Madame Web | February 14, 2024 | Sony Spider-Man Movie I SJ Clarkson to direct

[grim22]

4 hours ago, HummingLemon496 said:

Ok, let's stop pretending that Morbius is unironically a success

 

 

There's a difference between a movie making it's money back and a success. Morbius likely ended up in the black all said and done but there's never going to be a Morbius 2

[HummingLemon496]

1 hour ago, grim22 said:

There's a difference between a movie making it's money back and a success. Morbius likely ended up in the black all said and done but there's never going to be a Morbius 2

This is what I mean

 

I doubt studio execs goes to make a movie with the intent of "oh yeah let's make this movie so it makes the same amount of money as if it was never made in the first place" 

[JustLurking]

I struggle to see this one ending in the black given that it will probably not even crack 100M ww off these numbers.

[dudalb]

1 hour ago, grim22 said:

There's a difference between a movie making it's money back and a success. Morbius likely ended up in the black all said and done but there's never going to be a Morbius 2

Studios do not spend money to just break even.

I just read in other threads that this movie is so badly done that they messed up the ADR and actors dislogue does not match their lips. In an age when ADR is used in most movies ( if it is done on location or on a exterior there is a very good chance it is ADRd)

for that to happen is, well there is no freaking excuse. Pure incompetence.

[dudalb]

Many heads of production 

44 minutes ago, HummingLemon496 said:

This is what I mean

 

I doubt studio execs goes to make a movie with the intent of "oh yeah let's make this movie so it makes the same amount of money as if it was never made in the first place" 

Many studio execs get the boot not because the studio is losing money, but the profits are not as big as expected. "Return on Investiment" is the name of the game.

BTW I think "El Muerto" project will probably never happen after this.

[HummingLemon496]

11 minutes ago, dudalb said:

Many heads of production 

Many studio execs get the boot not because the studio is losing money, but the profits are not as big as expected. "Return on Investiment" is the name of the game.

BTW I think "El Muerto" project will probably never happen after this.

Exactly

[Barnack]

7 hours ago, Krissykins said:

With their Netflix deal for these films, Sony can move money around to suit themselves I’m sure. 

I would imagine that kind of deal have a pay scale determined by the movie box office performance and it is a first look type of deal, they do not have to pick them all up.

 

https://variety.com/2021/film/news/netflix-sony-pictures-pay-1-starz-output-1234946413/

 The deal is said to be structured in a relatively traditional form with the fee that Netflix pays for each title determined on a sliding scale by each title’s domestic or worldwide box office haul.

 

Movie always had second window post theatrical for revenues since Television got big enough (late 50s ?), and I doubt it is particularly great (but maybe not particularly bad like it was 10 years ago) historically right now, like say 2005 when the dvd bubble could make a lot of things work.

 

11 hours ago, Mojoguy said:

They only do these movies to keep the Spider-Man film rights or some shit like that. Madame Web and Morbius would meet the very defination of ashcan films if true.

Spider Man movies franchise schedule between reboot had this in mind but with their cadence I am not sure it could be an issue.

 

If it did not change, the expectation was:

Sony must commence production on a new "Spider-Man" film within three years, nine months and release it within five years, nine months after the release of preceding picture.

 

They have like 6 movie since 2018 released, it is more a long hiatus between reboot type of window to worry about (if you look the release date between Spider-man 3 may 2007 and amazing spider man production start december 2010, that was 3 years-7months almost on the nose of the limit), if things did not change dramatically in that regard. I am not sure if it was live action - animation or budget size, I do remember when reading it that the production needed to be a big one to count. And you would still want to make them really good regardless.

Edited February 16 by Barnack

[BigBoxOfficeBucks]

13 hours ago, Last Man Standing said:

She is so funny.

Let's be honest here. At this point, you have to pay her AGAIN to make her watch Madame Web.

[emoviefan]

37 minutes ago, BigBoxOfficeBucks said:

Let's be honest here. At this point, you have to pay her AGAIN to make her watch Madame Web.

You got to love that she just plain refused to play the phony publicity game of pretending that she was proud of being in this movie. 

