NEW YEAR WEEKDAYS THREAD: New Year Day Final Trend P 26. Happy New Year.

[cdsacken]

3 hours ago, Justin4125 said:

I think its clear with all this Star Wars "failure" talk that we're using the word "failure" in a different way than, say, "flop". A movie can still profit at the BO and be deemed a "failure" in a relative sense. TROS will make a greater profit than BvS, yet it still "failed" to live up to the high expectations of the franchise (just as BvS failed to live up to the potential of its titular characters and the massive BO drawing power of the SH genre).

 

I do, however, think we need to distinguish movies like TROS and BvS from movies like Justice League, Solo or Transformers Last Knight. Those were flops, which goes beyond the definition of failure this board seems to use. 

 

As a side note I think TROS is more analagous to Justice League than to BvS. The Last Jedi was Star Wars' BvS. It divided GA and fans alike. but it still made a lot of money off of the hype it had behind it. Just as Justice League paid for BvS's divisiveness, so too did TROS pay for the mistakes of TLJ

 

Bvs had a 400 million production budget and came out about even (100m profit is wrong)

 

Justice League was an absolute flop and costs a ton of money like Dark Phoneix and Dark Fate. Bvs like tros was disappointing. JL, DP, DF all were just awful net revenue wise.

[lorddemaxus]

2 minutes ago, cdsacken said:

Bvs had a 400 million production budget and came out about even (100m profit is wrong)

What's your source? According to Deadline, BvS's budget was 250 mil and the profit was 100 mil.

[cdsacken]

1 minute ago, lorddemaxus said:

What's your source? According to Deadline, BvS's budget was 250 mil and the profit was 100 mil.

250 was cost to just make it. Advertising and marketing was insane for that film.

 

That's like saying end game budget was 350m. Sure it was.....

[lorddemaxus]

Just now, cdsacken said:

250 was cost to just make it. Advertising and marketing was insane for that film.

 

That's like saying end game budget was 350m. Sure it was.....

And Deadline's calculations include advertising, marketing, and all the other extra costs.

[1Robert1]

3 minutes ago, lorddemaxus said:

And Deadline's calculations include advertising, marketing, and all the other extra costs.

According to Deadline total costs of bvs was 575.8m....

[lorddemaxus]

1 minute ago, 1Robert1 said:

According to Deadline total costs of bvs was 575.8m....

Yeah, that's what I mean't. When I said 250 mil, I was talking production budget. According to them, BvS made 681 mil in revenue.

[DisposedData]

29 minutes ago, cdsacken said:

250 was cost to just make it. Advertising and marketing was insane for that film.

 

That's like saying end game budget was 350m. Sure it was.....

So you are counting marketing budget even though those are usually covered with ancillaries but ignoring the marketing budget and campaign for TRoS which was arguably just as massive?

Edited December 31, 2019 by DisposedData

[dudalb]

ANyway, Warners was clearly expecting BvS to do for the DCU what "THe Avengers" did for the MCU...put it in the next level as far as profits go..and it failed big time in that regard, even if WB made an ok profit out of it. WB was expecting Avengers level profits, and it fell far short of that.

[lorddemaxus]

1 minute ago, dudalb said:

ANyway, Warners was clearly expecting BvS to do for the DCU what "THe Avengers" did for the MCU...put it in the next level as far as profits go..and it failed big time in that regard, even if WB made an ok profit out of it. WB was expecting Avengers level profits, and it fell far short of that.

I would say BvS did worse than that. It's the reason why JL flopped so in the long term, BvS didn't actually make any profit for WB.

Edited December 31, 2019 by lorddemaxus

[YM!]

14 minutes ago, cdsacken said:

250 was cost to just make it. Advertising and marketing was insane for that film.

 

That's like saying end game budget was 350m. Sure it was.....

Deadline says it made it profit of $105M, so this is probably wrong.

Edited December 31, 2019 by YourMother the Edgelord

[cdsacken]

2 minutes ago, YourMother the Edgelord said:

Deadline says it made it profit of $105M, so this is probably wrong.

And deadline is usually wrong about everything as we have seen. Let's agree to disagree. Regardless BVS was a huge disappointment like TROS just not an epic fail like Justice League or Dark Phoneix

[cdsacken]

8 minutes ago, dudalb said:

ANyway, Warners was clearly expecting BvS to do for the DCU what "THe Avengers" did for the MCU...put it in the next level as far as profits go..and it failed big time in that regard, even if WB made an ok profit out of it. WB was expecting Avengers level profits, and it fell far short of that.

Definitely true. It killed the teamup franchise, it killed the Affleck Batman, it killed Superman. Amazingly Aquaman survived and flourished. WW is no surprise. Gal Gadot is too damn incredible to not make another as is Chris Pine.

 

Not a fan war issue btw. Marvel had plenty of meh performances in the past and I so badly wanted BVS to do well. Saw it opening day and Man of steel opening day of UK. I hope some day we'll see a proper team up 

Edited December 31, 2019 by cdsacken

[Valonqar]

yes, BvS was supposed to achieve overnight what Avengers build up did in 6 years. 

[ZackM]

Looks like $15,302,130 for Star Wars yesterday.

[lorddemaxus]

Just now, Valonqar said:

yes, BvS was supposed to achieve overnight what Avengers build up did in 6 years. 

I think it could have gotten somewhat close. Not Avengers's 1.5 billion but I could've seen it make 1.3 billion. 

[YM!]

18 minutes ago, cdsacken said:

And deadline is usually wrong about everything as we have seen. Let's agree to disagree. Regardless BVS was a huge disappointment like TROS just not an epic fail like Justice League or Dark Phoneix

Except Deadline actually does research for profits including marketing costs. I am not denying it’s a disappointment but it’s not a flop.

[Nova]

13 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

yes, BvS was supposed to achieve overnight what Avengers build up did in 6 years. 

I mean that’s what WB wanted. They wanted what Marvel had but without putting in the work and that’s why the movie failed. Now WB is taking time and thinking things through with their DC projects and it’s been paying off for them. 

[Valonqar]

5 minutes ago, Nova said:

I mean that’s what WB wanted. They wanted what Marvel had but without putting in the work and that’s why the movie failed. Now WB is taking time and thinking things through with their DC projects and it’s been paying off for them. 

exactly. It's good that they are bouncing back without a need to copy the other studio but doing their own thing. 

[ZackM]

I'm thinking around 13M today for Star Wars.  Nothing selling this evening.

Edited December 31, 2019 by ZackM

[TwoMisfits]

So, my 1st local (Cinemark) has set its Friday - except for booking the Grudge on 1 screen, and taking that screen from TROS, it's kept everything else the same.  It's probably very sad one of the Jan 10 releases didn't jump back to Jan 3 and take another of the 3 screens it's still stuck putting TROS on (since there's nothing better to book)...I mean, this theater is dying for movies so much, it still has Cats on a full screen this upcoming weekend:)...