Weekend Thread | Bourne 60M, Trek 24M, Bad Moms 23.4M, Pets 18.2M

[KGator]

9 hours ago, Goffe said:

and Apocalypse was basically that, very colorful and fun-filled*, a film that checked throughout almost every long time fan demand.

 

Apocalypse was hardly fun filled.  Outside of Quicksilver it was dark and serious with the same rehashed and familiar plot that made the movie entirely too forgettable.  X-Men films have always taken themselves very seriously outside of Deadpool.  Only the occasion a quip from Wolverine or the Quicksilver character ever added any consistent levity.  Some people like it that way but others don't.  I've always found marvel movies to take themselves much more lightly in general and I think that is part of their success.

[Bishop54]

Jason Bourne, set phasers to slay!!! 

[Krissykins]

Does anyone remember when BOM used to include estimated P&A? It was listed just under budget. 

 

[Goffe]

EDIT: won't start another superhero discussion here.

Edited July 30, 2016 by Goffe

[EmpireCity]

When talking about Ghostbusters all I am talking about is the numbers, and it is without question that Sony itself views Ghostbusters as pretty much a disaster at this point.  It is likely not going to hit 2x the budget and the merchandise didn't sell anywhere close to what they hoped.  

 

It is a shame as the movie isn't bad, but it simply cost too much and the marketing was awful.  They made a strategic decision to play up the controversy hoping it would help sell the movie domestically and it never helped.  Then you add in the miscalculation of how it would perform overseas and it all adds up to Sony losing a lot  of money on this and killing the franchise.  

[CJohn]

1 minute ago, nilephelan said:

When talking about Ghostbusters all I am talking about is the numbers, and it is without question that Sony itself views Ghostbusters as pretty much a disaster at this point.  It is likely not going to hit 2x the budget and the merchandise didn't sell anywhere close to what they hoped.  

 

It is a shame as the movie isn't bad, but it simply cost too much and the marketing was awful.  They made a strategic decision to play up the controversy hoping it would help sell the movie domestically and it never helped.  Then you add in the miscalculation of how it would perform overseas and it all adds up to Sony losing a lot  of money on this and killing the franchise.  

It was always doomed OS since besides Hems all the other leads are unknown OS. 

[Nova]

2 minutes ago, nilephelan said:

When talking about Ghostbusters all I am talking about is the numbers, and it is without question that Sony itself views Ghostbusters as pretty much a disaster at this point.  It is likely not going to hit 2x the budget and the merchandise didn't sell anywhere close to what they hoped.  

 

It is a shame as the movie isn't bad, but it simply cost too much and the marketing was awful.  They made a strategic decision to play up the controversy hoping it would help sell the movie domestically and it never helped.  Then you add in the miscalculation of how it would perform overseas and it all adds up to Sony losing a lot  of money on this and killing the franchise.  

Pretty much how I have taken the Ghostbusters numbers. The movie cost too much and then the marketing wasn't good at all. If not for the reviews my butt wouldn't have gone to watch it and after watching it, I enjoyed it. It had its flaws but it's not a bad film. Unfortunately for Sony their marketing team was MIA doing god knows what while one of their blockbusters was getting ready to hit theaters. 

[Ethan Hunt]

2 minutes ago, BKB IS CAPTAIN AMERICA said:

Damn.. Look at Jason Bourne kicking box office ass.. Not bad for lackluster marketing...

YOU KNOW HIS NAME (NOW GO SEE THE MOVIE)

[a2k]

Haven't seen GHOSTB but where could they spend 144m?

On the vfx, the cast salaries, or was it false starts during production?

[EmpireCity]

I think studios also need to learn a lesson this summer to start allowing some early reviews when they have a winner or at least a decent movie.  There are 4 instances where keeping the embargo until so late in the process hurt the film.  

 

Star Trek Beyond had bad marketing that made everyone think the film was going to be terrible, but when they finally showed it to people and realized it was really good, it was too late.  They should have been getting the word out in June that they had a good movie and let the WOM build.  Ghostbusters is the same way.  They let the negative bullshit be the narrative and only when it was a few days before the release did they let anyone know the film was actually pretty good.  

 

Same thing with Bad Moms.  I think STX could have pushed the opening even higher if they would have let the decent reviews and WOM spread longer than 48 hours before release.  Even Bourne could have benefited more from the release of a few select reviews as older audiences tend to gravitate towards that.  

