creed 3]. Physical media is ~1/3 of overall transaction revenue. I'm using the first 6 months of 2023's Black Adam DVD sales as a benchmark.

Yeah, studios clearly are looking at box office results and marketing that implies its a negative even if it's not the worst thing in the world. Neither Dune nor Infinity War really denied there would be a sequel but both on their own terms tried to sell the film as a self-contained story (I don't think Disney gets enough credit for being able to sell both Infinity War and Endgame as the big final capstone to the MCU without suffering any blowback).

and neither did Infinity War

you take that back. At least you're not shitting on Dracula 2000.

nope its apparently that bad

The ~64M number just came from rushing through the spreadsheet by finding Dune 2 and looking at the last numerical value in the table (which in reality was just the gross spend from October -> December 2022). I'm glad you were able to take a look at this and correct that misread. Of course that's not a primary source but I can't imagine it's wrong.