Thor: Love and Thunder | July 8, 2022 | Directed by Oscar Winner Taika Waititi | Ninth most profitable movie of 2022

[Rebeccas]

2 minutes ago, WittyUsername said:

Neither this nor MoM felt like the event films that we were led to believe they’d be.  

I never expected this to be an event film. Just wanted it to be fun.. which it wasn't unfortunately. 

[Fox20]

9 hours ago, Rebeccas said:

So weird cause this ended up feeling extremely standalone and less of a team-up than even Ragnarok which at least had Hulk. Maybe the guardians were meant to have larger roles, like a proper Asguardians of the Galaxy movie but that seems so far from what we got in the film where they just left after 5 minutes and were never heard of again. 

They set-up the Asgardians of the galaxy for nothing if you have seen Gunn he could not care less about the concept and talks how this movie pretty much had zero effect in his movie even when it was supposed to release before Thor.

Edited August 8, 2022 by Fox20

[XXR vs XXR]

So L&T is currently at ~$705M WW. It'll finish in the ~$730M range. While this is below what I had hoped for I'm still happy with it when all the factors are considered. 

• No China 
• No Russia 
• Several other missing markets (due to various reasons)
• Strong dollar creating weak ER

 

If L&T had the same markets as Ragnarok, it would have done +20-30% of what it'll actually do. If the ER was better you could add 5-10% onto that and if the film was actually well received you could add another 10-15% on top of that!! 🤣

Edited August 11, 2022 by David Zaslav XXR

[Deep Wang]

28 minutes ago, In XXR We Trust said:

So L&T is currently at ~$705M WW. It'll finish in the ~$730M range. While this is below what I had hoped for I'm still happy with it when all the factors are considered. 

• No China 
• No Russia 
• Several other missing markets (due to various reasons)
• Strong dollar creating weak ER

 

If L&T had the same markets as Ragnarok, it would have done +20-30% of what it'll actually do. If the ER was better you could add 5-10% onto that and if the film was actually well received you could add another 10-15% on top of that!! 🤣

 

Going from fan favorite Ragnarok to fan despised TLAT and basically staying flat -RUS/CHINA is kinda crazy when you think about it.  

[Rebeccas]

4 minutes ago, Deep Wang said:

 

Going from fan favorite Ragnarok to fan despised TLAT and basically staying flat -RUS/CHINA is kinda crazy when you think about it.  

Most sequels do rely mostly on how the previous film was received, obviously legs would've been better if this movie was good, but you can still get away with a lot as long as people loved the previous one enough to at least be curious about the sequel. 

[XXR vs XXR]

7 minutes ago, Deep Wang said:

 

Going from fan favorite Ragnarok to fan despised TLAT and basically staying flat -RUS/CHINA is kinda crazy when you think about it.  

 

It'll actually increase in equivalent markets, overall. I believe L&T didn't release in 5-7 countries that Ragnarok did. Remove those and Ragnarok is at $690-700M. 

 

If you just give L&T back those markets (no ER or quality adjustment), it should do $900-950M. 

 

[charlie Jatinder]

On 8/8/2022 at 8:52 AM, lorddemaxus said:

700 mil WW is a flop.

NO IT ISNT.

 

The film has like $380M+ theatrical returns worldwide. That's far from a FLOP. 

Edited August 11, 2022 by charlie Jatinder

[SnokesLegs]

17 minutes ago, Deep Wang said:

 

Going from fan favorite Ragnarok to fan despised TLAT and basically staying flat -RUS/CHINA is kinda crazy when you think about it.  

I don’t think L&T was as hated by the general public as the internet would have you believe. Outside Film Twitter i think most people thought it was “fine”, not as good as Ragnarok, but still “fine”. Hardly the MCU ending catastrophe that the weirdos with a sudden axe to grind with Taika Waititi want us to believe.

[XXR vs XXR]

1 minute ago, SnokesLegs said:

I don’t think L&T was as hated by the general public as the internet would have you believe. Outside Film Twitter i think most people thought it was “fine”, not as good as Ragnarok, but still “fine”. Hardly the MCU ending catastrophe that the weirdos with a sudden axe to grind with Taika Waititi want us to believe.

 

It's not "hated" but the PostTrak data definitely indicates it was poorly received. I believe the "definite recommend" was the 2nd lowest ever for the MCU, behind Eternals. In contrast, Ragnarok was the 5th highest. 

