chuck0 Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Rise Of The Guardians also made more than twice its budget back worldwide and Dreamworks said that was a huge flop. I think they planned it as a kind of multi franchise starter and for that to work it probably was supposed to be really huge... which it was not really... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subzero Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 Oh, yeah. Looney Tunes. Love. Also who can forget the Pink Panther. That tune will never get out of ones head once you hear it. Da da, da da, da da da da...da da....da da da duhhhhhh....dah dah da da,,, 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Marvel Fanboy Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 (edited) Rise Of The Guardians also made more than twice its budget back worldwide and Dreamworks said that was a huge flop. Link please. Edited March 8, 2014 by firedeep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holcs Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 Never thought I'd see a thread devoted to Eva…Good stuff guys/gals. And Ill be seeing 300 RoaE for various reasons but a few definitely include Eva and Lena (I love her and she seems pretty naughty in interviews ). 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keysersoze123 Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 Link please. you are ignoring marketing costs. Its never too low for big budget movies. So 2x aint good enough. Anyway you can see impact of guardians on dreamworks plus katz mentioning its a failure. http://www.businessinsider.com/dreamworks-animation-will-lay-off-350-employees-2013-2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Marvel Fanboy Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 (edited) Of course Guardians was a failure we all knew but neither DWA or Katzenberg ever exactly described it as a "huge flop". They neither said it in that way. Plus, as I recall, according to Neo, 2x is good enough for a sequel (for any movie) .... IMO, if a movie makes over 2x, it is still possible for financial balance (because some movies could do very well post-theaters or tie-ins or whatever). Anything over 3x is good/great; 1.5~2x probably equals flop; Under 1.5x = big/huge flop, if you will. For instance, last year's Turbo, which managed a box office-budget multiplier just over 2x, didnt loose any money according to Katzenberg. Point is, it is premature to write off Peabody as a flop, let alone a huge flop, at this early. 300m (certainly possible) ww is not that terrible. Edited March 8, 2014 by firedeep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fancyarcher Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 (edited) Katzenberg is an idiot. He makes bold claims all the time. Edited March 8, 2014 by Fancyarcher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keysersoze123 Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 DWA is a publicly listed firm. This is there quarterly earnings and they even fired 15% of its staff. So usual hollywood accounting is not an answer here. Guardians was a flop and that brought down DWA. Very early to speculate on P&S. But I doubt its going to be a franchise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Marvel Fanboy Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 Katzenberg is an idiot. He makes bold claims all the time. Yeah an idiot that produced classics from Little Mermaid to Aladdin for evil Disney. DWA is a publicly listed firm. This is there quarterly earnings and they even fired 15% of its staff. So usual hollywood accounting is not an answer here. Guardians was a flop and that brought down DWA. Very early to speculate on P&S. But I doubt its going to be a franchise. Profitable movies dont always have sequels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
