WEEKEND ESTIMATES: 23.48 M THE BOSS | 23.44 M BVS: DOJ | 14.35 M ZOOTOPIA | 5.10 M HARDCORE HENRY

[CJohn]

You know what are facts? BvS has toxic WOM, WB clearly wanted 1B and that the overall reception/box office after OW is a huge disappointment for them. 

[WrathOfHan]

2 minutes ago, CJohn said:

You know what are facts? BvS has toxic WOM, WB clearly wanted 1B and that the overall reception/box office after OW is a huge disappointment for them. 

You forgot that it's CRUMBLING

Edited April 10, 2016 by WrathOfHan

[CJohn]

1 minute ago, WrathOfHan said:

You forgot that it's CRUMBLING

Ah yes, good times. Where is the dude that said JW was #CRUMBLING?

[The Dark Alfred]

Who came up with the expectations? WB would have liked 1 billion, but the film increased from the previous installment and created buzz for two future releases. Job done. BvS will be forgotten in a few years time just like IM2. Not to mention that the year is not over yet, SS might pull Deadpool numbers.

[SWXII]

1 minute ago, The Dark Alfred said:

Who came up with the expectations? WB would have liked 1 billion, but the film increased from the previous installment and created buzz for two future releases. Job done. BvS will be forgotten in a few years time just like IM2. Not to mention that the year is not over yet, SS might pull Deadpool numbers.

 

Yes even the Forbes article makes that point this is a good start.

 

Pretty sure though that once the extended cut is available this movie will not be forgotten soon.

[POTUS 2020]

7 hours ago, Baumer said:

 

What u dont see is all the posts we have hidden. Trust me, it was going off a cliff again.

Lol siento mucho

[GiantCALBears]

8 minutes ago, The Dark Alfred said:

Who came up with the expectations? WB would have liked 1 billion, but the film increased from the previous installment and created buzz for two future releases. Job done. BvS will be forgotten in a few years time just like IM2. Not to mention that the year is not over yet, SS might pull Deadpool numbers.

 

I'll take the other side of any optimistic SS club, I just think the hype on here is as overrated as it can possibly be. Shocking how high some are predicting there even after BvS opened.

Edited April 10, 2016 by GiantCALBears

[somebody85]

3 minutes ago, SWXII said:

 

Yes even the Forbes article makes that point this is a good start.

 

Pretty sure though that once the extended cut is available this movie will not be forgotten soon.

Not really. I read it.

If you look at the table yes it increased (even though most of it came from the opening weekend) but look at what the author means.
 

A few quotes:
"That 30 percent may look OK, but we need to remember that it takes years for all this money to flow in to the studio’s coffers. The $250 million in production funding is spent long before the movie’s release, and the marketing money is also a big upfront cost. The theatrical rental revenue usually comes back inside of a year after the film’s release, but home entertainment revenue can take several years to trickle in, and TV revenue years more.
 

Taking into account the time value of money, the IRR on Warners’ investment is probably in the range of 12 to 15 percent. And that’s before we count the studio’s overhead costs, which if amortized against the picture would probably reduce the Batman v Superman profits by another $30 or $40 million. But for the sake of argument let’s say that the merchandise revenue I’ve temporarily set aside makes up for that overhead cost, so the film’s final profit works out to $126 million. Pre-tax.
 

That’s only a fair-t0-middling return when lined up against comparable films, as illustrated in the table below (the profit estimates come largely from Mike Fleming Jr.’s excellent analyses in Deadline Hollywood). Assuming my estimates for Batman v Superman are in the right ballpark, then on an ROI basis the film appears to be only a modest success for Warner Bros."

"So here’s the challenge for Warner Bros going forward: If the studio can contain its production costs and talent participation expenses on future Justice League films, do a bit better in holding on to the domestic audience, and then gain back the interest of overseas moviegoers–especially themassive Chinese market–then they should do just fine financially going forward."

 

[SWXII]

1 minute ago, somebody85 said:

Not really. I read it.

If you look at the table yes it increased (even though most of it came from the opening weekend) but look at what the author means.
 

A few quotes:
"That 30 percent may look OK, but we need to remember that it takes years for all this money to flow in to the studio’s coffers. The $250 million in production funding is spent long before the movie’s release, and the marketing money is also a big upfront cost. The theatrical rental revenue usually comes back inside of a year after the film’s release, but home entertainment revenue can take several years to trickle in, and TV revenue years more.
 

Taking into account the time value of money, the IRR on Warners’ investment is probably in the range of 12 to 15 percent. And that’s before we count the studio’s overhead costs, which if amortized against the picture would probably reduce the Batman v Superman profits by another $30 or $40 million. But for the sake of argument let’s say that the merchandise revenue I’ve temporarily set aside makes up for that overhead cost, so the film’s final profit works out to $126 million. Pre-tax.
 

