Weekend Numbers: GOTG - 94M (PG 180) [25.5M Sunday (Spatula) Cancel the Godzilla legs!]

[grey ghost]

I also read somewhere that there's also some sort problem which means Fox can't connect their separate properties (F4, Xmen, Deadpool) without Marvel consent. I wonder if it plays a factor in the future.

I can see how connecting FF with X-men could confuse the reverting rights issue later.If I were Disney there's no way I'm letting them blend the two worlds.

[MrPink]

I am Groot.

[Blankments]

Fault is as close to original as it gets.

It's not much of a risk.  Disney has made so much money with their MCU films that dropping 250 mill on this was a calculated gamble.  I doubt they would have batted an eyelash if this didn't succeed.

 

...

 

Not to be a dick baumer, but if you honestly think Fault, a $12M budgeted adaptation of an uber popular young adult book, is more risky than Guardians, a $170M bizarre space opera with very tenuous connections to the Marvel universe, we need to have a serious talk

[Dementeleus]

... Not to be a dick baumer, but if you honestly think Fault, a $12M budgeted adaptation of an uber popular young adult book, is more risky than Guardians, a $170M bizarre space opera with very tenuous connections to the Marvel universe, we need to have a serious talk

I fail to see how GOTG was any significant financial risk at all. And this isn't retroactive 20/20 vision, I've stated this since it went into production.

[miketheavenger]

I can see how connecting FF with X-men could confuse the reverting rights issue later.If I were Disney there's no way I'm letting them blend the two worlds.

And connecting Deadpool to them would be difficult as well since that character needs to be Rated R.

[Blankments]

It was snickered at when it was announced. Even by fans.

yeah, I remember being pissed it was announced over a Black Panther project or Wright's Ant-Man

[grey ghost]

Sorry, yes, I edited to be clearer. Yes, it's an adaptation, but stylistically it's "original" as a movie. I usually try to use "unique" or something similar in that case, to avoid confusion.Really (and unfortunately) there are very few would-be blockbusters that are original properties.

But it's extremely risky to greenlight non-adapted/unique blockbusters.If you were gambling 200 million dollars wouldn't you want to help your chances by gambling on something with an established history of success?

[Blankments]

I fail to see how GOTG was any significant financial risk at all. And this isn't retroactive 20/20 vision, I've stated this since it went into production.

Oh, don't get me wrong; I don't think there was much financial risk involved with either.

 

But Fault was always going to exponentially make a profit. Guardians had a chance to be stuck with merely breaking even

[miketheavenger]

Guardians wasn't really that big of a risk, but it was a true test for the Marvel brand name and since it succeeded big time, I feel it was important for Disney/Marvel to see how big their brand really is.

[Jandrew]

I am Groot.

off topic

[efialtes76]

Dragon 2 CONTINUES to disappoint!

How old are you?7?

[miketheavenger]

off topic

I am GROOT.

[Jandrew]

Guardians wasn't really that big of a risk, but it was a true test for the Marvel brand name and since it succeeded big time, I feel it was important for Disney/Marvel to see how big their brand really is.

It featured a talking tree, talking raccoon that swears, and it was set in space with aliens. And it cost $170M. Thats a pretty big risk, dont be a revisionist.

[AJG]

Dragon 2 CONTINUES to disappoint!

Frozen is one of the most plain, overrated animated movies of the last 10 years. How it made more money than Dragons 2 is sad.

[Blankments]

Really the closest things to Guardians are the TV shows Firefly and Farscape 

The way I'm trying to sell Guardians to my mom is that it's the closest she's gonna get in tone for new Firefly.

 

in before Coolio says "Firefly sux"

[grey ghost]

Oh, don't get me wrong; I don't think there was much financial risk involved with either. But Fault was always going to exponentially make a profit. Guardians had a chance to be stuck with merely breaking even

But you cant sell merchandise and have sequels for Fault.For the long-term, nothing beats a successful franchise.

[Dementeleus]

It featured a talking tree, talking raccoon that swears, and it was set in space with aliens. And it cost $170M. Thats a pretty big risk, dont be a revisionist.

"Let's make a SW-esque movie featuring a band of lovable ne'er-do-wells." How is that a big risk? It's only a risk compared to something like TA2 or SW7.

[miketheavenger]

It featured a talking tree, talking raccoon that swears, and it was set in space with aliens. And it cost $170M. Thats a pretty big risk, dont be a revisionist.

It wasn't a risk since Marvel and especially Disney have so much money that they could have afford a bomb.

[grey ghost]

The way I'm trying to sell Guardians to my mom is that it's the closest she's gonna get in tone for new Firefly. 

in before Coolio says "Firefly sux"

It's more Farscape than Firefly.

[Dementeleus]

It wasn't a risk since Marvel and especially Disney have so much money that they could have afford a bomb.

It would never have bombed, assuming they kept the budget under control. Even stuff like JOHN CARTER made something like 290m worldwide. There was a small chance it would've lost a small amount of money (all told), but that's nowhere near bomb territory.