Jump to content

grim22

Star Trek Beyond and Ghostbusters box office: What Went Wrong

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, grim22 said:

 

Won't be the first PStew franchise recast with young actors.

 

If you are going for GA PStew is irrelevant. GA couldn't care less about PStew, imho.  It needs to be sold like a regular movie.

Edited by trifle
Link to comment
Share on other sites





6 minutes ago, superweirdo87 said:

I think they may care about Patrick Stewart when he plays Professor X, but we might get a sense for sure, with "The Wolverine." The Star Trek movies with Stewart did not do as well as STID or ST 09. Maybe it will be different now with nostalgia.

 

Agreed.  I think it's a miracle that X-Men: Apoc did as well as it did worldwide.  But I think the 2017 Wolverine has a chance of beating it (though not DOFP), just with Jackman and Stewart, and it being Jackman's last (supposedly). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Star Trek just proved making a solid flick isn't enough.  Ghostbusters proves that no matter what, if you're spending this much...if the international appeal isn't there, you're shit out of luck.  The domestic on this isn't great, but it's not what's killing that movie.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites





Lol at Sony saying that the movie needs 300 million to break even.

 

If it has a budget of 144 million + 100 million for P&A ( meaning a production budget of 244 million ), then how the hell do they get to 300 million to break even? Their damage control is pathetic. This movie needs at least 500 million to break even. Even the director himself said that.

 

Given the fact that they don't even keep all the money this movie is making, I fail to see how 300 million is a magic number, lol. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's really too bad. Star Trek made a good movie. There are strong incentives for studios to put a lot into tentpoles. But, James Wan's Conjuring 2 is going to make a really good profit. Central Intelligence and Me Before You were solid too. With some of these movies having such high costs and being put in a position where they have to gross a lot or fall short, hopefully Hollywood can calm down a bit on tentpole craze and pursue other very profitable opportunities.

Edited by superweirdo87
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



25 minutes ago, filmlover said:

If this is true then Star Trek is certain to be a loss as well.

 

From the HR article it says the studio had $300m as "break even" for GB

 

ST is more expensive but it should do far better WW.  They both have several big territories left but ST has more including China and South America.

 

Star Trek films also not only usually do very well in ancillary but they help sell all the other films and TV series as well. 

 

Comparatively,  Alice2 is now at $290m WW so it might lose less than GB even with $25m higher budget.  TMNT2 might also fail to hit $250m ww.

 

 

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



22 minutes ago, Blaze Heatnix said:

Lol at Sony saying that the movie needs 300 million to break even.

 

If it has a budget of 144 million + 100 million for P&A ( meaning a production budget of 244 million ), then how the hell do they get to 300 million to break even? Their damage control is pathetic. This movie needs at least 500 million to break even. Even the director himself said that.

 

Given the fact that they don't even keep all the money this movie is making, I fail to see how 300 million is a magic number, lol. 

 

Why 500M, Blaze? Ancillary revenues enter the picture. 500M was to be seen as a success

 

244 production, p&a

30 home entertainment costs

35-45 interest, residuals, and off the tops

------------------------------------------------

310

 

Deadline estimates that San Andreas made 400M in revenues with a 473M WW gross. Ghostbusters also has merchandise. 

Edited by superweirdo87
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Blaze Heatnix said:

Lol at Sony saying that the movie needs 300 million to break even.

 

If it has a budget of 144 million + 100 million for P&A ( meaning a production budget of 244 million ), then how the hell do they get to 300 million to break even? Their damage control is pathetic. This movie needs at least 500 million to break even. Even the director himself said that.

 

Given the fact that they don't even keep all the money this movie is making, I fail to see how 300 million is a magic number, lol. 

 

He didn't say it needed $500m to break even, he said it needed that to be a success on the level that it would get more films like it made with older female leads

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



8 hours ago, Blaze Heatnix said:

Lol at Sony saying that the movie needs 300 million to break even.

 

If it has a budget of 144 million + 100 million for P&A ( meaning a production budget of 244 million ), then how the hell do they get to 300 million to break even? Their damage control is pathetic. This movie needs at least 500 million to break even. Even the director himself said that.

 

Given the fact that they don't even keep all the money this movie is making, I fail to see how 300 million is a magic number, lol. 

 

300m seems light, but it ain't 500m.  It's probably somewhere in the 400m range though.  Well, unless they actually did only spend 100m on P&A.  Then slightly less.  But 300m, a bit low.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



8 hours ago, Blaze Heatnix said:

Lol at Sony saying that the movie needs 300 million to break even.

 

If it has a budget of 144 million + 100 million for P&A ( meaning a production budget of 244 million ), then how the hell do they get to 300 million to break even? Their damage control is pathetic. This movie needs at least 500 million to break even. Even the director himself said that.

 

Given the fact that they don't even keep all the money this movie is making, I fail to see how 300 million is a magic number, lol. 

Because studios don't only get half of a film's gross. Excluding factors such as China (which I mean in GB's case...) they get more than half. So you can take into account the marketing costs to some degree as taking off some of the film's revenue for the studio until you're roughly at a number of "just over twice the production budget (granted as long as a decent portion of that comes from domestic numbers)" is a break even point. 

 

Because se if you want to look at it that way, CA First Avenger, Batman Begins etc weren't hits either. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



52 minutes ago, DAJK said:

Because studios don't only get half of a film's gross. Excluding factors such as China (which I mean in GB's case...) they get more than half. So you can take into account the marketing costs to some degree as taking off some of the film's revenue for the studio until you're roughly at a number of "just over twice the production budget (granted as long as a decent portion of that comes from domestic numbers)" is a break even point. 

 

Because se if you want to look at it that way, CA First Avenger, Batman Begins etc weren't hits either. 

 

Well, worldwide...they don't really get half of the box office...a bit less.  Something like GB is heavily domestic so, maybe, maybe it's slightly over half.  They do make a lot more money off other revenue streams though.  It's a bit silly when people judge break even on box office alone.  It's like explaining your annual salary and only counting the first 6 months.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites





Just make it Paramount.  At least you're not coming off a poor response.

 

And Winona?  Ok, at some point time traveling parents need to stop.  Maybe a scene where Chris Pine and Winona start making out and Kirk and Spock both share a really uncomfortable moment?  

 

Ok, that's a terrible idea.  Yet...it's kinda awesome?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites







Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • 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.