A Very Queer Thanksgiving Weekend Thread | We Here. We Queer. Move On. | 3-Day/5-Day: Black Panther 45.9/64, Strange World 11.9/18.6, Glass Onion 9.2/13.3, Devotion 6/9, The Menu 5.2/7.3 | Daddy Cameron, please save us!

[ringedmortality]

2 minutes ago, Cmasterclay said:

Strange World is like an animate version of Wrinkle In Time where everyone wants to blame it on "wokeness" when all indications are that the movie is kinda bad, even from people naturally rooting for it.

 

Don’t bring up the PTSD we all have from Wrinkle in Time

[dudalb]

Streamng could be the biggest challenger the film industry has faced since the coming of Television.

[Ipickthiswhiterose]

3 minutes ago, Cmasterclay said:

Strange World is like an animate version of Wrinkle In Time where everyone wants to blame it on "wokeness" when all indications are that the movie is kinda bad, even from people naturally rooting for it.

 

 

I agree with the parallel, except just like Wrinkle In Time (maybe not quite as much) I'm not sure quality was even ever going to be a factor.

 

WIT was a bizarre green light. The book is basically unknown outside North America, even in English speaking countries so the film needed from the off to make $250m plus in US and CAN alone and it just wasn't that property no matter how well it was done. 

 

Maybe that circles round to it being a film being greenly as some kind of loss leader because they wanted to commit to the story or the director but...I don't know that with the budget it had there was any route available to a profit even if an unassailable masterpiece. 

 

But then yes, add modest to poor WOM on them both and they're going to tank hard. Not one stitch to do with 'wokeness' or 'anti wokeness'.

[Nikostar]

Can somebody explain to me why A Wrinkle in Time is looked at as some massive flop. Didn’t open to 33 million and have a 3x multiple to 100 million total. I know the budget was only a hundred million but for such a weird film based on a book hard to understand it’s box office run didn’t seem that bad.

[Eric the Ape]

5 minutes ago, Nikostar said:

Can somebody explain to me why A Wrinkle in Time is looked at as some massive flop. Didn’t open to 33 million and have a 3x multiple to 100 million total. I know the budget was only a hundred million but for such a weird film based on a book hard to understand it’s box office run didn’t seem that bad.

Because...it's a massive flop?

[Ipickthiswhiterose]

13 minutes ago, Nikostar said:

Can somebody explain to me why A Wrinkle in Time is looked at as some massive flop. Didn’t open to 33 million and have a 3x multiple to 100 million total. I know the budget was only a hundred million but for such a weird film based on a book hard to understand it’s box office run didn’t seem that bad.

 

Because of the 100-130m budget. It made pretty much exactly that back.

 

Would have needed to make double - around £250m to get in the black. Therefore it lost around 120m, which is right up there in terms of box office losses.

 

The multiple was fine. The box office for a non-well-known franchise was fine. The box office for a book unknown outside the US was good. None of that's relevant, because of the budget.

 

Where the Crawdads Sing did similar (actually almost identical) BO numbers, similar book popularity, similar US-centric supply, similar profile....BUT sensible budget of 24m = made very good money.

 

A secondary element is unlike Strange World which is the very, very significant marketing efforts Disney put into the film.

 

This is particularly embarrassing when contrasted with The Nutcracker and the Four Realms, a similar budgeted flop from the same year, but which was completely buried by Disney who didn't market it and which actually made quite a bit more money than WIT because it did reasonably well in Central Europe.

Edited November 26, 2022 by Ipickthiswhiterose

[jedijake]

58 minutes ago, dudalb said:

Streamng could be the biggest challenger the film industry has faced since the coming of Television.

But yet, as others have said, streaming itself is reaching a saturation point. They need to spend money for more content to avert people dropping subs. But that content costs money and is itself a risk. But without added content, people will drop.

[Nikostar]

42 minutes ago, Ipickthiswhiterose said:

 

Because of the 100-130m budget. It made pretty much exactly that back.

 

Would have needed to make double - around £250m to get in the black. Therefore it lost around 120m, which is right up there in terms of box office losses.

 

The multiple was fine. The box office for a non-well-known franchise was fine. The box office for a book unknown outside the US was good. None of that's relevant, because of the budget.

 

Where the Crawdads Sing did similar (actually almost identical) BO numbers, similar book popularity, similar US-centric supply, similar profile....BUT sensible budget of 24m = made very good money.

 

A secondary element is unlike Strange World which is the very, very significant marketing efforts Disney put into the film.

 

This is particularly embarrassing when contrasted with The Nutcracker and the Four Realms, a similar budgeted flop from the same year, but which was completely buried by Disney who didn't market it and which actually made quite a bit more money than WIT because it did reasonably well in Central Europe.

