MLK Weekend Thread | 3-Day/4-Day Estimates: Mean Girls 28/32, Beekeeper 16.8/19.2, Wonka 8.4/10.9, Migration 6.2/8.3, Anyone 6.9/8.2

[HummingLemon496]

4 minutes ago, JimmyB said:

The didnt market it comments are so full of sh*t. Aquaman had commercials during NFL and NBA games for the past 2 months before it's release, Momoa made all the media rounds from the Late Show, Today Show, Good Morning America...etc.   That's call marketing. 

 

 

Edited January 15 by HummingLemon496

[SchumacherFTW]

50 minutes ago, MysteryMovieMogul said:

Studios really need to figure out their digital platform strategies. Because movies that don't do well at the box office get to streaming within a month or two, more people are realizing they can just wait for streaming. Because all films eventually come to streaming!

People say that stuff is out of the bottle now. That seems daft to me, the studios can easily create scarcity again for their products if they wanted to. It's frustrating to point to a movie like Oppenheimer as an exception that can't be replicated. It could be, but the studios just think old man Nolan wants his own way rather than realising it still works in general. 

Edited January 15 by SchumacherFTW

[JustLurking]

1 hour ago, Krissykins said:

It’s early because like someone else said, it hasn’t opened overseas at all yet. PVOD doesn’t have a major impact on the US, but if the film isn’t available at all overseas yet, it’ll certainly impact. 

 

 

Because of the end of the post you quoted “….all things considered”. 

They think the film is dead regardless overseas. Honestly? They probably aren't wrong. I think this does like, 20M OS.

[Mojoguy]

1 hour ago, JustLurking said:

They think the film is dead regardless overseas. Honestly? They probably aren't wrong. I think this does like, 20M OS.

TCP still hasn't released overseas? What the hell are they waiting for?

Edited January 15 by Mojoguy

[Kon]

16 minutes ago, Mojoguy said:

TCP still hasn't released overseas? What the hell are they waiting for?

It seems the overseas release of the movie was scheduled for January 18th.

 

I really doubt that international theaters have interest on bringing forward the release dates.

Edited January 15 by Kon

[Mojoguy]

10 minutes ago, Kon said:

It seems the overseas release of the movie was scheduled for January 18th.

 

I really doubt that international theaters have interest on bringing forward the release dates.

I guess they were waiting for Oscar norms? Someone tell them the bad news...

[MovieMan89]

TCP will prob end up around 120m away from its breakeven point, so yeah that’s worse than anything besides Flash for WB last year. But if Oprah mostly funded it, WB themselves may not care that much if it wasn’t a direct loss of their money tbh. 

[dallas]

2 hours ago, HummingLemon496 said:

$100M in marketing 

That was speculation from Deadline, not an official number. 

[HummingLemon496]

6 minutes ago, dallas said:

That was speculation from Deadline, not an official number. 

Well that's all we got (and the Reddit claims about how they spent $0 on marketing is also speculation)

 

"The didnt market it comments are so full of sh*t. Aquaman had commercials during NFL and NBA games for the past 2 months before it's release, Momoa made all the media rounds from the Late Show, Today Show, Good Morning America...etc.   That's call marketing."

Edited January 15 by HummingLemon496

[Valonqar]

5 hours ago, Kon said:

 

Honestly, I think the biggest problem is how few people under 25 years old has attracted this movie. The demographics show there were more men over 25 (21%) than women under 25 (14%).

 

This would never interest audience under 25. If the studio thought that over-emphasizing Halle Bailey in promos was going to draw TLM crowd they miscalculated badly. The concept isn't for younger people and considering what happens in the movie I don't know why WB went after the church crowd either. 'A' CS aside, WOM must be pretty bad if even the demo didn't bother to carry it. It's a rejection through and through Xmas Day aside. 

[Tower]

15 hours ago, dallas said:

This is literally a box office forum. The box office determines whether a movie makes money or not, so ofc there will be discussion regarding whether a movie did or didn't break even. Don't know what we ought to talk about instead besides "oh wow big numbers"

There are several reasons I don't like the break even discussions.

