ARGYLLE| Matthew Vaughn| Henry Cavill, Samuel L. Jackson, Bryce Dallas Howard, Bryan Cranston, Sam Rockwell | February 2, 2023

[OncomingStorm93]

1 hour ago, MysteryMovieMogul said:

The only cost that matters for BO discussion is the $200 million that Apple paid, though, right? I guess I wonder why how much they made back matters.

You gotta factor that Apple views all  these films more as marketing campaigns for their streaming service.

 

After all, so much of the discussion is about Apple TV+. No press is bad press, free marketing, yadayadayada.

 

How relevant is the BO discussion in that larger context? Certainly not the same for a film that a studio spent $200m of their own production budget on.

 

Apple’s playing a different game. And I dare say it’s working for them.

[MysteryMovieMogul]

2 hours ago, OncomingStorm93 said:

You gotta factor that Apple views all  these films more as marketing campaigns for their streaming service.

 

After all, so much of the discussion is about Apple TV+. No press is bad press, free marketing, yadayadayada.

 

How relevant is the BO discussion in that larger context? Certainly not the same for a film that a studio spent $200m of their own production budget on.

 

Apple’s playing a different game. And I dare say it’s working for them.

Is it, though?

 

They don't need people talking, they need people subscribing. Argylle seems to have had a large marketing budget, with the majority of the cast on talk shows the past two weeks. Not to mention the tv spots and other advertising.

 

Meanwhile, as was pointed out a number of pages back, Killers of the Flower Moon has underwhelmed regarding mainstream awards outside of Lily Gladstone and also flopped at the box office , Napoleon never even entered the conversation and also didn't do amazing at the box office, and now Argylle looks to be a box office bomb. Maybe they won't lose much money in the end, but it won't make them take such a gamble in the future.

[DAJK]

Obviously a good box office run would be BETTER for Apple, but I gotta give it to them for putting out three “buzzy” titles in a row. Sure, they cost too much and didn’t generate enough returns, but Killers got a lot of awards buzz (plus Marty + Leo + DeNiro), Napoleon clearly had audience interest looking at its box office numbers, before the WOM became toxic. And Argylle essentially became a meme. People are talking about titles on Apple TV+. Get big stars over to your platform, and audiences will eventually follow.

[Speedorito]

28 minutes ago, DAJK said:

Obviously a good box office run would be BETTER for Apple, but I gotta give it to them for putting out three “buzzy” titles in a row. Sure, they cost too much and didn’t generate enough returns, but Killers got a lot of awards buzz (plus Marty + Leo + DeNiro), Napoleon clearly had audience interest looking at its box office numbers, before the WOM became toxic. And Argylle essentially became a meme. People are talking about titles on Apple TV+. Get big stars over to your platform, and audiences will eventually follow.

Apple already has a lot of star power and buzz though. Reese Witherspoon, Jennifer Aniston, Idris Elba, Jason Sudeikis, Brie Larson, Harrison Ford, Tom Holland, Jason Momoa, Austin Butler, etc. all lead series there. And nearly all of their shows are critically acclaimed award winners at best and mildly well received at worst. The TV side is took off right away. If anything, their films are dragging it down a bit.

 

At least from people I know, they don’t consider Apple TV+ really worth it (compared to Netflix, Max, Disney+, etc) because there’s only one or two shows running at once, and the catalog is almost entirely originals and relatively small. 

[Becker]

On 2/3/2024 at 12:11 PM, 35MM-18 said:

I kinda got that chemistry from them too. They should've done it. 

Might as well. Movie was already a full blown 2 hour SNL episode at that point. 

[PlatnumRoyce]

On 2/4/2024 at 3:58 PM, MysteryMovieMogul said:

Is it, though?

 

They don't need people talking, they need people subscribing. Argylle seems to have had a large marketing budget, with the majority of the cast on talk shows the past two weeks. Not to mention the tv spots and other advertising.

 

Meanwhile, as was pointed out a number of pages back, Killers of the Flower Moon has underwhelmed regarding mainstream awards outside of Lily Gladstone and also flopped at the box office , Napoleon never even entered the conversation and also didn't do amazing at the box office, and now Argylle looks to be a box office bomb. Maybe they won't lose much money in the end, but it won't make them take such a gamble in the future.

Argylle's marketing budget was reported as 80M split 50/50 between apple and distributor.

 

Anyways, 

 

Quote

The only cost that matters for BO discussion is the $200 million that Apple paid, though, right? I guess I wonder why how much they made back matters.

For Apple - yes but I don't think that's the only possible lens. For example, given the film's marketing budget was "only" $80M, I don't think it's at all unfair to compare the film's box office results to significantly cheaper big tentpole spy releases if we're looking at "how big of a hit/flop" style box office discussions (because they're ultimately going to be very similar films given similar theatrical releases just with a different financial structure). 

Edited February 7 by PlatnumRoyce

[AJG]

On 2/4/2024 at 9:12 PM, DAJK said:

Obviously a good box office run would be BETTER for Apple, but I gotta give it to them for putting out three “buzzy” titles in a row. Sure, they cost too much and didn’t generate enough returns, but Killers got a lot of awards buzz (plus Marty + Leo + DeNiro), Napoleon clearly had audience interest looking at its box office numbers, before the WOM became toxic. And Argylle essentially became a meme. People are talking about titles on Apple TV+. Get big stars over to your platform, and audiences will eventually follow.