That makes sense now because i remember that film opening pretty well and have pretty good legs but its budget was the problem. 

[ringedmortality]

Didn’t A Wrinkle in Time only make it to 100M DOM because of double features with Incredibles 2?

[Sandro Mazzola]

29 minutes ago, ringedmortality said:

Didn’t A Wrinkle in Time only make it to 100M DOM because of double features with Incredibles 2?

 

Yeah, and that was not the first Disney Drive In boost it got.... It was helped by Infinity War twice, Solo and then I2. It was stumbling towards 95m before that help. 

[Webslinger]

I had totally forgotten about the drawn-out saga of Disney pushing A Wrinkle in Time past $100 million (which, in turn, prolonged the effort to get Black Panther past $700 million) until reading this thread.

[DAJK]

2 hours ago, ringedmortality said:

 

Don’t bring up the PTSD we all have from Wrinkle in Time

Literally the only time I've ever had to leave a theatre because I was laughing obnoxiously at how lame it was, that I was being a disruption to the people around me.

 

And this is from someone who genuinely wanted to like the movie. And from someone who HATES when people laugh obnoxiously at a non-comedy movie. God, what a mess that film was.

[Webslinger]

5 minutes ago, DAJK said:

Literally the only time I've ever had to leave a theatre because I was laughing obnoxiously at how lame it was, that I was being a disruption to the people around me.

 

And this is from someone who genuinely wanted to like the movie. And from someone who HATES when people laugh obnoxiously at a non-comedy movie. God, what a mess that film was.

Oh, I was definitely that person when I went and saw Cats over its opening weekend. I felt a little bad about it at first - and strategically sat a few rows away from other patrons in either direction - but it was Cats, so it was hard not to laugh.

 

One of my friends and I also whisper-riffed on Breaking Dawn - Part 1 on its opening night with a sellout crowd of Twihards. I'm still not sure how we made it out of there alive. It was her idea, though, so I didn't feel too guilty about it.

[Legion Again]

2 hours ago, charlie Jatinder said:

Industry need to stop acting dumb and put a strict 90-120 days window in place.

I’m in favor of this only because it’ll be super funny when it doesn’t improve BO much 

[Legion Again]

34 minutes ago, Sandro Mazzola said:

 

Yeah, and that was not the first Disney Drive In boost it got.... It was helped by Infinity War twice, Solo and then I2. It was stumbling towards 95m before that help. 

Tbf, 95M vs 100M is not really an important diff for profit calculations.   
 

I guess you might get more than 5M in increased ancillary profit from kicking into a different threshold on various contracts.

[Eric the Ape]

2 minutes ago, Legion By Night said:

Tbf, 95M vs 100M is not really an important diff for profit calculations.   
 

I guess you might get more than 5M in increased ancillary profit from kicking into a different threshold on various contracts.

That actually is the case. Crossing the 100M or 200M threshold means you get better deals and revenue when it comes to selling your movie to cable TV or streaming services. That's why movies like Passengers or Spectre typically get fudged to those marks if the studio has the option to. Don't know how important that is these days, since studios now only play their movies on their own cable networks or streaming services, but that was certainly an important incentive in 2018.

 

@TalismanRing explained this a few years ago and I'm sure she can explain it better than I ever could.

[Factcheck]

3 hours ago, charlie Jatinder said:

This.

 

Early VOD is not impacting legs because it has already impacted the head by creating the atmosphere that, oh this will be out for free in 17 days. 

 

Industry need to stop acting dumb and put a strict 90-120 days window in place.

 

 

Actually, the release of movies on subscription services before PVOD is hurting PVOD, not theatrical revenue. Most people watch a movie within 45 days of its release. Disney is losing $1 billion or more a year because of the loss of digital, DVD, and Blu-ray revenue.

Edited November 27, 2022 by Factcheck

[The GOAT]

3 hours ago, dudalb said:

Streamng could be the biggest challenger the film industry has faced since the coming of Television.

Could? Already is. They can't make mid budget films anymore because the PVOD sales are gone. Now, we're stuck with mediocre Netflix films.

[Legion Again]

15 minutes ago, Eric Clade said:

That actually is the case. Crossing the 100M or 200M threshold means you get better deals and revenue when it comes to selling your movie to cable TV or streaming services. That's why movies like Passengers or Spectre typically get fudged to those marks if the studio has the option to. Don't know how important that is these days, since studios now only play their movies on their own cable networks or streaming services, but that was certainly an important incentive in 2018.

 

@TalismanRing explained this a few years ago and I'm sure she can explain it better than I ever could.

I know it’s the case that you get more, the “I guess you might” part is how much more. Though I guess you only need ~2.5M ancillary boost for it to outweigh the theatrical rev so that seems almost guaranteed.

[snarkmachine]

No official numbers for Bones or The Menu?