KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON | 10.20.2023 | Paramount | final gross: $68,026,901

[KeepItU25071906]

12 hours ago, Bob Train said:

Jordan Peele also.

Need to wait if Peele can get $100+ mln budget for his original movie after Nope. But it can be possible, of course.

[Eric the IF]

9 hours ago, Giorno said:

yes but if a movie like killers loses a lot of money than its gonna make the next movie of this type getting funding or something close even harder unless you have a megastar commercial director like nolan

Agreed. However, I am at the point where I've long since given up on these movies having a future. I know, deep down, that the movies I care about are a dying breed and there's nothing we can do to change that. The studios are run by people who ate art, and audiences are the least demanding they've ever been. As we near this end of an era, we just have to enjoy the little victories and recognize there was an audience at one point, even at a time when audiences were the most repulsed at real movies...I guess?

 

I dunno. I just know that if I say the truth and do the usual "cinema is dead", "audiences are undemanding", "nostalgic toy commercial" schtick, people will get mad at me and yell at me and hate that I dare be "doom and gloom" even though there's a bazillion reasons to be doom and gloom. Just trying to give a tiny bit of optimisim to placate others, even if, sadly, things are only going to get worse and worse and worse.

[Arlborn]

34 minutes ago, Eric MacNeil said:

The studios are run by people who ate art, and audiences are the least demanding they've ever been.

*gonna assume it is hate here, although eating here would oddly be fitting as well

 

That's one thing I'll never get over, putting people in charge of something they don't care about. Anytime I see this, in any area, my capitalist side dies a little bit more. It just shouldn't happen, but it does because money talks, and that just hurts.

 

 

Least demanding though? I don't know about that. Maybe? But wouldn't more demanding also apply here? More demanding of a quality cinematic experience that will make it worth it for them to spend the little extra money they have on it? It's getting expensive out there... But maybe demanding wouldn't be the right word here, more like selective? 

 

I just think streaming really hurt movies like that, people feel like they won't lose much by just watching them at home, and then they can save some much needed money that way.

 

I wonder, back when westerns seemingly dominated popular cinema, were people also saying the audiences weren't very demanding? Or was it never this bad?

 

 

[Eric the IF]

 

[titanic2187]

 

 

They are basically build their marketing campaign around Marty and understandably so because of the strike. I actually don't remember Marty was ever this into marketing push, perhaps since Gang of New York but that was mostly Oscar campaign orchestrated by Weinstein.  

[Spidey Freak]

17 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

 

 

Marty still showing how it's done at the age of 80 by being this respectful, accurate and inclusive of a people and their culture that he's portraying.  

[SpiderByte]

Yeesh, even with Wolf of Wall Street numbers itd be too much. I wonder how much of this is just Leo alone

[ThePhasmid]

How many people do you know are saying "I can't wait to watch this on Apple."? My 60+ year old father is a huge Scorsese fan. The prime age for it. He didn't even know about this Apple deal. I'm pretty sure Scorsese knows his demographic, and knows they'll show up when given the correct option.

Edited October 11, 2023 by ThePhasmid

[SpiderByte]

I don't think the Apple+ thing is going to be a factor. It's not day and date and, well, Apple has a much smaller subscriber base than say Netflix anyways. Apple famously has been willing to spend big on not too much return but that does add up eventually.

[Curiouser and Curiouser]

1 hour ago, SpiderByte said:

Yeesh, even with Wolf of Wall Street numbers itd be too much. I wonder how much of this is just Leo alone

They know it’s not going to recoup theatrically that’s not the point. 

[SpiderByte]

49 minutes ago, Curiouser and Curiouser said:

They know it’s not going to recoup theatrically that’s not the point. 

Yes but this is a box office thread so it's relevant to the discussion of the box office 

[Bobzaruni]

Trying to analyse this from a P/L perspective is useless, Apple is leveraging Marty, Leo, De Niro, Gladstone and the film in general for legitimacy in film similar (but not to the same extent) to Netflix with the Irishman

The real interesting thing of the Box Office stuff with KOTFM is how big of an appetite there is for this kind of film since Oppenheimer already made some head way in that direction (albeit with a more digestible film)

Edited October 11, 2023 by Bobzaruni

[Curiouser and Curiouser]

1 hour ago, Bobzaruni said:

Trying to analyse this from a P/L perspective is useless, Apple is leveraging Marty, Leo, De Niro, Gladstone and the film in general for legitimacy in film similar (but not to the same extent) to Netflix with the Irishman

The real interesting thing of the Box Office stuff with KOTFM is how big of an appetite there is for this kind of film since Oppenheimer already made some head way in that direction (albeit with a more digestible film)

Exactly. I don’t get the insistence its budget matters. The budget could be as high as 250 million can we not pretend Apple thinks it is going to recoup theatrically? 

[Curiouser and Curiouser]

I’m wondering why the China release was supposedly scrapped. 

[Eric the IF]

3 minutes ago, Curiouser and Curiouser said:

I’m wondering why the China release was supposedly scrapped. 

Scorsese is banned in China.

[Bob Train]

6 minutes ago, Eric Feels 22 said:

Scorsese is banned in China.

It passed censorship. It's just that Apple canceled the release of it in China due to "adjustments in the international release strategy".

[Eric the IF]

2 minutes ago, Bob Train said:

It passed censorship. It's just that Apple canceled the release of it in China due to "adjustments in the international release strategy".

Really? Huh. I thought after Kundun that Scorsese movies were a no-no.

[Bob Train]

Just now, Eric Feels 22 said:

Really? Huh. I thought after Kundun that Scorsese movies were a no-no.

I don't think that was a hard and fast rule. Perhaps that is just the reason they gave for banning it, whereas in reality it was not. See how Simu Liu was supposedly banned in China, but Barbie was released with no issue, and the Kang Dynasty probably will too.

 

And No Way Home was supposedly banned for having the Statue of Liberty, but many other movies that show it were released with no issue.

[Jsmitty]

On 10/11/2023 at 12:18 PM, SpiderByte said:

I don't think the Apple+ thing is going to be a factor. It's not day and date and, well, Apple has a much smaller subscriber base than say Netflix anyways. Apple famously has been willing to spend big on not too much return but that does add up eventually.

Do we have any idea regarding the theatrical exclusivity window before shifting to Apple TV? 60 days+?

[TheDude391]

https://www.boxofficepro.com/long-range-box-office-forecast-marvel-studios-the-marvels/

 

Estimates rose 11% from last time.

 

OW: $33-42

DOM: $110-156