Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning Part 1 | July 12 2023 | 99% on Rotten Tomatoes! | 290M budget so far, Cruise holding Paramount hostage for more money

[Algebra]

1 hour ago, Squire said:

Given the critic and audience reception to this movie, its underperformance has nothing to do with the quality of the movie. Those saying otherwise don’t have an objective metric to point to beyond “but the BO numbers are bad!!” 

 

Lots of good movies don’t do well, often for a variety of reasons. This isn’t a franchise in decline in terms of critic and audience scores like Fast and Furious or Transformers. 

And MI isn’t like the MCU or Star Wars..you don’t need to have watched the previous movie to understand the new one (this wasn’t conveyed at all in any of the press junkets cuz they only talked about the stunt and I think along with the Part 1 in the title, alienated a few people)..these movies are standalone and can easily bounce back.

 

Also, I think a good strategy will be to take inspiration from he Top Gun marketing, starting with the trailers and then subsequent promotions. There wasn’t any emphasis on the ‘lore’ of Top Gun or the rest of the original characters…the promotions were only focused on Cruise right from the start, even the poster just had him and a jet or a bike. When the focus is just on the protagonist right from the start, it doesn’t alienate new audiences and they feel like they can get the new movie even without watching the original. And it worked! TGM’s opening weekend had like $30m coming in from the u-25 crowd which is insane for a 36 year old sequel.

They should do the same with DR2…keep the focus and the attention right on Cruise starting with the posters....enough with the float heads posters which serve nothing but to make people who haven’t kept up or the people who’ve seen but forgotten the predecessors feel left out 

Edited August 1, 2023 by Algebra

[RamblinRed]

As I mentioned yesterday in the International thread, MI:7 is largely underperforming in the DOM and Asian markets.

Top 6 markets for MI have been DOM, China, South Korea, Japan, UK and France. Those 6 markets generally contribute close to 70% of MI's revenue, So far with MI:7 it is 61%.

 

UK has been the most consistent. Basically MI movies make $30M +-2 there.

France is underperforming slightly but not a huge amount.

 

The DOM market is likely going to end up underperforming the previous 3 movie avg by around $40M. in China it is underperforming the previous three release avg by almost $100M.

South Korea is going to end up somewhere between $15-20M below the previous 3 movie avg. 

Have to wait and see what happens with Japan.

 

But right there that is a drop of $155-160M drop from the previous 3 movie avg. 

 

 

I'm expecting MI:7 to make around $170M DOM (below Indy 5 and SoF and above Transformers) and around $550-575 WW.

In China the new cap for Hollywood movies looks to be around $100M. I think DR2 will recover to 200-210 in the DOM market. Maybe SK will improve next time, but that is one market that has had 0 interaction with Barbieheimer.

 

So right now I'm thinking something close to GP and RN in WW Take - $660-670M give or take a little for DR2.

Fallout looks like a 1 movie outlier, not a new normal. 

 

 

 

 

[Algebra]

23 minutes ago, RamblinRed said:

As I mentioned yesterday in the International thread, MI:7 is largely underperforming in the DOM and Asian markets.

Top 6 markets for MI have been DOM, China, South Korea, Japan, UK and France. Those 6 markets generally contribute close to 70% of MI's revenue, So far with MI:7 it is 61%.

 

UK has been the most consistent. Basically MI movies make $30M +-2 there.

France is underperforming slightly but not a huge amount.

 

The DOM market is likely going to end up underperforming the previous 3 movie avg by around $40M. in China it is underperforming the previous three release avg by almost $100M.

South Korea is going to end up somewhere between $15-20M below the previous 3 movie avg. 

Have to wait and see what happens with Japan.

 

But right there that is a drop of $155-160M drop from the previous 3 movie avg. 

 

 

I'm expecting MI:7 to make around $170M DOM (below Indy 5 and SoF and above Transformers) and around $550-575 WW.

In China the new cap for Hollywood movies looks to be around $100M. I think DR2 will recover to 200-210 in the DOM market. Maybe SK will improve next time, but that is one market that has had 0 interaction with Barbieheimer.

 

So right now I'm thinking something close to GP and RN in WW Take - $660-670M give or take a little for DR2.

Fallout looks like a 1 movie outlier, not a new normal. 

 

 

 

 

I do think DR2 will be the biggest..I just feel that, in Asia even though they probably still liked the movie, they probably didn't feel like watching it multiple times as they did with TGM or Fallout..TGM opened lower in South Korea and Japan than MI7 and made $67m and $100m+ respectively, well above any MI film. Even Indonesia opened to franchise high numbers but fell off quick.