[Mad Max007]

I watched this and it was better than Morbius for sure but that's not saying much. Dakota would kill it in any other big franchise. If she made these dialogues and scenes seem ok on screen.

[JustLurking]

I can't even remember if I've seen a blockbuster go rotten on verified audience since its introduction. That's just insane, and the critics score is down to 13% as well...jesus...

[PlatnumRoyce]

10 hours ago, HummingLemon496 said:

This is what I mean

 

I doubt studio execs goes to make a movie with the intent of "oh yeah let's make this movie so it makes the same amount of money as if it was never made in the first place" 

Let's use a real-world examples from 2016

• Goosebumps - 68.5M budget = breakeven at 118.7M WW (1.73)1; "return threshold" at 156M WW (2.27) & "target" at 163M WW (2.37)
• Grimsby - 70M budget = breakeven at 123M WW (1.78) ; return threshold & target 188.8M (2.7)
•  Pixels - 110M budget - 190M breakeven (1.73x) & 311.3M (2.83) "return threshold" & 282.5M "target" (2.57)

[Jay Beezy]

2 hours ago, JustLurking said:

I can't even remember if I've seen a blockbuster go rotten on verified audience since its introduction. That's just insane, and the critics score is down to 13% as well...jesus...

 

It's on its way to becoming the worst reviewed film by the guys who previously wrote Dracula Untold, The Last Witch Hunter, Gods of Egypt and Morbius.

 

1 hour ago, PlatnumRoyce said:

Let's use a real-world examples from 2016

• Goosebumps - 68.5M budget = breakeven at 118.7M WW (1.73)1; "return threshold" at 156M WW (2.27) & "target" at 163M WW (2.37)
• Grimsby - 70M budget = breakeven at 123M WW (1.78) ; return threshold & target 188.8M (2.7)
•  Pixels - 110M budget - 190M breakeven (1.73x) & 311.3M (2.83) "return threshold" & 282.5M "target" (2.57)

 

Is your avatar what I think it is?

[PlatnumRoyce]

24 minutes ago, Jay Beezy said:

 

It's on its way to becoming the worst reviewed film by the guys who previously wrote Dracula Untold, The Last Witch Hunter, Gods of Egypt and Morbius.

 

 

Is your avatar what I think it is?

 

just a truly amazing performance from an actor who knew exactly what movie he was in. 

Edited February 16 by PlatnumRoyce

[dudalb]

16 hours ago, BigBoxOfficeBucks said:

Let's be honest here. At this point, you have to pay her AGAIN to make her watch Madame Web.

I think most people who were in this film will try to forget about is as quickly as possible.

[dudalb]

7 hours ago, Jay Beezy said:

 

It's on its way to becoming the worst reviewed film by the guys who previously wrote Dracula Untold, The Last Witch Hunter, Gods of Egypt and Morbius.

 

 

Is your avatar what I think it is?

Messing up something as basic as ADR takes a special kind of incompetnece.

[dudalb]

From the first box office reports it is bombing badly, to the surprise of no one.

[Jay Beezy]

1 hour ago, dudalb said:

From the first box office reports it is bombing badly, to the surprise of no one.

Unless you’re someone like Anthony D’Alessandro at Deadline, who thought the reason it was tracking poorly initially was due to a “wonky marketplace” or anti-female superhero sentiments and not because the movie itself failed to look appealing.

[NoobSaibot]

Hung with a friend. Went to see it with her because for some reason she wanted to.

 

This movie sucks. I didn't think Argylle was good, and I'm sorry for bashing it because it at least looked like it had effort put into it. As bizarre as this sounds, it feels like the people behind THIS didn't even try. I mean, they really, really didn't try. The only other people in there were laughing at moments that I guess should have been taken seriously. In some circles I'm in, people are still dogging on Night Swim. Compared to this movie, Night Swim is almost like gold because it feels like it was a production that was taken seriously.

 

I'm curious to know what kind of dysfunction occurred during filming and during post, because I can't imagine any of it went smoothly with the product that was put on screen. It's worse than Morbius.

Edited February 17 by NoobSaibot

[Human]

All these negative reviews have me hyped.  I really want to see this trainwreck (when I find it for free on a disk at the library in a few months).