Star Trek Beyond and Ghostbusters box office: What Went Wrong

[kowhite]

3 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

that tweet is about the tv show fyi.

 

Well, Winona is seeing some great success on "TV" so...

 

Still, I liked my idea better.

[somebody85]

"Both are being guided by Reitman, who firmly is back in charge of theGhostbusters empire via Ghost Corps., a subsidiary with a mandate to expand the brand across platforms. (It was former Sony film chief Amy Pascal who first embraced Feig's vision for the live-action reboot, not Reitman or Rothman.)"

It should have never left his hands. The Sony emails show it clearly did. So I imagine fans of the original would be happy to hear this.

[trifle]

33 minutes ago, trifle said:

More signs that Star Trek IV is still on:

 

 

 

 

19 minutes ago, kowhite said:

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?

 

19 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

that tweet is about the tv show fyi.

 

 

Sigh.  Didn't know that.  I thought that might be the name of Star Trek IV.  Sorry.

 

My thought was that the Enterprise went through a worm hole into the alternate galaxy for something they needed that wasn't going to exist in their time line because the time line had changed (or whatever reason that means they need to go back.)  So a lot of alternate time line people could be there.

Edited August 11, 2016 by trifle

[kowhite]

Well, if too many parents showed up...

 

Lets be real, we don't want to watch Star Trek: The PTA meeting

[superweirdo87]

Chris Liberge and THR thought somewhere in the 400M range.

[kowhite]

Ok, I will ask this...who on this movie is a gross player?  Nobody except JJ would get a deal like that.  Ok, MAYBE Justin Lin if Paramount is crazy.  And JJ is only producing.

 

Hollywood, gross deals are the past.  Who am I kidding, they know that.

Edited August 11, 2016 by kowhite

[grim22]

15 minutes ago, kowhite said:

Ok, I will ask this...who on this movie is a gross player?  Nobody except JJ would get a deal like that.  Ok, MAYBE Justin Lin if Paramount is crazy.  And JJ is only producing.

 

Hollywood, gross deals are the past.  Who am I kidding, they know that.

 

Maybe the Roddenberry estate? JJ is almost guaranteed but I don't think anyone else might be. If Pine or Quinto got a deal like that, it would probably be really miniscule compared to what Vin Diesel probably makes on F&F.

[kowhite]

1 minute ago, grim22 said:

 

Maybe the Roddenberry estate? JJ is almost guaranteed but I don't think anyone else might be. If Pine or Quinto got a deal like that, it would probably be really miniscule compared to what Vin Diesel probably makes on F&F.

 

Vin is making cash like a fucking king of F&F.  No doubt.  Also no doubt,..JJ made more on Star Wars.

 

Roddenberry?  No way they're a gross player.  Ok, maybe some way, but probably not even a point if they are.

[superweirdo87]

19 minutes ago, kowhite said:

Ok, I will ask this...who on this movie is a gross player?  Nobody except JJ would get a deal like that.  Ok, MAYBE Justin Lin if Paramount is crazy.  And JJ is only producing.

 

Hollywood, gross deals are the past.  Who am I kidding, they know that.

 

That convo is about Ghostbusters...sorry for lack of clarifications.

[grim22]

2 minutes ago, kowhite said:

 

Vin is making cash like a fucking king of F&F.  No doubt.  Also no doubt,..JJ made more on Star Wars.

 

Roddenberry?  No way they're a gross player.  Ok, maybe some way, but probably not even a point if they are.

 

Looks like the tweet was talking about Ghostbusters. I can see plenty of people potentially being gross players on that movie for sure. Starting with Ghostcorps, Aykroyd, maybe Feig and McCarthy as well. That property does look like it could have the pie divided many many ways.

[jimisawesome]

24 minutes ago, kowhite said:

Well, if too many parents showed up...

 

Lets be real, we don't want to watch Star Trek: The PTA meeting

 

You are missing out on the new Star Trek/Bad Mom shared universe then. 

[kowhite]

3 minutes ago, grim22 said:

 

Looks like the tweet was talking about Ghostbusters. I can see plenty of people potentially being gross players on that movie for sure. Starting with Ghostcorps, Aykroyd, maybe Feig and McCarthy as well.

