⊃∪∩⪽ Part II | March 1, 2024 | Reactions drop February 15, reviews February 21 | Zendaya for our next C-3P0

[Avatree]

17 minutes ago, von Kenni said:

 

Yeap, if their sources are good, I'll drink to that. I've been meaning to add to my numbers that I believe the actuals are a few millions less than than my $193m which would be taken out of the above the line costs hence the $190m makes sense based on the open source information that I used.

 

What Variety forgets to point out are hefty rebates which brings the effective actuals at $150m. That's where they should compare the BO. I.e. breakeven point is already around $300-330m. Even if the P&A budget is bloated, max $350m.

 

The reported budget normally accounts for tax rebates.

[MysteryMovieMogul]

I feel old because I don't recognize anyone from these reaction Tweets!

[von Kenni]

12 minutes ago, Avatree said:

The reported budget normally accounts for tax rebates.

I've heard that said in the past too but I don't think so. Highly unlikely in this case at least but not either in the  Disney, Marvel productions that have been lately filmed with UK incentives or Dune Part 1 either.

[Last Man Standing]

 

[Brainbug]

Oh man im so ready for this

[joselowe]

45 minutes ago, Last Man Standing said:

 

Why does it seem like Timothee was trying to hold in his laughter? lol 

[TomThomas]

2 hours ago, von Kenni said:

What Variety forgets to point out are hefty rebates which brings the effective actuals at $150m. That's where they should compare the BO. I.e. breakeven point is already around $300-330m. Even if the P&A budget is bloated, max $350m.

 

Or more like 190m after hefty rebates.

[AMC Theaters Enjoyer]

Some folks are saying the film is pretty bleak. Makes sense given what Dune is all about, but curious how audiences will feel about that.

[Last Man Standing]

 

 

 

[Warmaster506]

8 minutes ago, AMC Theaters Enjoyer said:

Some folks are saying the film is pretty bleak. Makes sense given what Dune is all about, but curious how audiences will feel about that.

That's a good thing 

[DeeCee]

Catching the worm looks awesome in IMAX.

 

That is all.

[lorddemaxus]

55 minutes ago, AMC Theaters Enjoyer said:

Some folks are saying the film is pretty bleak. Makes sense given what Dune is all about, but curious how audiences will feel about that.

The ending of the 3rd highest grossing film of last year posits that MAD is inevitable. It'll be fine.

[Lucas]

 

[IchwanBigBrother]

1 hour ago, AMC Theaters Enjoyer said:

Some folks are saying the film is pretty bleak. Makes sense given what Dune is all about, but curious how audiences will feel about that.

How I look at it theoretically: a polarizing but popular book makes a polarizing blockbuster, makes talk, makes even more devoted fans and lasting, nourishing value. The ending of THE DARK KNIGHT and the oft-mentioned THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK weren't exactly sunshine and rainbows either, speaking of what may be cinematic cousins. 

Edited February 20 by IchwanBigBrother

[PlatnumRoyce]

3 hours ago, von Kenni said:

I've heard that said in the past too but I don't think so. Highly unlikely in this case at least but not either in the  Disney, Marvel productions that have been lately filmed with UK incentives or Dune Part 1 either.

The Disney budgets are still insane (and well above trades) after you take the tax credits into account. To my eyes, it's clearly a real mixed bag likely stemming from how people get their data. For example: I'm 100% sure Bottoms' number comes from the raw spending from one state's worth of filming (lousiana despite the film had other costs) given LA Fastline is public knowledge. Contrast that with another film, 65, where the studio clearly pushed a 45M budget. This was at net spend from Louisiana but there's another $10M of filming in Oregon (800k tax breaks) and likely $$$ in post-production in California/overseas.

[PlatnumRoyce]

21 minutes ago, IchwanBigBrother said:

How I look at it theoretically: a polarizing but popular book makes a polarizing blockbuster, makes talk, makes even more devoted fans and lasting, nourishing value. The ending of THE DARK KNIGHT and the oft-mentioned THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK weren't exactly sunshine and rainbows either, speaking of what may be cinematic cousins. 

You'd think so but I'd argue the tone of the dark knight's ending is radically changed by having Gary Oldman just sell the hell out of the "not the hero we deserve" monologue combined the pounding motion of the score that quickly cuts off. For better or worse, it somehow ends up avoiding the bittersweet feeling the plot is leading you towards. 

Edited February 21 by PlatnumRoyce

[MOVIEGUY]

I just want to brag that I'm seeing this early this Sunday. There's an early showing at the IMAX near me and there was one aisle seat left in the very last row. Can't fuckin' wait.

[IchwanBigBrother]

20 minutes ago, PlatnumRoyce said:

You'd think so but I'd argue the tone of the dark knight's ending is radically changed by having Gary Oldman just sell the hell out of the "not the hero we deserve" monologue combined the pounding motion of the score that quickly cuts off. For better or worse, it somehow ends up avoiding the bittersweet feeling the plot is leading you towards. 

Yes. It's leavened by the certainty that Batman will have his day again because he's known. Paul's path is...different. But audiences will hopefully be given a vision which will stick in their consciousness with ⊃∪∩⪽ and that can create something special and valuable for audiences, a "must see" factor. 

[von Kenni]

1 hour ago, TomThomas said:

Or more like 190m after hefty rebates.

 

Everything is possible but unlikely based on the breakdown I made from open sourced information if you check it out. I'm making some updates on it based on new refined info (shooting days and locations) on some parts of it but nothing that would likely change those overall numbers in a big way. If the actuals are $190m after rebates then you would need to add something drastic to the high ball numbers.

 

13 minutes ago, PlatnumRoyce said:

The Disney budgets are still insane (and well above trades) after you take the tax credits into account. To my eyes, it's clearly a real mixed bag likely stemming from how people get their data. For example: I'm 100% sure Bottoms' number comes from the raw spending from one state's worth of filming (lousiana despite the film had other costs) given LA Fastline is public knowledge. Contrast that with another film, 65, where the studio clearly pushed a 45M budget. This was at net spend from Louisiana but there's another $10M of filming in Oregon (800k tax breaks) and likely $$$ in post-production in California/overseas.

 

Yeah, agree. It definitely is a mixed bag. I dived deeper into the rebates last spring regarding Ant Man 3, The Little Mermaid, Indy 5, etc and seemed that the reporting is always something to take with a grain of salt and you need to dig deeper. Pretty much all of those went over budget as Disney and MCU has a habit to do and be wasteful. And it depends a lot of the type of incentives and rebates they get. I.e. what costs can you put there. The UK seems most flexible where you can basically put everything in as long as 10% is UK local expenses. That said even in those cases you need to track possible pre-production, right fees, etc.

 

That said, I got to a pretty accurate results when I did cost/revenue analysis on multiple movies a year ago that correspondent those that ultimately leaked out or were done by some industry analysis with more access to to actuals. But even then it's always possible to be off even tens of millions especially with Disney and MCU.

 

Recalling now, BR 2049 was shoot mainly in Hungary too and reported budget was usually $185m or some cases even $200m but later revealed that the actual was around $150 after rebates.

[TomThomas]

14 minutes ago, von Kenni said:

Everything is possible but unlikely based on the breakdown I made from open sourced information if you check it out. I'm making some updates on it based on new refined info (shooting days and locations) on some parts of it but nothing that would likely change those overall numbers in a big way. If the actuals are $190m after rebates then you would need to add something drastic to the high ball numbers.

I don't buy it cost less than the first one, you can't make a prestige sci fi epic with all-star cast, big battles and A-list director for 150m anymore, maybe in 2009, but not today. 190m after rebates sounds about right.