Halloween Weekend Thread | D:$15.53m HK: $8.5m NTTD: $7.82m

[DC Rich]

12 minutes ago, filmnerdjamie said:

Ah, the excuses from the Dune fanboys. 

 

I believe you may have hit a nerve. 

[Porthos]

6 minutes ago, DC Rich said:

 

I believe you may have hit a nerve. 

 

The "nerve" he hit is from people being annoyed not only with Dune fanboys, but Dune anti-fanboys as well.

 

Like, it ain't striking a nerve to note the very real differences between the situation that Blade Runner 2049 ran into and the one Dune (2021) did.

- signed, a person who hasn't watched Dune and has no plans on seeing Dune.

Edited October 30, 2021 by Porthos

[CJohn]

Hilariously bad numbers for Soho and Antlers. The pandemic kills two more movies.

[baumer]

The problem with saying Dune is being released in a pandemic and it's on HBO Max and so on, then declaring that it's doing well, is that the budget for this thing was probably 225 million or more.  The budget is pre-pandemic budget and it is being judged on pandemic results.  Can't have it both ways.  When something has a budget of 165 mill plus marketing, I think it needs to do more than it is domestically.  I have no idea what it's going to make internationally, but with a 225 budget (or more) wouldn't it need something like 400 mill to break even?

[baumer]

For the record, I have not seen Dune either, nor do I plan to.  I'm not trying to poop on it or praise it, just kind of commenting on what I've seen here for the last few months.  

[DC Rich]

7 minutes ago, Porthos said:

 

The "nerve" he hit is from people being annoyed not only with Dune fanboys, but Dune anti-fanboys as well.

 

Like, it ain't striking a nerve to note the very real differences between the situation that Blade Runner 2049 ran into and the one Dune (2021) did.

- signed, a person who hasn't watched Dune and has no plans on seeing Dune.

 

I understand completely, but a lot of people on here overreact way too much.  Some of it is deserved but most cases it isn't worth a response IMO.  Yes, I probably shouldn't have said anything as I usually do not.  I usually just enjoy reading and getting all the information and opinions I can from the different threads.  However, after reading people going back and forth over differing opinions for several pages on different threads over the last few days, it just kind of slipped out so to speak.   It is good advice to take the Mods advice that you do not have to respond to a post, you can just scroll on.  I failed to listen this time.  Oh well, I'll go back into my hole for now.  Enjoy the movies.  Oh and the numbers. 

[Porthos]

10 minutes ago, baumer said:

The problem with saying Dune is being released in a pandemic and it's on HBO Max and so on, then declaring that it's doing well, is that the budget for this thing was probably 225 million or more.  The budget is pre-pandemic budget and it is being judged on pandemic results.  Can't have it both ways.  When something has a budget of 165 mill plus marketing, I think it needs to do more than it is domestically.  I have no idea what it's going to make internationally, but with a 225 budget (or more) wouldn't it need something like 400 mill to break even?

 

Stepping aside any specific debates around Dune itself and speaking in more general terms, if we're using profitability from the box office alone, there's a whole lot of failures this year.  And probably into next as well.

 

Personally, and this is just me, I'm giving nearly every movie a pass on profitability this year unless it pulls a The Last Duel or The Suicide Squad.  And even something like The Suicide Squad  is being graded on something of a curve simply due to the immense drop off from the first installment that points to there being more problems than HBO Max or the pandemic.

 

Only have to look at marginal cases like Cruella which has already had a sequel greenlit (or at least it's all but certain to) to see that this is just a special circumstance.

 

Edited October 30, 2021 by Porthos

[WittyUsername]

Dune is objectively doing much better than BR: 2049, considering the circumstances. 

[baumer]

3 minutes ago, Porthos said:

 

Stepping aside any specific debates around Dune itself and speaking in more general terms, if we're using profitability from the box office alone, there's a whole lot of failures this year.  And probably into next as well.

 

Personally, and this is just me, I'm giving nearly every movie a pass on profitability this year unless it pulls a The Last Duel or The Suicide Squad.  And even something like The Suicide Squad  is being graded on something of a curve simply due to the immense drop off from the first installment that points to there being more problems than HBO Max or the pandemic.

 

Only have to look at marginal cases like Cruella which has already had a sequel greenlit (or at least it's all but certain to) to see that this is just a special circumstance.