[charlie Jatinder]

5 minutes ago, SnokesLegs said:

I don’t think L&T was as hated by the general public as the internet would have you believe. Outside Film Twitter i think most people thought it was “fine”, not as good as Ragnarok, but still “fine”. Hardly the MCU ending catastrophe that the weirdos with a sudden axe to grind with Taika Waititi want us to believe.

General audience liking standards are relatively lower. Even the worst commerical films get like "its ok" from 70% audience. And so is the case for THOR L&T. 

 

BUT for sustained success of MCU, they need to take that % back to 90%+.

[lorddemaxus]

1 hour ago, charlie Jatinder said:

NO IT ISNT.

 

The film has like $380M+ theatrical returns worldwide. That's far from a FLOP. 

Read my later comment man

[Rebeccas]

2 hours ago, charlie Jatinder said:

NO IT ISNT.

 

The film has like $380M+ theatrical returns worldwide. That's far from a FLOP. 

Depending on how much they spent on marketing on top of $250m production budget, that might not actually be break even or just barely. 

[charlie Jatinder]

7 minutes ago, Rebeccas said:

Depending on how much they spent on marketing on top of $250m production budget, that might not actually be break even or just barely. 

You know there are ton of other revenue streams?

[Rebeccas]

4 minutes ago, charlie Jatinder said:

You know there are ton of other revenue streams?

This is not something that's been relevant for MCU movies in ages (with the exception of the covid era releases that have a slight asterisk). They've all been profitable theatrically since The Avengers (2012). 

[WittyUsername]

I don’t know why we’re questioning whether a movie that passed $300 million domestically and over $700 million worldwide without China will manage to break even, especially when @lorddemaxus was joking. 

[Valonqar]

On 8/8/2022 at 10:09 AM, Rebeccas said:

So weird cause this ended up feeling extremely standalone and less of a team-up than even Ragnarok which at least had Hulk. Maybe the guardians were meant to have larger roles, like a proper Asguardians of the Galaxy movie but that seems so far from what we got in the film where they just left after 5 minutes and were never heard of again. 

 

I think that team-up in question is Thor/Mighty Thor which isn't nearly as attractive as when the team was Thor/Loki/Hulk/Valkyrie. The selling point of team-up movies is characters with different powers working together or sometimes fighting each other (CATCW). But unless we are talking about Tobey and Andrew, where novelty were actors from old franchises rather than the powers themselves (and they still had that awesome scene where Tom and Andrew are in awe of Tobey's organic web), having multiple characters with the same power is boring and redundant. It literally brings nothing to the table. Why have 20 Thors if you can have the Avengers? 

[THUNDER BIRD]

2 hours ago, charlie Jatinder said:

NO IT ISNT.

 

The film has like $380M+ theatrical returns worldwide. That's far from a FLOP. 

Underperformer though.

[Rebeccas]

55 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

 

I think that team-up in question is Thor/Mighty Thor which isn't nearly as attractive as when the team was Thor/Loki/Hulk/Valkyrie. The selling point of team-up movies is characters with different powers working together or sometimes fighting each other (CATCW). But unless we are talking about Tobey and Andrew, where novelty were actors from old franchises rather than the powers themselves (and they still had that awesome scene where Tom and Andrew are in awe of Tobey's organic web), having multiple characters with the same power is boring and redundant. It literally brings nothing to the table. Why have 20 Thors if you can have the Avengers? 

I'm not in any way blaming Natalie Portman for this but I do think every writer/director of this franchise has struggled to integrate Jane into the more wacky/cosmic side of Thor, which is the stuff ppl actually like about him. It seemed to work the best in the first Thor when he was on earth for much of it but even then you still had to surround her with wacky comic relief characters like Darcy and Stellan Skarsgaard. It says a lot that the only Thor film with universal critical acclaim is the one she's totally absent from and barely even gets mentioned.

 

Thor/Loki/Valkyrie/Hulk was just a great combo and the actors had tons of chemistry in various combinations, which made the loose improvisational vibe work. 

[Macleod]

I'd like apologies from all who laughed when I predicted around $700m WW final.  OK, I said $700m WW "or lower"...so I'm off just a bit.  😉  I also just about correctly predicted the second-weekend dropoff.  I claimed it would be $69%... it was 68%.  

[p a p i]

Wonder how much in profits, from theatrical run only, Thor has made by now. PROFITS. 

 

If I had to shoot, I would say 62M-65M.