Jump to content
Skipper Eric

Weekend Thread (6/11-13) | Friday #s - ln the Flops 5M, Peter Floppit 2 4M

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, WorkingonaName said:

The only DTV movies that have made any impact in the popular culture in any way are DCOMs.

 

What acronym is that? DCOM?

 

1 hour ago, Rebeccas said:

 

Mackie and Stan are both supporting actors and can even stand out in those roles, but are really not meant to carry whole projects themselves. I mean isn't that why Daniel Bruhl kind of became the most popular character in the show lol

 

Compared to Olsen/Bettany and Hiddleston, there was a massive charisma vacuum in TF&WS. 

 

 

Yep, doesn't help that Mackie has starred in quite a number of bad streaming movies or at least it seems like he has. 

 

3 minutes ago, filmlover said:

Also I got the trailer for Tick Tick...Boom! before my showing which was my first time ever seeing a trailer for a Netflix movie before anything showing at a major chain. Looks like they are indeed committed to giving a pretty notable theatrical release before streaming first, which would be an amusing turn of events if it were Netflix and not a major Hollywood studio giving LMM the royal theatrical exclusivity treatment in 2021.

 

As I mentioned earlier, Netflix is spending billions and how much value is retained? They need to figure out how exactly they can make their movies more valuable long term. The erosion of popularity IMO is much higher than a similar movie that was released theatrically. 

 

Personally I loved 6 Underground, the Michael Bay/Ryan Reynolds action movie on Netflix, would have seen it in the cinema - but it was something I just stumbled upon. In my country, zero marketing, it (and really all their 'big' movies; Extraction, Old Guard etc.) quickly disappeared from view. You cannot have something topping the charts for a week and then disappearing forever as a sustainable business model. 

 

It would make sense for them (IMO) to acquire some cinemas, since the rest would not play ball, and then release their movies there as well as on their platform. Market it like an event, give it that prestige, but then also give your subscribers the ability to see it how they usually do. If it can't be done for all of their slate, at least do it for ones that they know have got good reception. It's all about perspective.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, BK007 said:

 

What acronym is that? DCOM?

 

 

Yep, doesn't help that Mackie has starred in quite a number of bad streaming movies or at least it seems like he has. 

 

 

As I mentioned earlier, Netflix is spending billions and how much value is retained? They need to figure out how exactly they can make their movies more valuable long term. The erosion of popularity IMO is much higher than a similar movie that was released theatrically. 

 

Personally I loved 6 Underground, the Michael Bay/Ryan Reynolds action movie on Netflix, would have seen it in the cinema - but it was something I just stumbled upon. In my country, zero marketing, it (and really all their 'big' movies; Extraction, Old Guard etc.) quickly disappeared from view. You cannot have something topping the charts for a week and then disappearing forever as a sustainable business model. 

 

It would make sense for them (IMO) to acquire some cinemas, since the rest would not play ball, and then release their movies there as well as on their platform. Market it like an event, give it that prestige, but then also give your subscribers the ability to see it how they usually do. If it can't be done for all of their slate, at least do it for ones that they know have got good reception. It's all about perspective.

DCOM - Disney Channel Original Movie, the bigger ones turn into franchises like High School Musical or The Descendants.

 

Netflix is looking for sheer content to attract/retain eyeballs with their movies. It's all about getting those people who will watch whatever to have a new movie to watch every week so they'll keep subscribing, quality is an incidental bonus. If you look at Hollywood movie studios in the 1930s, many released tons of movies each year, the classics are remembered but a lot of their output was considered mediocre or worse, even at the time. 

Edited by BoxOfficeFangrl
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Plain Old Tele said:

Part of Netflix’s model is not spending 70-100m on marketing for a theatrical release.

Studios should take note

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve every sympathy for everyone at WB that put every effort into making a great movie and marketing the hell out of it. Yet the fact remains, their overlords selling them all out for subscriber numbers - there’s just no getting away from that. 
 

I keep hearing “yeah but Godzilla v Kong made $100 million and that was on HBO Max”. 
That movie was an anomaly. A super IP picture that screams big screen, just like a Star Wars or Marvel movie. 
The regular pretty major releases, like ITH, are being and will continue to be slaughtered by this decision. 

Expect to see major budget WB movies for later in the year conveniently move to next year. Either that or WB make a statement that they’re changing their policy. 
I hear “yeah, but ITH wouldn’t have done that great pre-pandemic anyway”. 
 

Really?? It would have opened very well with WOM carrying it through the summer, Greatest Showman style. Instead, that WOM will largely result in people just watching the thing on tv.  They’ll check out the movies that can only be seen in cinemas at the cinema instead.  
 

Imagine the walk-ups on Friday night…..
 

“what shall we see Hun?”

 

“In the Heights is meant to be great!”

 

”yeah, but we can watch that tomorrow night on HBO Max. What about Quiet Place?”
 

The message WB are sending out is getting the reception they asked for as far as box office goes.  What did they expect? AT&T took advantage of the pandemic, as vaccines were starting to get rolled out, for subscribers. No wonder they’ve now offloaded to Discovery. 
 

Let’s just hope this once great studio can get a grip on what they’ve been known as throughout movie history. A behemoth studio that makes movies for the big screen. 

