cdsacken Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 (edited) Maybe super dark comics or villain movies but not superhero films. Free market spoke loudly. Insulting others on here should be off limits I agree. Insulting directors that cripple franchises no way. Edited April 1, 2019 by cdsacken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnack Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 (edited) 9 hours ago, AndyK said: They made 2 movies with that budget though. A lot of Endgames costs are already paid. For 700m pound and still counting, yes I would imagine it is for part 1 and 2. Edited April 1, 2019 by Barnack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdsacken Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 It's a ton no doubt but it's looking 4 billion in revenue and 1.3 to 1.4 billion net for both. Really hope Shazam does well enough to get an sequel greenlit early. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnack Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 5 hours ago, cdsacken said: Whoever brought up GOTG vs Justice League. 145 million in video sales versus 56 million. Absolutely insane. You are not able to follow the conversation (if you are talking about mine). One said: 400m for BvS Production and marketing it is crazy high for a movie like that. Pointing out that is pretty similar to a GOTG. How does it turn into a versus ? Is it possible that I am talking to someone that would be a fans here ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Futurist Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 I am non binary when it comes to funny book movies. I identify as a table. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2kt09 Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 1 hour ago, cdsacken said: Maybe super dark comics or villain movies but not superhero films. I don't have to imagine what the various Greg Weisman/Bruce Timm stuff would be like in live-action for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdsacken Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 8 minutes ago, Barnack said: You are not able to follow the conversation (if you are talking about mine). One said: 400m for BvS Production and marketing it is crazy high for a movie like that. Pointing out that is pretty similar to a GOTG. How does it turn into a versus ? Is it possible that I am talking to someone that would be a fans here ? Except GOTG made a profit. Plenty of movies cost a lot, obviously for studio that spend 400+ million they hope to profit off it as it's a lot of risk. Gotg made even more after you factor the home video sales. CM/BP/Infinity War all had good margins too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdsacken Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 6 minutes ago, 2kt09 said: I don't have to imagine what the various Greg Weisman/Bruce Timm stuff would be like in live-action for example. Problem is the sequels often stink and the really dark ones are hard to rewatch. Such as Sin City imo of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomCruiseTop Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 1 hour ago, lorddemaxus said: a fascist president [citation needed] 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnack Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 (edited) 20 minutes ago, cdsacken said: Except GOTG made a profit. Plenty of movies cost a lot, obviously for studio that spend 400+ million they hope to profit off it as it's a lot of risk. Gotg made even more after you factor the home video sales. CM/BP/Infinity War all had good margins too. And why the except ?, how is this relevant into pointing out that it would be very average/normal spending for a big SH movie if GOTG made a profit or not ? But that making the point, if the over 830m at the box office Batman V Superman would have been made at a very reasonable 400m in production/marketing budget (that would be spending 130m less than Spider Man 3 did almost a decade before), it would have made a huge profit, movie making less at the box office and costing about the same like Guardian of the Galaxy having made one according to you. Edited April 1, 2019 by Barnack 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdsacken Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 (edited) If you can show my the profit loss statement for Bvs I will believe you it's always been hidden. I'd love to see what it made. Promotion was massive for that film. Either way clearly it didn't go well since Justice League actually lost money and it was down hill from there. Aquaman was a breath and fresh air in comparison, hopefully more is like that. Edited April 1, 2019 by cdsacken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnack Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 Just now, cdsacken said: If you can show my the profit loss statement for Bvs I will believe you it's always been hidden. I'd love to see what it made. Promotion was massive for that film. It is unknown, that why I said if, it does sound on the optimistic side that $400m Deadline estimated a 105m net profit for the studios and 55m for the talents (on a 250m budget, 157m WW P&A and 46m home ent WW release): https://deadline.com/2017/03/batman-v-superman-box-office-profit-2016-1202049201/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdsacken Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 Seems unlikely but oh well might as well move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceFire9yt Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 BvS almost certainly made money with home video and streaming included, but business is not a zero sum game. There's an opportunity cost to making a movie, the money, talent, resources used to make it could have been used somewhere else, on a movie with a much better return on investment. Then there's the impact that BvS had on its franchise, one that's still being felt to this day. I have no doubt that WB views BvS as a complete failure, and one that has hurt them financially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdsacken Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 Not a complete one no. Probably how Fox feels about Alita. A complete failure is Justice league. Cost was at least 50 million more with 200 million less revenue. I thought Henry Cavill did a great job. It was way too grim and dark for me but I always thought he was good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Napoleon Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 2 hours ago, IceFire9yt said: BvS almost certainly made money with home video and streaming included, but business is not a zero sum game. There's an opportunity cost to making a movie, the money, talent, resources used to make it could have been used somewhere else, on a movie with a much better return on investment. Then there's the impact that BvS had on its franchise, one that's still being felt to this day. I have no doubt that WB views BvS as a complete failure, and one that has hurt them financially. But all of the DCEU movies after BVS overperformed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 If Shazam (2019) opens below Ant Man (2015)... 😱😱😱😱 I can't imagine what this thread will be like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Napoleon Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 46 minutes ago, Matthew said: If Shazam (2019) opens below Ant Man (2015)... 😱😱😱😱 I can't imagine what this thread will be like. That's impossible. I was told audiences want DC films to be fun and colorful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMP Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertman2 Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 7 minutes ago, TMP said: THE MOUSTACHE THAT KILLED THE JUSTICE LEAGUE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...