 

But with the exposition out of the way and with MI8 probably being relentless action, I think DR2 will get the franchise back on the upwards trendline

[The Dark Alfred]

The air combats are back with DR2. Think we might see a small amount of TGM halo working if they nail the trailers. Even if someone is a hater, you can't downplay the behemoth that is Barbenheimer. Not to mention direct demo kill that is SoF. I would be more worried about DR2 if the quality wasn't there with DR. Everyone wants to see Hayley and Pom kick more ass.

[Noctis]

I do think the Part 1 in the title hurt it. Part 1's after DH1 really don't have a good reputation, and this one should have removed it from the title.

 

EDIT: To clarify, I meant DH1 really worked artistically and as a story, but the rest really saw significant falls in quality which is why a film having a Part 1 in the title today is a bad idea.

Edited August 1, 2023 by Noctis

[Brainbug]

23 minutes ago, Noctis said:

I do think the Part 1 in the title hurt it. Part 1's after DH1 really don't have a good reputation, and this one should have removed it from the title.

 

I agree but i dont think it was DH1 that hurt the "Part 1" formula, it was Twilight and later Hunger Games. Because with Harry Potter, it was seen as logical to split the final book into two movies, considering that the material was just too big for 1 2 1/2 hour movie alone. But with Twilight and Hunger Games, it seemed more unnecessary and greedy, wanting to replicate the success formula of Deathly Hallows without the artistic and storytelling need for it.

[Noctis]

7 minutes ago, Brainbug said:

 

I agree but i dont think it was DH1 that hurt the "Part 1" formula, it was Twilight and later Hunger Games. Because with Harry Potter, it was seen as logical to split the final book into two movies, considering that the material was just too big for 1 2 1/2 hour movie alone. But with Twilight and Hunger Games, it seemed more unnecessary and greedy, wanting to replicate the success formula of Deathly Hallows without the artistic and storytelling need for it.

 

That's why I said after DH1. 

 

DH1 was the only Part 1 film (in its title) that genuinely worked. The rest were much weaker, and I include the splitting of the Hobbit films in the problem too.

[Brainbug]

3 minutes ago, Noctis said:

 

That's why I said after DH1. 

 

DH1 was the only Part 1 film (in its title) that genuinely worked. The rest were much weaker, and I include the splitting of the Hobbit films in the problem too.

 

Ah ok then i misunderstood you there, sorry. And i also agree that The Hobbit movies suffered from this business-oriented decision making. Two movies for the Hobbit would have been much better, altough i still mostly like them (1 and 2 much more than 3 though).

[hasanahmad]

20 hours ago, Algebra said:

People must’ve said the same thing after MI3 too..glad they didn’t listen.

 

Sometimes, freak Box office results happen..add to that a WGA strike dulling promotional activity and stiff competition for shows and screens and it can lead to B.O underperformance 

 

No i love the franchise. I loved this movie for what it is but I can see that its time is up. it's impact is not there anymore. You say MI3. that was early in the franchise. we are at movie 8 now. every franchise needs an end because its formula is recycled to the max it can go. 

 

 

[Mk2504]

13 hours ago, RamblinRed said:

As I mentioned yesterday in the International thread, MI:7 is largely underperforming in the DOM and Asian markets.

Top 6 markets for MI have been DOM, China, South Korea, Japan, UK and France. Those 6 markets generally contribute close to 70% of MI's revenue, So far with MI:7 it is 61%.

 

UK has been the most consistent. Basically MI movies make $30M +-2 there.

France is underperforming slightly but not a huge amount.

 

The DOM market is likely going to end up underperforming the previous 3 movie avg by around $40M. in China it is underperforming the previous three release avg by almost $100M.

South Korea is going to end up somewhere between $15-20M below the previous 3 movie avg. 

Have to wait and see what happens with Japan.

 

But right there that is a drop of $155-160M drop from the previous 3 movie avg. 

 

 

I'm expecting MI:7 to make around $170M DOM (below Indy 5 and SoF and above Transformers) and around $550-575 WW.

In China the new cap for Hollywood movies looks to be around $100M. I think DR2 will recover to 200-210 in the DOM market. Maybe SK will improve next time, but that is one market that has had 0 interaction with Barbieheimer.

 

So right now I'm thinking something close to GP and RN in WW Take - $660-670M give or take a little for DR2.

Fallout looks like a 1 movie outlier, not a new normal. 