 

 

I agree with you in principle, but maybe it's time to start lowering budgets on movies.  I say this as a film fan.  I don't think you can continue to allocate this kind of money to films like, but not restricted to, Dune.  Films like Fast and Furious and maybe some MCU movies are still good for the massive budgets but even Venom and Shang Chi are still going to do just okay domestically.  They look to both clear 400 mill but that's a far cry from even the smallest of MCU efforts like Ant-man, although Shang Chi will come pretty close to 500.

[CJohn]

The current theatrical environment doesn't sustain 150M+ budgets anymore but stuff like Shang-Chi, Venom: Let There Be Carnage and Dune was done pre-pandemic, and the truth is that marketing budgets are well below what they used to be.

 

Theaters are far from recovered. We will see how things are a year from now.

[Porthos]

27 minutes ago, baumer said:

 

I agree with you in principle, but maybe it's time to start lowering budgets on movies.  I say this as a film fan.  I don't think you can continue to allocate this kind of money to films like, but not restricted to, Dune.  Films like Fast and Furious and maybe some MCU movies are still good for the massive budgets but even Venom and Shang Chi are still going to do just okay domestically.  They look to both clear 400 mill but that's a far cry from even the smallest of MCU efforts like Ant-man, although Shang Chi will come pretty close to 500.

 

Oh, I've thought that for a long time (ever since about 10 minutes after Solo bombed [yes, I know it was shot nearly twice — still had way too high of a budget for even one shoot]).

 

At the same time, a film that cost $100m to make in 2010 sure as hell won't cost $100m to make in 2022, so I do think we have to mentally adjust somewhat when we look at film budgets.

 

That being said, we are also in a fluctuating state.  We really don't know what the movie theater landscape is gonna look like when we exit the pandemic era and enter the endemic one.  It's not like these trends weren't already here before the 'rona (Mortal Engines boming, anyone?).  How receptive will folks be to films that aren't already established IP?  How receptive will folks be to more, let's be nice and say cerebral films as opposed to more light entertainment fare?

 

Will the mid-budget blockbuster survive even survive in the first place?  Even if we are sure that movies allegedly aimed at adults are on the endangered species list, what about films that aren't already established in the minds of folks?

 

So, yes, absolutely with you on budget bloat.  Then again, every time folks actually try to cut costs you get people out there screaming their heads off about how awful CGI is and why can't things all be practical effects.  Well, all those practical effects bloat budgets out in a hurry.  Maybe things like ILM's Stagecraft will make it so costs can come down and money isn't poured down a rathole on some of the expensive location shoots.  I will be very interested in seeing how The Batman is received since it made heavy use of that technology (from what I understand).

 

Could very well be that (many) films can't afford these types of budgets anymore.  Wouldn't be the first time Hollywood has had to cut back from overspending on films (thinking of the epics of the 50s and 60s here).  

Edited October 30, 2021 by Porthos

[Fox20]

I hope I see most of the same excuses next week.

Edited October 30, 2021 by Fox20

[lorddemaxus]

6 minutes ago, Porthos said:

 

 

So, yes, absolutely with you on budget bloat.  Then again, every time folks actually try to cut costs you get people out there screaming their heads off about how awful CGI is and why can't things all be practical effects.  Well, all those practical effects bloat budgets out in a hurry.  Maybe things like ILM's Stagecraft will make it so costs can come down and money isn't poured down a rathole on expensive location shoots.  I will be very interested in seeing how The Batman is received since it made heavy use of that technology (from what I understand).

 

Could very well be that (many) films can't afford these types of budgets anymore.  Wouldn't be the first time Hollywood has had to cut back from overspending on films (thinking of the epics of the 50s and 60s here).  

Shooting on location or using more practical effects doesn't mean the movie will cost substantially more. Dune cost as much as Shang-Chi and less than Jungle Cruise, both of which use noticeably heavy CGI. And what's wrong with asking for less awful CG work? Not only would films look better, you wouldn't have non-union VFX workers overwork themselves to create middling stuff because studios find that more convenient.

[ThomasNicole]

The biggest WB movie on pandemic is GxK which did 280M without China.

 

It's not hard seeing why Dune making +300M without China is getting a sequel. 

 

Of course for the budget is not enough, but people really need to stop pretending everything is normal. Not a single Hollywood movie this year made 600M without China, and we get some pretty huge franchises trying it.