 

1. The discussions are based solely on box office numbers, and non box office revenue is ignored. This hasn’t made sense since the invention of television, but it's especially strange in today's world. We now have 100M+ budgeted films with no theatrical release considered a success by the studio, but a film with that budget making 200M in the box office is declared a definitive flop.

 

2. We don’t have all the proper data to know what the break even from theatrical is. The box office numbers themselves are available. how much studios actually make from that we have some idea but not all of it. Budgets estimates are quite unreliable, you can easily get estimates 50M apart from two different sites, or even from the same site a month apart. Marketing budgets are basically guesswork, which is why people will often throw out numbers 100M apart.

 

3. The break even discussion is dichotomous in a way that it isn’t in reality. Every film either makes its break even number and is a success or misses it and is a flop. But in reality it’s more about how much it makes than whether it hit a specific number. You can call the break even of a 200M budgeted film at 500M, but 450M is still closer to 550M than 200M (despite both being flops) and 550M is still closer to 450M than 1B (despite both being successful).

 

Personally I care more about how a film performs compared to similar films, whether a sequel increases or decreases from the original, or how a film holds week to week, than whether it hits a single magic number.

[Borobudur]

4 hours ago, Johnny Tran said:

 

It's a sequel to a now defunct franchise, They didn't market it. They dumped it and left it to die...   and it's going to do well over $400M worldwide.  Over 2x the gross of Shazam 2, The Marvels, Blue Beetle and way more than The Flash as well. 

Can't you recognize Momoa was everywhere during the last 2 weeks? He was in Brazil and China and James Wan went to Malaysia too. In Hong kong, Aquaman billboard is everywhere on highway and train station. The marketing is there and they are abundantly present for a defunct franchise. BB is the only movie I would agree marketing isn't enough and that was mostly due to strike. 

[dallas]

41 minutes ago, Tower said:

There are several reasons I don't like the break even discussions.

 

1. The discussions are based solely on box office numbers, and non box office revenue is ignored. This hasn’t made sense since the invention of television, but it's especially strange in today's world. We now have 100M+ budgeted films with no theatrical release considered a success by the studio, but a film with that budget making 200M in the box office is declared a definitive flop.

 

2. We don’t have all the proper data to know what the break even from theatrical is. The box office numbers themselves are available. how much studios actually make from that we have some idea but not all of it. Budgets estimates are quite unreliable, you can easily get estimates 50M apart from two different sites, or even from the same site a month apart. Marketing budgets are basically guesswork, which is why people will often throw out numbers 100M apart.

 

3. The break even discussion is dichotomous in a way that it isn’t in reality. Every film either makes its break even number and is a success or misses it and is a flop. But in reality it’s more about how much it makes than whether it hit a specific number. You can call the break even of a 200M budgeted film at 500M, but 450M is still closer to 550M than 200M (despite both being flops) and 550M is still closer to 450M than 1B (despite both being successful).

 

Personally I care more about how a film performs compared to similar films, whether a sequel increases or decreases from the original, or how a film holds week to week, than whether it hits a single magic number.

Fair points, and I do agree on everything you said, but at the end of the day, it's still fun speculation. Will we ever truly know which films profit and which don't? Not necessarily, but there's no harm in making those guesses based on the information we do have. 

[dallas]

2 minutes ago, Borobudur said:

Can't you recognize Momoa was everywhere during the last 2 weeks? He was in Brazil and China and James Wan went to Malaysia too. In Hong kong, Aquaman billboard is everywhere on highway and train station. The marketing is there and they are abundantly present for a defunct franchise. BB is the only movie I would agree marketing isn't enough and that was mostly due to strike. 

Well yeah, marketing was excellent overseas, that's why it's doing so well internationally. 

[MovieMan89]

1 hour ago, Tower said:

There are several reasons I don't like the break even discussions.

 

1. The discussions are based solely on box office numbers, and non box office revenue is ignored. This hasn’t made sense since the invention of television, but it's especially strange in today's world. We now have 100M+ budgeted films with no theatrical release considered a success by the studio, but a film with that budget making 200M in the box office is declared a definitive flop.