[Nova]

1 minute ago, a2knet said:

Haven't seen GHOSTB but where could they spend 144m?

On the vfx, the cast salaries, or was it false starts during production?

Well apparently McCarthy got paid $14M to do it and Feig got $10M so thats $24M right there. Im guessing they spent over $30M in cast salaries alone based on those two numbers. Thats why Ive stated if they were ever going to make a sequel the first thing to get slashed from the budget would be the cast salaries. 

 I only saw it in regular 2D so someone who saw it in IMAX can really tell you about the effects but with the format that I watched it in, its effects weren't all that great. Honestly I have no idea where the $144M was spent in that regard. But again maybe someone who watched it in IMAX like @Tele Loves Bay & Twilightcan better explain whether thats where the money went or not. 

[Nova]

I think studios are going to walk away from this summer thinking: lets just make a ton of low budget horror films. 

[Nova]

8 hours ago, TLK said:

 

How is Cafe Society going to make $2.1 million from $321k Friday ? One of those numbers is wrong. Good for Bourne though. I was expecting a sub-$50 million opening.

In case you were wondering. Deadline decided to fix their mistake. 

 

11). Cafe Society (LG/AMZ), 565 theaters (+515) / $650K Fri. / 3-day cume: $2.3M / Per screen average: $2,330K / Total cume: $4M / Wk 3

[EmpireCity]

3 minutes ago, Nova said:

Well apparently McCarthy got paid $14M to do it and Feig got $10M so thats $24M right there. Im guessing they spent over $30M in cast salaries alone based on those two numbers. Thats why Ive stated if they were ever going to make a sequel the first thing to get slashed from the budget would be the cast salaries. 

 I only saw it in regular 2D so someone who saw it in IMAX can really tell you about the effects but with the format that I watched it in, its effects weren't all that great. Honestly I have no idea where the $144M was spent in that regard. But again maybe someone who watched it in IMAX like @Tele Loves Bay & Twilightcan better explain whether thats where the money went or not. 

 

Sony painted themselves into a corner from the start on this movie.  They decided to go all female cast, and that is great, but also comes with unintended consequences.  One of them is budget, and if you announce a big budget franchise reboot starring an all female cast, then you can't short the budget or you will be looked at bad.  If the men centric big budget action gets $140m budget, then you can't do this and not give it to the females.  

 

The reality is they should have gone with roughly a $80m - $90m budget on this and let Fieg do his thing.  He made Spy look great on a $65m budget and could have done the same on Ghostbusters with a $90m budget.  Even if they would have had a mixed cast or all males or the originals coming back, the budget still didn't make sense at $144m.  It is a 30 year old franchise that had limited potential.  

 

Sony though is not the studio to try and pull these things off as they found a way to fuck up 3 straight Spiderman films.  

[WrathOfHan]

That PTA seems pretty weak for Cafe Society.

[robertman2]

I'm convinced that Sony Pictures is run by complete idiots

[POTUS 2020]

11 minutes ago, Nova said:

I think studios are going to walk away from this summer thinking: lets just make a ton of low budget horror films. 

As bad as this year sounds its still up over last year w/o a $600m movie in june and a $350m in January. Its just too many franchises and its the new stuff that's thriving, Zoo DB TJB SS etc

Edited July 30, 2016 by No Prisoners

[filmlover]

2 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

That PTA seems pretty weak for Cafe Society.

It's actually better than the typical Allen movie these days. Midnight in Paris and Blue Jasmine were just anomalies.

[TalismanRing]

9 minutes ago, Nova said:

In case you were wondering. Deadline decided to fix their mistake. 

 

11). Cafe Society (LG/AMZ), 565 theaters (+515) / $650K Fri. / 3-day cume: $2.3M / Per screen average: $2,330K / Total cume: $4M / Wk 3

 

Still didn't fix their PTA

[POTUS 2020]

9 minutes ago, Nova said:

In case you were wondering. Deadline decided to fix their mistake. 

 

11). Cafe Society (LG/AMZ), 565 theaters (+515) / $650K Fri. / 3-day cume: $2.3M / Per screen average: $2,330K / Total cume: $4M / Wk 3

Per screen is still off