Weekend topic: Split: $26.2m (Amazing drop!!!) | ADP: $18.3m | RE: $13.8m | HF: $14m | Gold $3.4m

[robertman2]

I want good movies. I don't care if it's made for 200 million or 'bout $3.50, just give me good movies

Edited January 29, 2017 by robertman2

[Alli]

I love big budget movies.  they are so fun to track at the BO. summer season is my fav

Edited January 29, 2017 by Alli

[TalismanRing]

6 minutes ago, Alli said:

but look at the budget.

 

these mid-level movies did great.....their final numbers are 4-5 multiple of their budget.  the same can't be said about the big budget movies.

 

Mid level movies still have sizable marketing budgets though.  The rising costs of marketing (along with the home theatre revenue dive)  is what makes smaller and mid budget films more risky than big budget films. 

 

Look at Live By Night - after tax rebates the film cost $65m but WB spent another $40m plus just on US TV ads, about what WB spent on Mad Max (budget around $175m).   Hidden Figures TV ad spend was $20-25m which puts it in line and even a bit above with what Disney paid for Civil War or Rogue One.

 

 

 

[Barnack]

8 minutes ago, Alli said:

but look at the budget.

 

these mid-level movies did great.....their final numbers are 4-5 multiple of their budget.  the same can't be said about the big budget movies.

 

Yes, but in recent year big budget double it at the box office at a much higher rate than smaller budget, they are still safer to do and clearly the most popular with the audience, none of those movie will come close to Star wars 8.

[TwoMisfits]

6 minutes ago, Spidey Freak said:

 

YES, WE WILL REJECT THE CORPORATE TYRANNY...

 

...until February 10, 2017 when we collectively become submissive to Mr. Grey, Lego Batman and the barrage that will follow for the rest of the year

 

Okay, I admit - my kids are making me see Lego Batman...and I am looking forward to it:)...but that's party due to a wildly different plot (at least from the previews) from the Lego Movie and a fantastically amusing take on one of my favorite comic characters, Robin!  

 

All the other Feb sequels will hit the dustbin for me, just like the Jan ones...and probably the March/April ones...I now really only see originals or spin-offs (or some supers/HP world movies) in theaters...I save the rest for video (and having just watched BvS on video, I can say that I am happy I never shelled out the money for that wild piece of cinematic garbage where enormous destruction based on stupid is set to crescendos of music - but don't get me started:)...

[WrathOfHan]

I'm really glad to see films like Split, La La Land, and Hidden Figures do well. Hollywood absolutely needs more mid and smaller budget films. Even if they aren't all hits, the special ones could definitely make a lot of money. Take Manchester by the Sea, for example. Despite its widest release being in 1,200 theaters, it's going to outgross movies starring Mark Wahlberg, Ben Affleck, and potentially Vin Diesel. Imagine if it got into 2,000+ theaters and had a good marketing budget; it might have grossed upwards of 70-80M! As we enter a period where every franchise wants to have an expanded universe for side characters, people want something different and exciting. Hell, I want something different and exciting.

 

I have nothing against big budget films, but the market is reaching a saturation point, and I'll just be blunt: the internet has ruined my perception on a lot of stuff. One year ago, I was really excited to see where the MCU was going, but now I just shrug at its future. I mean, I'll still catch every superhero film in theaters, but I honestly can't say that I'm excited. Personally, I'm looking for films that attempt something different. Everyone should want more films. As someone who admires film and thinks its the best form of art, Hollywood cannot dive down into a hole of big budget films. Everyone loses from saturation.

[Maxmoser3]

1 hour ago, Eevin said:

The fact that Hidden Figures is probably going to wind up in the same gross range as La La Land and Split ($140m-$150m) shouldn't go unnoticed. If people go to see films like these three, Hollywood is going to make more. 

And they're all actually original! 

[TalismanRing]

5 minutes ago, Maxmoser3 said:

And they're all actually original! 

 

Hidden Figures is adapted from a book (based on historical figures and events).    A lot of so called "original" films are.   