 

 

 

 

Mi7 is already making $29 m in South Korea and should end up making around $35 m.  You have to take the current strong dollars into consideration as well. For example, Ghost protocol made $70 m in 2011 in Japan Box Office and will only make $38 in today exchange rate.  DR should make around $32-35m in Japan which is very impressive.

Edited August 2, 2023 by Mk2504

[Algebra]

8 hours ago, hasanahmad said:

 

No i love the franchise. I loved this movie for what it is but I can see that its time is up. it's impact is not there anymore. You say MI3. that was early in the franchise. we are at movie 8 now. every franchise needs an end because its formula is recycled to the max it can go. 

 

 

The time on the franchise is definitely coming to a close and MI8 will surely be the last...and that's why MI8 will go out with a bang. MI7 was an aberration marred by so many missteps which surely will be rectified for MI8

[John Marston]

https://collider.com/mission-impossible-dead-reckoning-imax-run-bruce-markoe-comments/

 

IMAX Tried to Help 'Mission: Impossible Dead Reckoning,' But Paramount Wouldn't Budge

[emoviefan]

30 minutes ago, John Marston said:

https://collider.com/mission-impossible-dead-reckoning-imax-run-bruce-markoe-comments/

 

IMAX Tried to Help 'Mission: Impossible Dead Reckoning,' But Paramount Wouldn't Budge

The question is Were Cruise and MCQ on board with this stubbornness or not. If not things must be tense right now

[Ryan Reynolds]

Tom's ego is the cause,  I believe they dropped the IMAX version because of their stubbornness 

[The Dark Alfred]

Criminal stupidity by Paramount. Cruise obviously wanted the summer release because the plan was to start shooting DR2 after the publicity tour in August. However when Universal decided to stick with Op's release, Paramount should have moved the date. Especially when the SAG strike was obvious to happen, so the filming plans were crushed. It was clear that Indy would flop after Cannes. They should have released it at least a week earlier. Cruise clearly didn't want just a limited IMAX run, absolute bottle job by the studio,

Edited August 3, 2023 by The Dark Alfred

[Squire]

13 hours ago, Algebra said:

The time on the franchise is definitely coming to a close and MI8 will surely be the last...and that's why MI8 will go out with a bang. MI7 was an aberration marred by so many missteps which surely will be rectified for MI8

This franchise won’t end with MI8. Paramount will eventually try to reboot it without Cruise someday. Whether that will be successful or not is a good question. 

[Squire]

24 minutes ago, The Dark Alfred said:

Criminal stupidity by Paramount. Cruise obviously wanted the summer release because the plan was to start shooting DR2 after the publicity tour in August. However when Universal decided to stick with Op's release, Paramount should have moved the date. Especially when the SAG strike was obvious to happen, so the filming plans were crushed. It was clear that Indy would flop after Cannes. They should have released it at least a week earlier. Cruise clearly didn't want just a limited IMAX run, absolute bottle job by the studio,

I think this is all great in hindsight, but nobody knew SAG was going to strike until it was impossible to move the release date. 

[Ryan Reynolds]

33 minutes ago, The Dark Alfred said:

Criminal stupidity by Paramount. Cruise obviously wanted the summer release because the plan was to start shooting DR2 after the publicity tour in August. However when Universal decided to stick with Op's release, Paramount should have moved the date. Especially when the SAG strike was obvious to happen, so the filming plans were crushed. It was clear that Indy would flop after Cannes. They should have released it at least a week earlier. Cruise clearly didn't want just a limited IMAX run, absolute bottle job by the studio,

Paramount messed up dating MI there to begin with , Disney was smart enough to move The Marvels out of the way

Edited August 3, 2023 by Ryan Reynolds

[Algebra]

1 hour ago, Squire said:

This franchise won’t end with MI8. Paramount will eventually try to reboot it without Cruise someday. Whether that will be successful or not is a good question. 

Some franchises live and die by their star…MI is one of them. And Paramount won’t do anything without his say. A report came out last year that they tried launching an MI spin-off and Cruise shot it to the ground. They even wanted a Days of Thunder to show and couldn’t do it because Cruise.

They also had to wait 36 years for Cruise to say yes for Top Gun

[Darth Lehnsherr]

Part One in a movie title only make sense with adaptations when you're clearly telling the audience that the film is only going to cover a portion of a work with the same title. Otherwise it really isn't needed when you can name the sequel something different even if it's directly continuing the story though yes there will always be pushback on films that have unresolved plotlines.