 

No fucking way.  Gross plays are only reserved for the old guard.

 

If you're recent...you ain't getting that deal.  Ok admittedly I don't know that for sure...but if they are...your deal makers are dropping the fucking ball.  Feig and McCarthy?  Aykroyd?  There's a Hollywood deal now that pays these guys but protects these companies.  Gross deals are dumb.  I bet nobody on Ghostbusters got a gross deal.

Edited August 11, 2016 by kowhite

[kowhite]

3 minutes ago, jimisawesome said:

 

You are missing out on the new Star Trek/Bad Mom shared universe then. 

 

Mila Kunis does sound like a Vulcan name.

[Jonwo]

CBS must get a cut of the Star Trek film profits since they own the franchise, Paramount only has the movie rights. 

[grim22]

8 minutes ago, kowhite said:

 

No fucking way.  Gross plays are only reserved for the old guard.

 

If you're recent...you ain't getting that deal.  Ok admittedly I don't know that for sure...but if they are...your deal makers are dropping the fucking ball.  Feig and McCarthy?  Aykroyd?  There's a Hollywood deal now that pays these guys but protects these companies.  Gross deals are dumb.  I bet nobody on Ghostbusters got a gross deal.

 

Looks like Feig and McCarthy got a big payday on this movie

 

Quote

The Ghostbusters price tag when greenlit by Pascal was a hefty $169 million, with rich deals for talent, including $14 million for Melissa McCarthy and north of $10 million for Feig. Rothman couldn't do anything about those fees, but sources say Feig made tweaks to the script to reduce the cost to $154 million — just a few million above Rothman's target of $150 million.

 

Just judging by the fact that roughly 25M went to one actor and the director, and bringing people back for a sequel means the salaries will definitely go up, I would venture to say the basic starting budget point for a sequel i.e. just to bring everyone back might hit 50M or so once the director, the 4 Ghostbusters and Hemsworth are paid. There is almost no way they can deliver a sequel for much cheaper than the first movie just thanks to lead actor salaries.

 

I guess the thinking was that McCarthy had enough star power to make the movie blow up big domestically and the concept would travel well overseas - probably.

 

I don't know how much they paid Murray to show up for a day's worth of filming, but he couldn't have come too cheap judging by his answers in the AMA

 

Quote

Well, how about Garfield? Can you explain that to me? Did you just do it for the dough?
No! I didn't make that for the dough! Well, not completely. I thought it would be kind of fun, because doing a voice is challenging, and I'd never done that. Plus, I looked at the script, and it said, "So-and-so and Joel Coen." And I thought: Christ, well, I love those Coens! They're funny. So I sorta read a few pages of it and thought, Yeah, I'd like to do that. I had these agents at the time, and I said, "What do they give you to do one of these things?" And they said, "Oh, they give you $50,000." So I said, "Okay, well, I don't even leave the fuckin' driveway for that kind of money."

 

[filmlover]

11 minutes ago, jimisawesome said:

 

You are missing out on the new Star Trek/Bad Mom shared universe then. 

That would be pretty badass not gonna lie (I'd do anything to watch the Kathryn Hahn character in Bad Moms be a part of the Star Trek universe ).

[kowhite]

Well, that didn't work.  I don't doubt the upfronts.

 

But often...upfronts are traded for backend.  

 

Still not seeing a gross deal.  And that upfront is going to be against that whatever deal more than likely so...yeah, no backend.

[Jonwo]

11 hours ago, superweirdo87 said:

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.

 

Pretty much all the New Line films released this summer have been profitable both domestically and overseas. Their films are just as important to Warner Bros as the other franchises.

[Jandrew]

Everyones talking about trailers...theres much more to marketing than trailers. In my opninon, the whole marketing campaigns for both weren't good. That, and the casual audience is quickly fading.

 

Not just these two movies though. Something has to explain all these drastic sequel drops, and the sudden dissaparence of the $150-300 range. 

[superweirdo87]

Not totally sudden jandrew, Ben Fritz discussed how the # of movies making between 100M and 350M shrank from 2014 to 2015.