Kingp0va Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 2 hours ago, That Floating Guy said: No, but I'm sure they also didn't expect a 15% on RT with a fucking 18% as the audience rating or a 4.4/10 on IMDb. I dont think they cared as long as it made money which it did for its budget. It IS weird that a sequel is being made 7 years ago tho, why was the budget so small??? were the effects that awful? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That One Girl Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 Sorry but if your film makes only $66M WW with shit reviews, no one will be clamoring for a sequel. That's why everyone is so surprised. No matter if they made money, most smart studios wouldn't greenlight a sequel like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filmlover Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 I honestly forgot there was a first Skyline until this thread. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnack Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 (edited) 12 minutes ago, That Floating Guy said: Sorry but if your film makes only $66M WW with shit reviews, no one will be clamoring for a sequel. That's why everyone is so surprised. No matter if they made money, most smart studios wouldn't greenlight a sequel like this. Isn't the sequel financed by the people that made the first movie with their money, no studio involved ? For projects like those, they are not necessarily rational decision but people using the large fortune they made on the first to have fun on the sequel. And the first one was such a massive giant success 78m on a 10m budget in the year 2010 ! (and a small 500k physical production), even in the studio world a sequel would have been contemplated. Edited August 18, 2017 by Barnack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannastop Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 7 hours ago, That Floating Guy said: because it got shit reviews? Since when is that a reason to not make a sequel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannastop Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 4 minutes ago, filmlover said: I honestly forgot there was a first Skyline until this thread. I never heard of these movies until this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That One Girl Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 4 minutes ago, Barnack said: Isn't the sequel financed by the people that made the first movie with their money, no studio involved ? For project like those, they are not necessarily rational decision but people using the large fortune they made on the first to have fun on the sequel. That makes more sense then. If a studio did greenlight this film though, then that'd be fucking hilarious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That One Girl Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 2 minutes ago, cannastop said: Since when is that a reason to not make a sequel? There's a difference between a movie with shit reviews that makes $200M and a movie with shit reviews that makes $20M. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnack Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 3 minutes ago, That Floating Guy said: That makes more sense then. If a studio did greenlight this film though, then that'd be fucking hilarious Seem has independent has it can get: Production Companies Beyond The Mothership Infinite Frameworks Pte. Ltd. Head Gear Films (In association with) Infinite Frameworks Studios Metrol Technology (In association with) North Hollywood Films (in association with) Distributors E Stars Films (2017) (China) (all media) Eagle Films (2017) (Non-US) (all media) (Middle East) Mongkol Major (2017) (Thailand) (all media) Splendid Film (2017) (Germany) (DVD) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnack Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 5 minutes ago, That Floating Guy said: There's a difference between a movie with shit reviews that makes $200M and a movie with shit reviews that makes $20M. Are you talking in estimated profit ? it made almost $80m at the box office (and being a 2010 release I would not be surprised if it had interesting dvd sales) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That One Girl Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 15 minutes ago, Barnack said: Are you talking in estimated profit ? it made almost $80m at the box office (and being a 2010 release I would not be surprised if it had interesting dvd sales) It only made $66M WW and $20M domestic, and most people hated it. A major studio greenlighting a sequel does not seem like the best of business decisions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnack Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 1 minute ago, That Floating Guy said: It only made $66M WW and $20M domestic, and most people hated it. A major studio greenlighting a sequel does not seem like the best of business decisions. Box office mojo often does not track intl number correctly for non studio movie: http://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Skyline#tab=summary Domestic Box Office $21,416,355 Details International Box Office $57,277,016 Details Worldwide Box Office $78,693,371 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That One Girl Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 Just now, Barnack said: Box office mojo often does not track intl number correctly for non studio movie: http://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Skyline#tab=summary Domestic Box Office $21,416,355 Details International Box Office $57,277,016 Details Worldwide Box Office $78,693,371 That's still not enough for a sequel, especially with its dismal domestic gross Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnack Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 1 minute ago, That Floating Guy said: That's still not enough for a sequel, especially with its dismal domestic gross Not sure to follow here, how 78m box office on a 10m (if they are saying the truth) not a giant success story ? That was bigger than say: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=girlwhoplayedwithfire.htm Not sure what would be the best comparable but a movie like: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=grantparker09.htm Did You Hear About the Morgans? Total Lifetime Grosses Domestic: $29,580,087 34.7% + Foreign: $55,700,163 65.3% = Worldwide: $85,280,250 That sold less dvd according to the-numbers made 119 million in revenue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That One Girl Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 5 minutes ago, Barnack said: Not sure to follow here, how 78m box office on a 10m (if they are saying the truth) not a giant success story ? That was bigger than say: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=girlwhoplayedwithfire.htm Not sure what would be the best comparable but a movie like: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=grantparker09.htm Did You Hear About the Morgans? Total Lifetime Grosses Domestic: $29,580,087 34.7% + Foreign: $55,700,163 65.3% = Worldwide: $85,280,250 That sold less dvd according to the-numbers made 119 million in revenue. Okay, but can you please name me any other films that made $21M or less domestic and had sequels released theatrically? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnack Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 (edited) 25 minutes ago, That Floating Guy said: Okay, but can you please name me any other films that made $21M or less domestic and had sequels released theatrically? The girl who played with fire was my example of that, but the 3 movie got released so close that I must imagine were all shot in the same time and would mean very little. Others: Harold & Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay sequel from the 18.2m dbo Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle The Devil's Rejects sequel from the 12.6m dbo House of 1000 Corpses And both those movie didn't do 33% of Skyline oversea, didn't have necessarily a much cheaper production budget. Other not too far Transporter 2 sequel of Transporter (24 million budget): Total Lifetime Grosses Domestic: $25,296,447 57.6% + Foreign: $18,632,485 42.4% = Worldwide: $43,928,932 Whitout knowing how a movie played on video/tv (that were 65 to 80% of the revenue for movies like those) it is really hard to judge them, we know just a little surface that was always only a publicity for the home video window and that did cost more than the rental. Edited August 18, 2017 by Barnack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingp0va Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 31 minutes ago, That Floating Guy said: That's still not enough for a sequel, especially with its dismal domestic gross omg just shut up. 78m on a 10m budget is amazing. of course it would deserve a sequel. you're just wrong. You're acting like this was supposed to be a serious movie with good reviews that ended up failing at the bo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingp0va Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 (edited) 19 minutes ago, That Floating Guy said: Okay, but can you please name me any other films that made $21M or less domestic and had sequels released theatrically? but why dont u count overseas numbers? lol. if done right, this movie will easily make more than 21m dom Edited August 18, 2017 by Kingp0va Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That One Girl Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 27 minutes ago, Kingp0va said: omg just shut up. 78m on a 10m budget is amazing. of course it would deserve a sequel. you're just wrong. You're acting like this was supposed to be a serious movie with good reviews that ended up failing at the bo 25 minutes ago, Kingp0va said: but why dont u count overseas numbers? lol. if done right, this movie will easily make more than 21m dom First of all, this is a theoretical situation in the event that the film is greenlit for a theatrical release (which it's not). Second of all, even if it were a theatrical release, it'd have a larger budget more than likely and even lower returns than the last one (especially considering the 7 year gap). Do you honestly think people will rush out to see the sequel to a movie they hated 7 years after it came out? Just cause it had good box office returns the first time around doesn't mean people liked it, nor does it guarantee they'll see it a second time around 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
langer Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 Took the time to watch the trailer. Definitely my type of disaster/monster movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
