Jump to content
kayumanggi

Wonder Woman 1984 | Dec 16 2020 OS | Dec 25 2020 US and on HBO MAX

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, Jamiem said:

India had 10x or more internet users

Indians who know English would be around 200mn range, not entire country know English.

Share this post


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

Indians who know English would be around 200mn range, not entire country know English.

That’s fair but that’s still close to 10x the population of Australia of roughly  25m. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don’t think piracy for films in Australia will have any more or less of an impact on WW84 then  it did on Aquaman, Endgame or Star Wars. 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Saul Goodman said:

This basically seems like a write off at this point.

That doesn't make sense as no matter how terrible the actual quality of the movie, the OW would have been massive based on the goodwill and popularity of the first film alone (whenever things went back to normal). Even mediocre legs would have ensured profitability at the BO.

Edited by Spidey Freak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Jamiem said:

Foxtel is hoping to curb piracy of “GoT” by offering a discounted Foxtel Play subscription; however, if episode one is of any indication, it’s not exactly working. 
 

Foxtel will be fighting the “Game of Thrones” battle on multiple fronts, with not only pirates a concern, but also HBO’s Now streaming service. While Now isn’t officially available in Australia, it’s not hard to use a DNS or VPN service to get around it. 

GOT being so massive for HBO despite rampant piracy is probably one of the factors that made this decision easier for AT&T. They chose to ensure IP awareness reaches a much bigger audience during the peak of release season than the profitability of a single installment of said IP. Some people not paying for the actual content does not matter in the long run if they are financially supporting it in ancillary ways like purchasing merchandise and spreading strong WOM.

Edited by Spidey Freak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Spidey Freak said:

That doesn't make sense as no matter how terrible the actual quality of the movie, the OW would have been massive based on the goodwill and popularity of the first film alone (whenever things went back to normal). Even mediocre legs would have ensured profitability at the BO.

This decision has zero to do with the quality of the movie, it's entirely because it has turned into a write-off at this point (same problem that befell Tenet by the time it opened as well). The marketing blitz began earlier this year before the pandemic with billboards and everything while various merchandise/licensing tie-ins have been released throughout the year as the release date continued to be pushed back (COVID has completely messed up licensing deals in general). It's all lost money at this point, so might as well just take the L and call it a day.

Edited by filmlover
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, filmlover said:

This decision has zero to do with the quality of the movie, it's entirely because it has turned into a write-off at this point (same problem that befell Tenet by the time it opened as well). The marketing blitz began earlier this year before the pandemic with billboards and everything while various merchandise/licensing tie-ins have been released throughout the year as the release date continued to be pushed back (COVID has completely messed up licensing deals in general). It's all lost money at this point, so might as well just take the L and call it a day.

Licensing losses would have given all the more incentive to hold out for recovery via a theatrical release. It's not unusual for licensed products to hit markets months before the movie release, even if the time frame was extended longer than previously this year. Also, the official communication being released from Jenkins saying just a few weeks back that the probability of a Christmas release was reducing to the studio putting out ads with "Releasing exclusively in theatres" just a few days before this news hit doesn't really point to a predetermined decision. It's primarily a Hail Mary for HBO Max as being reported.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Spidey Freak said:

Licensing losses would have given all the more incentive to hold out for recovery via a theatrical release.

Not when they've already lost a ton of money for multiple marketing campaigns (first from earlier this year, second from later in the year when WB was optimistic about the box office chances for this and Tenet, the actual release of the latter ending up a costly mistake) that ended up going down the drain as well. It's too bad they didn't decide to wait any longer for this to have a chance at making theatrical money, but it's easy to see why they gave up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Spidey Freak said:

Licensing losses would have given all the more incentive to hold out for recovery via a theatrical release. It's not unusual for licensed products to hit markets months before the movie release, even if the time frame was extended longer than previously this year. Also, the official communication being released from Jenkins saying just a few weeks back that the probability of a Christmas release was reducing to the studio putting out ads with "Releasing exclusively in theatres" just a few days before this news hit doesn't really point to a predetermined decision. It's primarily a Hail Mary for HBO Max as being reported.

