Jump to content

MinaTakla

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

By MinaTakla, in Numbers and Data

Recommended Posts

Nova Global Phenomenon

Nova

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

That PTA seems pretty weak for Cafe Society.

Edit: nevermind. As others have noted, the PTA is off because of Deadline. No surprise there though. 

Edited by Nova
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


EmpireCity Blockbuster

EmpireCity

Posted
Posted
10 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. 

 

They need to walk away thinking about how to make mid-level hits ($130m+ domestic range) on a $50m budget like Central Intelligence and not Tarzan.  They need to think about how to make their upper mid-level hits ($170m+ domestic range) on a $100m budget instead of a $160m budget.  

 

Studios have let the budgets run a bit too wild.  No reason they  can't get them back under control as half the shit they use it on isn't really that necessary.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites




Nova Global Phenomenon

Nova

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, nilephelan said:

 

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.  

I think Fox should have handled this franchise. :ph34r:

 

On a serious note. I agree. When I saw the budget for the film, I thought why? Then again Ive thought that about a lot of blockbusters that were released this year. Its crazy to think that so many films could have been successful this summer, had their budgets just been brought down. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TalismanRing Global Phenomenon

TalismanRing

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, nilephelan said:

 

They need to walk away thinking about how to make mid-level hits ($130m+ domestic range) on a $50m budget like Central Intelligence and not Tarzan.  They need to think about how to make their upper mid-level hits ($170m+ domestic range) on a $100m budget instead of a $160m budget.  

 

Studios have let the budgets run a bit too wild.  No reason they  can't get them back under control as half the shit they use it on isn't really that necessary.  

 

The huge increase in avg marketing budgets is hurting them more than production budgets for mid scale and large films.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


EmpireCity Blockbuster

EmpireCity

Posted
Posted

Jason Bourne actually looks downright brilliant at this point.  $120m budget, likely $170m domestic, $500m+ overall total and should be more than enough to greenlight the next movie and give Damon/Greengrass a chance at improving from some of the poor reviews.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites




Nova Global Phenomenon

Nova

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, nilephelan said:

 

They need to walk away thinking about how to make mid-level hits ($130m+ domestic range) on a $50m budget like Central Intelligence and not Tarzan.  They need to think about how to make their upper mid-level hits ($170m+ domestic range) on a $100m budget instead of a $160m budget.  

 

Studios have let the budgets run a bit too wild.  No reason they  can't get them back under control as half the shit they use it on isn't really that necessary.  

Weird because I just commented pretty much this. And its how I've felt all summer long with a lot of the blockbusters. Of course anytime I asked why a studio would spend so much on a film, the general consensus on this forum was that its the norm and its how blockbusters are being made now a days. 

Edited by Nova
Link to comment
Share on other sites






EmpireCity Blockbuster

EmpireCity

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Nova said:

Weird because I just commented pretty much this. And its how I've felt all summer long with a lot of the blockbusters. 

 

I loved Star Trek, but they could have cut out that end sequence that had to have cost about $30m and nobody would have even cared.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Belakor Box Office Gold

Belakor

Posted
Posted
38 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.  

Ben-Hur is looking strong OS, would be funny if the total pass Ghosbuster´s OS BO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites








Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.

  I accept