 

 

 

 

Edited January 29, 2017 by TalismanRing

[Barnack]

30 minutes ago, TwoMisfits said:

 

That's not quite a fair way to judge - you also need to do total costs vs revenue to see what the most profitable films were...as both a $ value and a %...I mean, Ghostbusters is #19 and we know that was a pretty large money loser...

 

Star Trek Beyond, another major money loser, comes in at #15...

It is not a good way to judge how profitable they are, for sure, but it is a good way to judge what audience go see and want and domestic audience wanted to see a Ghostbuster very much, more than pretty much any original live action movie last year, despite average marketing and reviews. That show how much the general audience is starving and asking for franchise.

Edited January 29, 2017 by Barnack

[Maxmoser3]

3 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

 

Hidden Figures is adapted from a book (based on historical figures and events).    A lot of so called "original" films are.   

 

 

 

 

damn. But it's doing fantastic numbers! 

[Maxmoser3]

January 2017 will make about $955 million. Down from last year. But considering how many films bombed this month, it's not bad. 

[trifle]

40 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

 

It's not a bomb so she won't be too singed but $300m WW is not why they paid her $20m and Pratt $12.5m an pushed the budget from a mid $30m film to a $100m+ event movie

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But given the reviews and the fact that the movie was only marketed on its stars, I think it is pretty clear to Sony that it's stars are the reason they will be making a profit rather than losing money on the movie.  That is what they paid the money for, to my mind, a kind of insurance, and it worked.  Obviously, every studio wants every film to break out, but when they are attacked as badly as this movie, they need something to be profitable at all, and what this original property movie had was its stars, not a franchise or built in audience of any other sort.

 

I loved La La Land and I am very happy Emma Stone is doing so well, personally. That is an entirely different thing.  Passengers was never going to be that sort of Oscar movie (although I think Production Design and score would actually be well deserved.)

Edited January 29, 2017 by trifle

[Jandrew]

8 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

 

Hidden Figures is adapted from a book (based on historical figures and events).    A lot of so called "original" films are.   

 

Still wasn't well know, the book or the true story. The book has taken off (no pun intended) after the movie's release. It's not in the same situation as say Hobbit or Cat in the Hat. Most audience members have gone in without a clue.

[Alli]

how much is Passengers expected to make in Japan? that's the only major market left to open.

 

in the end it will to a little better than Oblivion (thanks to the holyday legs) and that movie is considered a failure at the BO.

[trifle]

1 minute ago, Alli said:

how much is Passengers expected to make in Japan? that's the only major market left to open.

 

in the end it will to a little better than Oblivion (thanks to the holyday legs) and that movie is considered a failure at the BO.

 

Why is it so important to you that it be considered a failure?

[Alli]

4 minutes ago, trifle said:

 

Why is it so important to you that it be considered a failure?

because it was a crap movie

[trifle]

Just now, Alli said:

because it was a crap movie

 

Since you didn't see it, how can you be so sure?

[Alli]

Just now, trifle said:

 

Since you didn't see it, how can you be so sure?

who said i didn't see it?!

[Barnack]

12 minutes ago, Alli said:

how much is Passengers expected to make in Japan? that's the only major market left to open.

 

in the end it will to a little better than Oblivion (thanks to the holyday legs) and that movie is considered a failure at the BO.

 

Oblivion/Elysium are clear box office underperformer (failure), but were still profitable.

 

Elysium didn't miss Sony 300 million world wide box office target by that much and still made 20.45 million in profit, depending of Tom Cruise participation deal I imagine Oblivion did something really similar.

[Eevin]

In my humble opinion, if all people see are big-budget blockbusters, that's all Hollywood is going to make. When really good mid-budget films like The Nice Guys, Popstar, Edge of Seventeen, etc. bomb, it makes Hollywood that much less likely to make films like that. And vice versa with successful films like Hidden Figures, La La Land, and Split. And that's not shaming films that have massive budgets - I have Rogue One, Zootopia, and the Jungle Book all in my top 10 for the year - it just means that if all you see in theaters is the next Marvel clone, that's all you're going to get.