 

2. We don’t have all the proper data to know what the break even from theatrical is. The box office numbers themselves are available. how much studios actually make from that we have some idea but not all of it. Budgets estimates are quite unreliable, you can easily get estimates 50M apart from two different sites, or even from the same site a month apart. Marketing budgets are basically guesswork, which is why people will often throw out numbers 100M apart.

 

3. The break even discussion is dichotomous in a way that it isn’t in reality. Every film either makes its break even number and is a success or misses it and is a flop. But in reality it’s more about how much it makes than whether it hit a specific number. You can call the break even of a 200M budgeted film at 500M, but 450M is still closer to 550M than 200M (despite both being flops) and 550M is still closer to 450M than 1B (despite both being successful).

 

Personally I care more about how a film performs compared to similar films, whether a sequel increases or decreases from the original, or how a film holds week to week, than whether it hits a single magic number.

You are correct in your points about none of us knowing for sure the breakeven point or other revenues, however I can assure you your last bit on how you look at it is completely meaningless to the studios. They care about whether or not they lost money on it, not how it’s doing vs similar movies, if it held well etc. It can have a 20x multi and if it still lost $50m, studio execs are gonna be pissed. And more importantly for us - impact their decisions for the franchise or other related greenlights. 

Edited January 16 by MovieMan89

[MysteryMovieMogul]

5 hours ago, MovieMan89 said:

You are correct in your points about none of us knowing for sure the breakeven point or other revenues, however I can assure you your last bit on how you look at it is completely meaningless to the studios. They care about whether or not they lost money on it, not how it’s doing vs similar movies, if it held well etc. It can have a 20x multi and if it still lost $50m, studio execs are gonna be pissed. And more importantly for us - impact their decisions for the franchise or other related greenlights. 

If they want to greenlight a sequel or continue a franchise, the studios will feed the trades whatever they need to spin a success. It's no surprise that, of all the flops last year, the only ones we're still talking about are The Flash and The Marvels. We know The Flash is part of a dead cinematic universe so it won't see sequels, and despite claims from random people that the bad reception killed the Captain Marvel franchise, The last franchise reference to Captain Marvel was in 2022 and completely ignored in Secret Invasion. These were sacrificial lambs the neither company did anything to defend after the fact.

 

I wouldn't guarantee, but I would take a good guess, if Mamoa wasn't in talks to be part of Gunn's DCEU, press for the film would be far more negative. But WB can't take that risk.

[Tower]

5 hours ago, MovieMan89 said:

You are correct in your points about none of us knowing for sure the breakeven point or other revenues, however I can assure you your last bit on how you look at it is completely meaningless to the studios. They care about whether or not they lost money on it, not how it’s doing vs similar movies, if it held well etc. It can have a 20x multi and if it still lost $50m, studio execs are gonna be pissed. And more importantly for us - impact their decisions for the franchise or other related greenlights. 

I know what I care about isn't what studios do, but I'm not the studio and nobody else here is either. And studios might not care about comparing films but they do care about how much a film makes beyond categorizing it as flop or not flop. 200M and 400M is not the same to the studio even if both are below the break even number.

 

Sequels are made by predicting what the film will make, which is only partly based on the previous films performance. And legs are part of what you can use to predict the sequels. The mechanic didn't make 2x its budget, making it a flop based on the thinking on this forum, but got a sequel anyway.

 

And on the other end there are films that made their break even but the bad legs caused by being received poorly make them long term failures for the studio. BVS and Quantumania did fine in pure box office analysis, but studios should not be pleased because they clearly harmed the sequels.

 

Even if you care about the financial health of the studio, I don't think the break even point is even the most important anyway. The goal of the studio isn't to break even, it's to make a profit. Merely hitting the exact break even point on every film would still be bad.

[toutvabien]

Crazy domestic run for Poor Things thus far - already at $18M without ever going over 800 theaters, keeps making ~$2M per weekend even tho it lost screens this one. The hype just keeps building. It's gonna be at ~$23M before any Oscar nominations.

 

Also $6.1M in 6 overseas markets and it's enormous in Greece. Think this is going higher than The Favourite.

[Issac Newton]

 

 

 

[Kon]