 

In October Apple TV+ viewership was just 0.01% higher than Discovery Plus (A service that has most its content co-streamed on Max). 

I'd honestly be SHOCKED if that $300m Band of Brothers show they have lands on the Nielsen charts.

 

Nielsen Oct, 2023 US TV viewing share

Tiny streaming services hidden in "Other Streaming"

AppleTV+: 0.24%
Discovery+: 0.23%
All ESPN (incl ESPN+): 0.12%
Crunchyroll: 0.10%
Twitch: 0.05% pic.twitter.com/hY6B1aAjYL

— TV Grim Reaper (@TVGrimReaper) November 28, 2023

Edited February 7 by AJG

[TheDude391]

Apple has quality content but lacks a backlog library which is the issue. TBH they should merge with Paramount+ or one of the other failing studio streamers, get their library onto Apple TV+.

I even think getting one of the smaller streamers like a Shudder would be beneficial, niche but enthusiast market, make Apple the home for horror movies/shows. Just using that one as an example.

Edited February 8 by TheDude391

[Barnack]

On 2/4/2024 at 11:59 AM, PlatnumRoyce said:

Sure, but how much money did Vaughn/Marv bank on this film? I think the obvious answer is that I'm just missing something about how its set up (there are more non UK costs than I suspect and they don't show up on the ledger?). It's more just flagging this as a piece of hard evidence for these Argylle cost discussions. 

 

Depend how it is packaged, but acquisition cost can resemble movie budget (it can change how bonus compensation work quite a bit though).

 

A bit like Kevin Smith speech about independant movie financing, you make a movie for 4 millions, if all goes well it sales for $6m at Sundance (and everyone that worked for nearly free to keep that cost at 4 get paid) and after a $20m theatrical release the studio that bought it want to make $25 millions or more at the box office, for a movie that did cost only $4 million to make.

 

Those relatively small $80m Adam Sandler movies did that much to acquire from Happy Madison not necessarily to make.

 

As for the UK incorporation cost, usually no, we are not looking at a demand for film credit but the whole company, the way there credit worked in the past made people wrote all the cost in them, even talent participation (you can see the cost continue to go up post release), unlike when you look at California tax credit where you only see the below the line on location that can access credit being listed. Maybe it did change...

 

  

On 2/3/2024 at 10:21 PM, PlatnumRoyce said:

FYI - the film's corporate entity appears to be MARV QUINN PRODUCTIONS LIMITED though I'm struggling to see how you get from that document to the reported $200M budget for this single film. 

 

 

To note the 92 or millions pound spent is up to june 30 2022, between now and then it is possible for money to have been spent post-production and what not, but maybe not that much, could have been sleeping in the strange theatrical world and then push for timing.

Edited February 8 by Barnack

[dudalb]

On 2/7/2024 at 3:28 PM, AJG said:

 

In October Apple TV+ viewership was just 0.01% higher than Discovery Plus (A service that has most its content co-streamed on Max). 

I'd honestly be SHOCKED if that $300m Band of Brothers show they have lands on the Nielsen charts.

 

Well, Masters of the Air is the main reason I subscirbed to Apple.....

[dudalb]

ANyeay, even Apple cannot keep dropping these huge budgets on films that lose so much money. They will have to go for less expensive prestige projects eventually.

Not that Argylle was a prestige project....

Edited February 9 by dudalb

[Dominic Draper]

This was absolutely God awful.

 

The first half is not good but it's not terrible, then the 2nd half goes insanely stupid. Rockwell does his best but he can't overcome the stupidity of the script and the terrible directing.

 

The 2 big set piece action scenes in the 2nd half had me close to walking out. Vaughn seems to be getting worse with every film.

 

3/10

Edited February 9 by Dominic Draper

[dudalb]

Just now, Dominic Draper said:

This absolutely God awful.

 

The first half is not good bur it's terrible, then the 2ndd half goes insanely stupid. Rockwell does his best but he can't overcome the stupidity of the script and the terrible directing.

 

The 2 big set piece action scenes in the 2nd half had me close to walking out. Vaughn seems to be getting worse with every film.

 

3/10

I have not seen it, but a friend at work who did says all it does is remind you how much better "Romancing The Stone" was.

[Avatree]

Errrrrr this was great lol. Really enjoyed it. Matthew Vaughn back on form after some quite lackluster movies. His best film since Kick Ass.

 

I had misunderstood what the film was about. I straight up thought it was just a spy movie with Henry Cavill and Dua Lipa. So a lot of the movie was quite the surprise lol. Was cool seeing big name star after big name star pop up throughout the film.

 

This film was a really pleasant surprise. Also I want to nominate this film for Best Original Song already. Banger.

 

Really don't understand how this cost over $200M though. The CGI is pretty weak. The big name actors have quite minor roles.

 

 

 

Edited February 12 by Avatree

[35MM-18]

17 hours ago, Avatree said:

Also I want to nominate this film for Best Original Song already. Banger.

I hated the film overall, but I really love "Electric Energy". I kinda want DeBose to sing the next Bond song now.

[AMCTheater2000]