Jump to content
kayumanggi

WONDER WOMAN 1984 | Aug 14 2020 | Diana will save us all!

Recommended Posts

 

Damn, I really thought that was a swimming pool and she was about to disrobe and slip in. :blush:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holly shit... Ryan reynolds is getting 27M for that Netflix movie??????????!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, AndyK said:

IMO she deserves a good back deal on top of that. She's worth more than 3x that. Without her that film easily could have been nowhere near as good. 

Edited by cdsacken
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Alli said:

Holly shit... Ryan reynolds is getting 27M for that Netflix movie??????????!!!!!

As they say in the editorial, Netflix is a fixed amount, there is no potential for backend deals.

 

But yeah, $27m is still an eye watering amount, especially for a biz that has still yet to turn a profit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Martin Lawrence $7m? $8m for Idris Elba? What? And $7m for Kristen Stewart...wtf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, AndyK said:

As they say in the editorial, Netflix is a fixed amount, there is no potential for backend deals.

 

But yeah, $27m is still an eye watering amount, especially for a biz that has still yet to turn a profit.

Not sure it ever will. Amazon, Apple and Disney never need to make a profit ever from streaming. Netflix eventually does or they are in big trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gal Gadot deserves more than $10m. Woman should be asking for $20m + backend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WW was a star making performance for Gal. She definitely deserves more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Alli said:

WW was a star making performance for Gal. She definitely deserves more.

Wouldn't be suprised if her production credit earns her more than the acting one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TMP said:

If the "female superhero novelty" is why the first one did so well, and not the movie itself, shouldn't it have had a bigger opening and stubbier legs?

I don’t think its target audience was the type to rush out and see a movie on OW. I think it caught on as a novelty and became an event, and that’s where the strong legs came from. You can see the difference in results between WW and JL. The hardcore superhero fans and DC fans were there for JL. The difference was the added audience because of the novelty factor.

 

I think WW84 will have a bigger OW, but worse legs. I could see it grossing $375-$380M domestically, which will make it a massive success. But, I don’t think it’ll surpass WW and I don’t think everyone who went for the novelty factor of the first will view it as “their franchise” and continue to see it in theaters. I think it’ll mostly be the crowd who likes superhero movies that will see this movie.

Edited by Walt Disney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Walt Disney said:

I don’t think its target audience was the type to rush out and see a movie on OW. I think it caught on as a novelty and became an event, and that’s where the strong legs came from. You can see the difference in results between WW and JL. The hardcore superhero fans and DC fans were there for JL. The difference was the added audience because of the novelty factor.

 

I think WW84 will have a bigger OW, but worse legs. I could see it grossing $375-$380M domestically, which will make it a massive success. But, I don’t think it’ll surpass WW and I don’t think everyone who went for the novelty factor of the first will view it as “their franchise” and continue to see it in theaters. I think it’ll mostly be the crowd who likes superhero movies that will see this movie.

Seems a bit narrow-minded to assume that women wouldn't view this as "their franchise" anymore, as you put it, while men can see every single super-hero sequel and often see them increase in box-office takes from its predecessor. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TMP said:

Seems a bit narrow-minded to assume that women wouldn't view this as "their franchise" anymore, as you put it, while men can see every single super-hero sequel and often see them increase in box-office takes from its predecessor. 

I think it’s “narrow-minded” to view superhero fans as only men or to view all men as superhero fans. WW appealed to women, but there were already female fans of those films. It  just broke out to the female GA.  It’s similar to BP, which appealed to people who normally would never watch a superhero movie.

Edited by Walt Disney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this movie is great I could definitely see $1 billion+ worldwide. It has a great release date and not much competition until like Top Gun on the 26th. 

 

My prediction: 

Opening Weekend: $145 million

Domestic: $435 million

Overseas: $580 million 

Worldwide: $1.015 billion 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Godzilla said:

If this movie is great I could definitely see $1 billion+ worldwide. It has a great release date and not much competition until like Top Gun on the 26th. 

 

My prediction: 

Opening Weekend: $145 million

Domestic: $435 million

Overseas: $580 million 

Worldwide: $1.015 billion 

I really think OW could rise to something like 200M.

 

I just can't fathom it goes under Captain Marvel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Noctis said:

Gal Gadot deserves more than $10m. Woman should be asking for $20m + backend.

And she would not get it. You are talking Tom Cruise in MI3 territory, where Cruise got such a lucrative deal that it cut deeply into Paramount's take, and Paramount ended making only a minor profit on MI3,whereas Cruuise made out like a bandit. Has not happened since.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dudalb said:

And she would not get it. You are talking Tom Cruise in MI3 territory, where Cruise got such a lucrative deal that it cut deeply into Paramount's take, and Paramount ended making only a minor profit on MI3,whereas Cruuise made out like a bandit. Has not happened since.

umm  Wonder Woman actually made money and the next one will make at least as much as WW1. Gal deserves a 20M paycheck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, dudalb said:

And she would not get it. You are talking Tom Cruise in MI3 territory, where Cruise got such a lucrative deal that it cut deeply into Paramount's take, and Paramount ended making only a minor profit on MI3,whereas Cruuise made out like a bandit. Has not happened since.

20M + backend happened very often since MI3.

 

Jolie / Smith / Denzel etc... made it many time.

 

MI3 was special because Cruise got a rumored 20m + 30% first dollar gross of the box office and 12% of the home video gross (with 100% accounting, no off the top or of the old count only 20% of the sales like the VHS days). Quite far from the classic 20m + 10% stars got for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
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.