That’s only a fair-t0-middling return when lined up against comparable films, as illustrated in the table below (the profit estimates come largely from Mike Fleming Jr.’s excellent analyses in Deadline Hollywood). Assuming my estimates for Batman v Superman are in the right ballpark, then on an ROI basis the film appears to be only a modest success for Warner Bros."

"So here’s the challenge for Warner Bros going forward: If the studio can contain its production costs and talent participation expenses on future Justice League films, do a bit better in holding on to the domestic audience, and then gain back the interest of overseas moviegoers–especially themassive Chinese market–then they should do just fine financially going forward."

 

 

The last part is key. It is a financial success and just starting to win over fans.

[somebody85]

8 minutes ago, SWXII said:

 

The last part is key. It is a financial success and just starting to win over fans.

But where does it say it's a financial success in the last part?

That final paragraph is big IF not a sure fact thing. And these drops are showing that it's not winning over fans. The thing they are showing is a lot of people rushed out to see it from the hype and aren't coming back for repeat viewings. They aren't saying good things about it either.

"So here’s the challenge for Warner Bros going forward: If the studio can contain its production costs and talent participation expenses on future Justice League films, do a bit better in holding on to the domestic audience, and then gain back the interest of overseas moviegoers–especially the massive Chinese market–then they should do just fine financially going forward."

Those are opinions on if certain things happen, it does not mean it's the success they wanted at all. 

Edited April 10, 2016 by somebody85

[Fancyarcher]

1 hour ago, Blank Panther said:

The biggest mistake WB could make is choosing Hal Jordan over John Stewart for their new Green Lantern movie. Heck, the biggest mistake they've been making with this DCEU business is NOT banking on nostalgia. They have an opportunity Marvel doesn't with the love for B:TAS and the other DCAU shows. The fact that they're going with a solo Cyborg movie instead of a Teen Titans movie is incredibly stupid business-wise too. People in their teens and twenties loved these cartoons as kids, but they're completely avoiding evoking them in the films for who knows what reason.

 

Having John Stewart instead of Hal Jordan wouldn't have helped the GL film. That film was doomed by it's bad script. 

[SWXII]

1 minute ago, somebody85 said:

But where does it say it's a financial success in the last part?

That final paragraph is big IF not a sure fact thing. And these drops are showing that it's not winning over fans. The thing they are showing is a lot of people rushed out to see it from the hype and aren't coming back for repeat viewings. They aren't saying good things about it either.

"So here’s the challenge for Warner Bros going forward: If the studio can contain its production costs and talent participation expenses on future Justice League films, do a bit better in holding on to the domestic audience, and then gain back the interest of overseas moviegoers–especially the massive Chinese market–then they should do just fine financially going forward."

Those are opinions on if certain things happen, it does not mean it's the success they wanted at all. 

 

Any new reimagining of classic characters has a lot of risk. This seems to have run the gauntlet and survived. It will only gain strength now.

[somebody85]

25 minutes ago, CJohn said:

You know what are facts? BvS has toxic WOM, WB clearly wanted 1B and that the overall reception/box office after OW is a huge disappointment for them. 

 

This.

[cookie]

1 minute ago, Daniel Dylan Davis said:

 

Having John Stewart instead of Hal Jordan wouldn't have helped the GL film. That film was doomed by it's bad script. 

 

And bad directing, bad post work etc.

[Fancyarcher]

Just now, cookie said:

 

And bad directing, bad post work etc.

 

Honestly, GL was the first sign that WB didn't know what they heck they were doing. That film was a studio-made disaster through and through. 

[Nova]

I could have sworn this thread was locked not too long ago because people, myself included, kept arguing about profit and numbers. I left and came back and people are STILL arguing about profit and numbers. This thread is CRUMBLING. Like BvS box office run. 

[Ethan Hunt]

1 minute ago, Daniel Dylan Davis said:

 

Honestly, GL was the first sign that WB didn't know what they heck they were doing. That film was a studio-made disaster through and through. 

Pooey Green Lantern is a fun little movie

[washderice]

Anyone arguing that Warner bros is cool with the overall run for bvs is lying to themselves. The last 2 movies involving batman had no 3D and both hit a billion. So now u got him with superman AND Wonder Woman for the first time, and u may not hit even 900 million? Warner bros cannot be happy with that.

[Nova]

1 minute ago, Daniel Dylan Davis said:

 

Honestly, GL was the first sign that WB didn't know what they heck they were doing. That film was a studio-made disaster through and through. 

Honestly, the GL shouldn't have even been made. 

[SWXII]

Just now, Nova said:

I could have sworn this thread was locked not too long ago because people, myself included, kept arguing about profit and numbers. I left and came back and people are STILL arguing about profit and numbers. This thread is CRUMBLING. Like BvS box office run. 

 

This seems to be a discussion. My correct understanding challenging an incorrect consensus. Time is on my side.