 

There's still a pandemic going on, and HBO Max hurting the legs, Dune is a success because it did fine despite that. Imagine this without pandemic and theatrical release and we would be talking about +500M instead of 350M, which is more than good for 165M budget, and probably it's where Part II is going to land.

[baumer]

I just want to see the theatres survive.  Different topic I know, but to me they are  all connected.  A healthy Hollywood, including the budgets and the profits, means a healthy movie theatre.  I used to go to the theatre 90X a year right up until about 2017.  But when most films are about 18-25$$$ to see on the big screen here in Toronto, and I can see them for a sliver of that maybe two months down the road at home, I'll wait.  I don't have $200 a month to allocate to the theatre anymore.  Maybe if budgets are lowered, they can lower the cost of the price of admission, maybe on a tier structure.  

[Porthos]

12 minutes ago, lorddemaxus said:

Shooting on location or using more practical effects doesn't mean the movie will cost substantially more. Dune cost as much as Shang-Chi and less than Jungle Cruise, both of which use noticeably heavy CGI. And what's wrong with asking for less awful CG work? Not only would films look better, you wouldn't have non-union VFX workers overwork themselves to create middling stuff because studios find that more convenient.

 

Because it's a knee-jerk criticism that ignores there is a whooooole lot of CGI in films that goes by unnoticed.

 

Admittedly, it is something of a pet peeve of mine in that I just think CGI bashing is more than overblown.  And tired for that matter. 

 

As for union/non-union sfx work that's really a separate discussion as I do feel the VFX houses are long overdue for unionization.  

 

 

Edited October 30, 2021 by Porthos

[Ozymandias]

Covid has permanently destroyed the idea of going to a theater for a lot of people, I think a lot of people are in denial about this.  I'm not 100% against going to a theater anymore, but I'm sure as hell not gonna go see a big movie on OW anymore, not in this dangerous shithole failed state.  The vaxx isn't 100% and I know people who've been mangled with horrific Long Covid symptoms for well over a year now with no end in sight for them.

[lorddemaxus]

1 minute ago, Porthos said:

 

Because it's a knee-jerk criticism that ignores there is a whooooole lot of CGI in films that goes by unnoticed.

 

Admittedly, it is something of a pet peeve of mine in that I just think CGI bashing is more than overblown.  And tired for that matter. 

 

As for union/non-union sfx work that's really a separate discussion as I do feel the VFX houses are long overdue for unionization.  

 

 

Is CGI bashing really tired when almost blockbusters still cost $150-200 mil or so and look like they were shot on a soundstage? And I don't think the conversations about VFX workers is a different conversation since the current situation we're in is partially due to how studios and VFX houses are exhausting the workers (which then clearly affects their output). 

 

And the movies where you don't notice the CGI generally mix it with practical effects and are mostly supplemental. That's not how CGI is used in most blockbusters today. 

[von Kenni]

24 minutes ago, Porthos said:

 

Stepping aside any specific debates around Dune itself and speaking in more general terms, if we're using profitability from the box office alone, there's a whole lot of failures this year.  And probably into next as well.

 

Personally, and this is just me, I'm giving nearly every movie a pass on profitability this year unless it pulls a The Last Duel or The Suicide Squad.  And even something like The Suicide Squad  is being graded on something of a curve simply due to the immense drop off from the first installment that points to there being more problems than HBO Max or the pandemic.

 

Only have to look at marginal cases like Cruella which has already had a sequel greenlit (or at least it's all but certain to) to see that this is just a special circumstance.

 

Porthos hits the nail on the head here. If we define success by profitability through purely box office without ancillaries, Dune and most releases this year are failures. Maybe more interesting is to define success by the eyes of the studios and how they define success. That would tell e.g. if they greenlight sequels or not for the film we're analyzing. Without going into great detail here (these have been discussed on other threads): 

 

1. Studios like WB /w AT&T analyze box office results in these abnormal times holistically: HBO Max numbers & box office effects, older demos hesitancy, pandemic's effects on roll-out, etc. and in each market, not just domestically. Then they most likely extrapolate how the movie, like Dune, would have made in pre- or post-pandemic times, and based on that make decisions for the future. In this case they would see that in pre-pandemic times Dune would have probably made closer to $450-500m WW (Batman Begins level) and that would and did greenlight its plans to start/continue the franchise, hence Part 2 (as an investment Dune was always about the possibility of a franchise).

