Fast and Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw | August 2 2019 | Embargo lifts July 31 for now

[JB33 4,809]

On 8/13/2019 at 1:48 AM, a2k said:

so it's a "little spin-off" with prod budget of puny 200m. 💪

i think the idea to go for H&S was timely and kept the franchise alive.

something went a little off in the marketing. should be doing bigger numbers at least early on.

That, or the original crew is a bigger sell than we thought, despite the box office rise of the franchise coinciding with the introduction of the Hobbs character.

[DeeCee 23,225]

Moderation

 

NO SPOILERS.

 

Regards

BOT Staff

[The GOAT 102]

Why must they play a shitty song every 5 minutes?

[ViewerAnon 838]

On 8/11/2019 at 2:06 PM, AJG said:

RANK THIS FRANCHISE

 

F5

F7

TOKYO DRIFT

F6

F8

HOBBES AN SHAW

F2

F4

 

I count F1 as an alternative universe spin off at this point.

FAST FIVE

FAST & FURIOUS 6

TOKYO DRIFT

THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS

FURIOUS 7

FAST & FURIOUS

THE FATE OF THE FURIOUS

2 FAST 2 FURIOUS

HOBBS & SHAW

[sfran43 21,965]

On 8/11/2019 at 11:13 AM, CoolioD1 said:

Finally saw this today. Worst of the franchise for me. Vin and Tyrese I’m sorry i doubted you I now believe in family.

 

On 8/11/2019 at 3:54 PM, RichWS said:

 

A week later, I'd probably rank it at the bottom as well. Pretty crazy how boring it is in relation to the sci-fi ridiculousness. 

 

9 better take it back to the tuna.

Can't believe it, but I have to agree with you guys! The movie was bad. And I like both Statham and the Rock, so not enjoying the movie pissed me off.

 

All the "funny" parts felt so forced, especially the cameos...which were not funny at all! This is definitely a one and done type of movie.

 

Things I did like in the movie

 

1. Edris was great as the villain 

 

2. Vanessa Kirby was awesome. Loved her scenes, esp. the ones away from the boys. She held her own throughout the movie.

 

Fast 8 was bad as well, but at least it was a bit more entertaining. 

Edited August 17 by sfran43

[sfran43 21,965]

24 minutes ago, The GOAT said:

Why must they play a shitty song every 5 minutes?

Right?! That was annoying!

[Panda 153]

H&S probably my 4th fave of the franchise so far but I just like the rock a lot

[sfran43 21,965]

I know someone mentioned it earlier, but wow! This movie is just a ripoff/remake of Tango & Cash (without the chemistry), even down to the sibling factor! No wonder it didn't gel well with me. The original is so much better...and funnier!

[Valonqar 8,498]

I hope Vanessa Kirby moves on from this. She's really great and the only cast member that actually gave a damn to act instead of just play herself or other famous shtick (you know which not-so-small cameos I'm talking about). I've no clue why her manager advised her to hop on this wagon after her breakout in Fallout but #saveVanessafromH&S.

[Captain Craig 5,711]

After 3 weeks the movie is still the #2 film in the land with $133m US Domestic in the register. 

Will this movie survive due to lack of competition? It'll be at/near $150m next weekend, Labor Day is coming up. 

Are we looking at a near break even vs budget scenario?

[Minnale101 1,502]

7 minutes ago, Captain Craig said:

After 3 weeks the movie is still the #2 film in the land with $133m US Domestic in the register. 

Will this movie survive due to lack of competition? It'll be at/near $150m next weekend, Labor Day is coming up. 

Are we looking at a near break even vs budget scenario?

Deadline said break even is mid 600s million 

 

should do that fine 

[Captain Craig 5,711]

6 minutes ago, Minnale101 said:

Deadline said break even is mid 600s million 

 

should do that fine 

So a sequel with a lower budget could very well happen it sounds like.

They could/should realize they need to pull back from the more outlandish("superman") and tone it down stunt wise but just have a stronger character driven script.

[Avatree 13,643]

31 minutes ago, Captain Craig said:

So a sequel with a lower budget could very well happen it sounds like.

They could/should realize they need to pull back from the more outlandish("superman") and tone it down stunt wise but just have a stronger character driven script.

Why would they make it lower budget? General attitude is that if you make something successful and it cost X, and you're happy with that, then that's the cost of getting that success... no point lowering budget and risking losing success. 

That is, assuming it does do well in China. We'll have to wait and see.

 

As for character driven story, is that what made the previous F&F films so big? 

[RealLyre 1,354]

wait why does this need 600M to break even again? 

 

it currently made 437M WW
133M DOM so 133M * 0.5 = 66.5M
303M OS-C so 303M * 0.4 = 121M
 

total gross revenue about ~187.5M so far from box office. production budget is 200M, it's gonna need $20M-$30M more to be in the clear so it's more like 450M-470M needed to break even (unless the Rock has some first dollar gross deal like with Tarantino in OUATIH but I doubt that ...)

 

ancillaries + home media should be enough to cover P&A costs.

[Avatree 13,643]

2 minutes ago, RealLyre said:

wait why does this need 600M to break even again? 

 

it currently made 437M WW
133M DOM so 133M * 0.5 = 66.5M
303M OS-C so 303M * 0.4 = 121M
 

total gross revenue about ~187.5M so far from box office. production budget is 200M, it's gonna need $20M-$30M more to be in the clear so it's more like 450M-470M needed to break even (unless the Rock has some first dollar gross deal like with Tarantino in OUATIH but I doubt that ...)

 

ancillaries + home media should be enough to cover P&A costs.

uh... you have been around here long enough to know about marketing budgets. Universal will have spent best part of $400m on this film so if it only grossed $450m it would lose a lot of money.

[RealLyre 1,354]

2 minutes ago, Avatree said:

uh... you have been around here long enough to know about marketing budgets. Universal will have spent best part of $400m on this film so if it only grossed $450m it would lose a lot of money.

eh, for well received blockbusters they usually make back the marketing budgets from ancillaries,home media sales and global TV deals etc. 

 

I doubt Universal spent more than $120M-$150M promoting this.

[Avatree 13,643]

9 minutes ago, RealLyre said:

eh, for well received blockbusters they usually make back the marketing budgets from ancillaries,home media sales and global TV deals etc. 

 

I doubt Universal spent more than $120M-$150M promoting this.

Okay, so if you agree that they have spent $320M-350M then how does that equate to it breaking even theatrically at $450M? You are confusing yourself.

 

No idea what marketing budget have to do with TV licence deals.

[RealLyre 1,354]

8 minutes ago, Avatree said:

 

No idea what marketing budget have to do with TV licence deals.

TV licenses deals are part of the "revenue". Marketing budget is part of the "costs" 

 

it's not that complicated. 

 

Venom made 154M from Global TV deals according to deadline.

[Minnale101 1,502]

31 minutes ago, RealLyre said:

wait why does this need 600M to break even again? 

 

it currently made 437M WW
133M DOM so 133M * 0.5 = 66.5M
303M OS-C so 303M * 0.4 = 121M
 

total gross revenue about ~187.5M so far from box office. production budget is 200M, it's gonna need $20M-$30M more to be in the clear so it's more like 450M-470M needed to break even (unless the Rock has some first dollar gross deal like with Tarantino in OUATIH but I doubt that ...)

 

ancillaries + home media should be enough to cover P&A costs.

Total cost of movie was 360 million 

 

P&A was 160 million according to deadline 

[JB33 4,809]

I like how this is chugging along here. Can't say it's surprising though. It's a tentpole franchise in a dead month. Still, glad it's doing its job. I'm interested enough in seeing where this sub-franchise goes.