Ya I feel like this has Stankey/AT&T written all over it as well. It’s all about streaming to them, they don’t care about the theatrical side of WB business.

 

I still don’t think this was the right call and I don’t believe it would of hurt the company significantly to hold out till June of next year. Patty and Gal deserved it imo with how much success the first Wonder Woman brought the studio. I really hope they were on board with this and Patty does come back for another Wonder Woman and more. 

Edited by cax16

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Patty and Gal deserved way better than this, it's a fact,

 

But I don't have high hopes for 2021 so I don't know if any other delay would make any difference. I think that even SS will be pushed back to March on the current Batman date and we will end up with just the Snyder cut and maybe the Peacemaker series in 2021.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cax16 said:

Ya I feel like this has Stankey/AT&T written all over it as well. It’s all about streaming to them, they don’t care about the theatrical side of WB business.

 

I still don’t think this was the right call and I don’t believe it would of hurt the company significantly to hold out till June of next year. Patty and Gal deserved it imo with how much success the first Wonder Woman brought the studio. I really hope they were on board with this and Patty does come back for another Wonder Woman and more. 

Nothing is certain, but I'm guessing that Warner Bros. made a "handshake deal" with Jenkins and Gadot that they will do a third film, regardless.  This is clearly an AT&T Executive decision from above.  And Jenkins' statement clearly indicates her reticence about it all.  Everyone understands that these unprecedented circumstances will cause studios to ultimately write-off a few big pictures...I admit that I didn't think it would be this one, though!  Astounding.  

Edited by Macleod
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to throw it out there, but maybe a small part of this decision was informed by the possibility that WB knew it had a stinker on its hands? No, I'm not saying they're dumping an incredibility expensive tentpole and it's clearly pandemic related, but... maybe that made the decision a tad easier? The trailers did look abysmal.

 

(Not trying to start a flame war, just thinking out loud.)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Hatebox said:

Just to throw it out there, but maybe a small part of this decision was informed by the possibility that WB knew it had a stinker on its hands? No, I'm not saying they're dumping an incredibility expensive tentpole and it's clearly pandemic related, but... maybe that made the decision a tad easier? The trailers did look abysmal.

 

(Not trying to start a flame war, just thinking out loud.)

Hard not to start a flame war by dropping some negative comment without valid criticism or explanation? So I would ask what is abysmal about the trailer?

 

The movie could be a stinker and it might as well since there have been leaks on reddit and not favourable reactions but trailers being abysmal is not really fair comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Hatebox said:

Just to throw it out there, but maybe a small part of this decision was informed by the possibility that WB knew it had a stinker on its hands? No, I'm not saying they're dumping an incredibility expensive tentpole and it's clearly pandemic related, but... maybe that made the decision a tad easier? The trailers did look abysmal.

 

(Not trying to start a flame war, just thinking out loud.)

Even if the movie was a stinker, it would've been a success. At worst it would've been an underperformance. 

  • Like 2
  • Disbelief 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Hatebox said:

Just to throw it out there, but maybe a small part of this decision was informed by the possibility that WB knew it had a stinker on its hands? No, I'm not saying they're dumping an incredibility expensive tentpole and it's clearly pandemic related, but... maybe that made the decision a tad easier? The trailers did look abysmal.

 

(Not trying to start a flame war, just thinking out loud.)

They might. But I wonder if it will still get good reviews now because of WB releasing this for free on Christmas during a pandemic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Saul Goodman said:

They might. But I wonder if it will still get good reviews now because of WB releasing this for free on Christmas during a pandemic.

Distribution strategy hasn't affected the reviews for any movie released during the pandemic.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Australia has a very strong movie going audience compared to population #

 

Game of Thrones is a different story - the show was very inaccessible to those here. It was through a dying premium service that no one uses anymore and requires a difficult set up and extremely high price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This movie was destined for a pretty big opening weekend just off of good will from the first movie so while anything’s possible I don’t think this has anything to do with the movies quality. I’m not saying it will be good or bad, I just think this was all about Hbomax. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no legal way to watch this in the UK as it stands at the moment.

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.


×
×
  • 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.