 

2. The pandemic ignited streaming competition and AT&T made a bold promise in order to get a critical mass for HBO Max domestically (and ultimately internationally) to open all movies DaD in 2021. The lifetime value of one subscriber is 10-20 that of a one box office ticket buyer. Building and competing with streaming service brands is capital intensive and upfront heavy, especially if you're late in the game (vs. Netflix). Only WB & HBO Max have the real data and means to calculate the impact with each release. We can only make calculations that tell about the ballparks of how much each movie lose in legs or possibly with OW. E.g. Dune's 1.9m Samba TV household number could be multiplied with 1.3? to get viewers on OW and using $14.4 ATP get about $36m "box office value" but most of them wouldn't have in any case gone to see Dune in cinema. 10% would be $3.6m ,20% $7.2m, etc. But this is just part of the picture: what's the value of those new viewers for HBO Max? How many new subscribers were there? We don't know but HBO Max for sure will analyze it. What we know is that building their streaming brand is a key strategic business goal that overwrites any single movie.

 

3. At the same time they learn from this year's releases and look for trends & changes in consumer behavior in order to decide on post-pandemic models with box office & streaming. We already know that for next year WB has 45-day theatrical releases after which they'll be on HBO Max. Plus they'll produce about half of their movies straight to HBO Max. With our access to data most simple way is try to analyze what the movie would have made in pre-pandemic times as pure theatrical release and that way analyze its profitability with box office and ancillaries (ballpark estimation) vs. costs but if it is not just meant to be a one-time off thing (like Titanic), but part of a franchise, then find suitable comparisons (hence Batman Begins vs. Dune) to understand it as an investment for the future.

[efialtes76]

7 minutes ago, von Kenni said:

Porthos hits the nail on the head here. If we define success by profitability through purely box office without ancillaries, Dune and most releases this year are failures. Maybe more interesting is to define success by the eyes of the studios and how they define success. That would tell e.g. if they greenlight sequels or not for the film we're analyzing. Without going into great detail here (these have been discussed on other threads): 

 

1. Studios like WB /w AT&T analyze box office results in these abnormal times holistically: HBO Max numbers & box office effects, older demos hesitancy, pandemic's effects on roll-out, etc. and in each market, not just domestically. Then they most likely extrapolate how the movie, like Dune, would have made in pre- or post-pandemic times, and based on that make decisions for the future. In this case they would see that in pre-pandemic times Dune would have probably made closer to $450-500m WW (Batman Begins level) and that would and did greenlight its plans to start/continue the franchise, hence Part 2 (as an investment Dune was always about the possibility of a franchise).

 

2. The pandemic ignited streaming competition and AT&T made a bold promise in order to get a critical mass for HBO Max domestically (and ultimately internationally) to open all movies DaD in 2021. The lifetime value of one subscriber is 10-20 that of a one box office ticket buyer. Building and competing with streaming service brands is capital intensive and upfront heavy, especially if you're late in the game (vs. Netflix). Only WB & HBO Max have the real data and means to calculate the impact with each release. We can only make calculations that tell about the ballparks of how much each movie lose in legs or possibly with OW. E.g. Dune's 1.9m Samba TV household number could be multiplied with 1.3? to get viewers on OW and using $14.4 ATP get about $36m "box office value" but most of them wouldn't have in any case gone to see Dune in cinema. 10% would be $3.6m ,20% $7.2m, etc. But this is just part of the picture: what's the value of those new viewers for HBO Max? How many new subscribers were there? We don't know but HBO Max for sure will analyze it. What we know is that building their streaming brand is a key strategic business goal that overwrites any single movie.

 

3. At the same time they learn from this year's releases and look for trends & changes in consumer behavior in order to decide on post-pandemic models with box office & streaming. We already know that for next year WB has 45-day theatrical releases after which they'll be on HBO Max. Plus they'll produce about half of their movies straight to HBO Max. With our access to data most simple way is try to analyze what the movie would have made in pre-pandemic times as pure theatrical release and that way analyze its profitability with box office and ancillaries (ballpark estimation) vs. costs but if it is not just meant to be a one-time off thing (like Titanic), but part of a franchise, then find suitable comparisons (hence Batman Begins vs. Dune) to understand it as an investment for the future.

Batman Begins only did $370M.