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think HBO Max is playing a huge part in this, Warner Bros. have a 30%+ share of the domestic marketplace (some of this is down to releasing more movies than other studios)

 

What people need to realise is even with AQP2 doing really well the domestic marketplace is still far from recovering, it’s still well under $1B year to date. In fact 6 of the 8 films that have crossed $30m domestically this year are day and date digital (Demon Slayer and AQP2 are the exceptions). Theatrical exclusives like Nobody, Wrath of Man, Peter Rabbit 2 etc. are not faring any better than In the Heights, Tom and Jerry etc. This isn’t a streaming issue but a product one.

 

The theatres desperately needs Superhero/Star Wars/Avatar size blockbusters which luckily the second half of the year has a handful although I don’t think any will be $500m+ grossers which will mean that box office will be under half of a normal year. As I’ve said in earlier threads the September-December films are much more important than the likes of AQP2 as they will set up which should be a very healthy 2022 that will be back to normal (or close to it) meaning ~$11B and that will be glorious. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the HBO max definately hurt it to some extent but I find it hard to buy after that 13m ow that it would have been the major breakout  many (including me) believed or that it would magically grow greatest showman legs if not for HBOmax. In retrospect it think this being a Rocketman level kind of sleeper hit would be what it would have done under better circumstances.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

So how much would've Heights made opening weekend as a theater exclusive during the pandemic?

 

How about before the pandemic? 

 

Because I still don't think it would've gotten break out numbers under those conditions. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying HBO Max didn't have some effect but I don't know....for all the raves online, I never felt any real buzz for this. I'm sure theater geeks and trendy white folks are into it but there seemed to be a very strong assumption that the LATINO monolith would flock in mass. I don't think they cared about this from the start.

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, grey ghost said:

So how much would've Heights made opening weekend as a theater exclusive during the pandemic?

 

How about before the pandemic? 

 

Because I still don't think it would've gotten break out numbers under those conditions. 

While I agree we probably just really overestimated the appeal of this particular Broadway adaptation, I do think it could've made around $20M either without the home release the same day or if its original June 2020 release had happened. I dunno, Hamilton (which was also supposed to come to theaters at one point) was a streaming monster last year and it feels like a lot of the same demographic is just choosing to watch this the same way since they can.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jamiem said:

I don’t think HBO Max is playing a huge part in this, Warner Bros. have a 30%+ share of the domestic marketplace (some of this is down to releasing more movies than other studios)

 

What people need to realise is even with AQP2 doing really well the domestic marketplace is still far from recovering, it’s still well under $1B year to date. In fact 6 of the 8 films that have crossed $30m domestically this year are day and date digital (Demon Slayer and AQP2 are the exceptions). Theatrical exclusives like Nobody, Wrath of Man, Peter Rabbit 2 etc. are not faring any better than In the Heights, Tom and Jerry etc. This isn’t a streaming issue but a product one.

 

The theatres desperately needs Superhero/Star Wars/Avatar size blockbusters which luckily the second half of the year has a handful although I don’t think any will be $500m+ grossers which will mean that box office will be under half of a normal year. As I’ve said in earlier threads the September-December films are much more important than the likes of AQP2 as they will set up which should be a very healthy 2022 that will be back to normal (or close to it) meaning ~$11B and that will be glorious. 


we can agree to disagree. My sentiment isn’t directed just at WB and HBO Max. 
When you create a system where by audiences are now getting used to either day and date or a few weeks later at home, then you’re just asking for trouble. 
 

During the pandemic it was understandable, but now…they need to start focusing on what’s been their golden goose since the advent of the medium - the movie theaters. 
 

I keep saying it, but any business that puts a premium version of their product online for ‘free’ is not a good business. It’s a controversial topic on here for sure, but it’s reality. The last eighteen months of people being stuck at home has only accelerated people’s abilities to ‘acquire things’ they shouldn’t.  The industry has still not come up with a solution to this, but the biggest thing they can do is not put them online in the first place! 
 

I’m pretty certain most on here have friends and family that have seen tons of the movies we’re talking about here, and didn’t pay a dime. It’s systemic and the studios are not helping the situation. 
 

Do we honestly believe the majority of families watching premium access Disney movies paid for it? Give me a break. 
 

Anyway…release movies exclusively in cinemas for a set amount of time. Even if that window is reduced. Then go to digital. Otherwise we’ve got a serious problem on our hands where great movies are just going to get lost with all the other million films and shows vying for attention on streaming. 
 

Theaters offer big marquee exclusivity. They’re special and make the films they project a special thing. They’ve always worked for everybody, so let’s not try and break something that doesn’t need fixing. It won’t work out well for anybody otherwise. 

Edited by wildphantom
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

So, since we're talking HBO Max, I took the time to watch an HBO Max dual release last night...yeah, I was gonna watch In The Heights, but then Max warned me that Those Who Wish Me Dead was leaving, so I watched that (and saved ITH for when my girls get home)...

 

So, I looked at the rotten tomato scores, and I think I watched a different movie than those folks.  I can TOTALLY see why TWWMD did terribly as a dual release b/c it's not good.  It's implausible, bordering on insane.  It explains ALMOST nothing (we get one thing explained, which is big thing...but one thing).  It kills everything (that's always the solution).  And it just revels in mediocrity.  The acting was mostly fine and the dialogue was okay, but it just revels in being a mediocre C/"direct to DVD" movie.  Which means HBO Max was well served putting that one in the strategy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I Just think the IN the Heights box office thing was ultimately just a Twitter bubble hype. Of course HBO Max hurt it, but i don't think it would have done much better.

 

Twitter and Social Media in general have a way of making things look like a much better deal than they actual are.

Edited by CrashBandicoot81
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.