Spring Bass Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 On 6/6/2018 at 12:14 PM, Corvinus said: I hope Disney looks at the long game with Solo. Reviews have been favorable, and word of mouth could result in good Blu-ray/digital sales and rentals in a few months. Cheap theaters or museums that shows movies a couple of months later than first release could also contribute some good numbers. We'll see. They will. Unless they're reserving this one for their rumored Netflix competitor (for which they pulled a ton of their stuff of Netflix), Solo will easily make back its costs and then some from distribution deals with TV networks and the streaming services down the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red snow Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 11 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said: It might not be fair, but when calculating the profits from a project you can't magically make unintended expenses disappear. However if looking at whether $X million dollars is a good box office gross for a movie you can ignore the production costs and just use other movies in the franchise or other movies in the genre as a benchmark. For Solo, you have the 3 Star Wars movies that preceded it, all of which grossed over $1Bn world-wide. So on that basis if Solo comes in under $500 million then it's a terrible result and a huge fall off for the Star Wars brand. Yes, there's no defending less than 500. But below 700 and the issue isn't so much the film not reaching a big enough audience but a problem with how the film was made. Eg the producers and directors are the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 10 hours ago, red snow said: Yes, there's no defending less than 500. But below 700 and the issue isn't so much the film not reaching a big enough audience but a problem with how the film was made. Eg the producers and directors are the issue. Agree. Really I find it kind of ridiculous that any film needs over $500 million to break even. Now with so much "free" marketing available through social media, it should be cheaper than ever (proportionally speaking) to successfully market a movie, especially one from a major franchise. But on the flipside, if you need more than $500 million to break even, perhaps you look at the theatrical release as a loss leader, and you make the profit from streaming / disc sales and merch. And at least Star Wars will always have the merch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red snow Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 12 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said: Agree. Really I find it kind of ridiculous that any film needs over $500 million to break even. Now with so much "free" marketing available through social media, it should be cheaper than ever (proportionally speaking) to successfully market a movie, especially one from a major franchise. But on the flipside, if you need more than $500 million to break even, perhaps you look at the theatrical release as a loss leader, and you make the profit from streaming / disc sales and merch. And at least Star Wars will always have the merch. It's an insane gamble to spend 500 million plus on the potential to make 100 million. No wonder cheap horror films are so popular budgets under 15 million means you can potentially make as much as the big blockbusters but with only a small loyal fanbase. I also suspect there's uneccessary expenses in the blockbusters and wouldn't be surprised if certain players are giving themselves lucrative salaries upfront. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadlines? What Deadlines? Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 On 6/8/2018 at 6:28 PM, red snow said: It's an insane gamble to spend 500 million plus on the potential to make 100 million. No wonder cheap horror films are so popular budgets under 15 million means you can potentially make as much as the big blockbusters but with only a small loyal fanbase. I also suspect there's uneccessary expenses in the blockbusters and wouldn't be surprised if certain players are giving themselves lucrative salaries upfront. You can't underestimate merchandise and home theater. It's entirely possible there's a bigger audience for this film but people are giving it a pass to watch it on dvd. Also, it has to be said that all the production cost numbers being bandied about are entirely speculative. Even if Ron Howard reshot 80% of the movie, as has been said, pre-production costs remain unchanged. Casting, script, wardrobe, sets, VFX, score costs are also more or less unchanged. Principal photography is a big deal but its not that big a deal. Gone completely under the radar: Deadpool 2 is underperforming in relation to the original. Despite having fairly good reviews, double the production budget, opening in more theaters, and the benefit of being the sequel to a very successful film, it's down about 10% in the domestic box office versus the original. Even the opening weekend was down versus the original. It'll still make a boat load of money, but I promise you the studio is noticing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 Actually from what I understand they had to redo a lot of the visual effects. Probably what made the budget balloon like it did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spring Bass Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 33 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said: Gone completely under the radar: Deadpool 2 is underperforming in relation to the original. Despite having fairly good reviews, double the production budget, opening in more theaters, and the benefit of being the sequel to a very successful film, it's down about 10% in the domestic box office versus the original. Even the opening weekend was down versus the original. It'll still make a boat load of money, but I promise you the studio is noticing. I doubt the lesson they'll take from it is anything other than "make sure the budget doesn't go much above $100-150 million". The movie has still made $619 million worldwide against its budget of $110 million, which is an excellent return and comparable to a mid-tier MCU movie (with the added disadvantage of being rated R). They've already greenlit Deadpool 3. It probably would have done even better if they hadn't released it the weekend before Solo (which even if it underperformed, still pulled in over $100 million on its opening box office weekend), in Summer Blockbuster Season with earlier blockbusters like the Avengers still in theaters. The first Deadpool came out in February. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 Um, it was confirmed by Reyonds that there isn’t going to be a Deadpool 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadlines? What Deadlines? Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 44 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said: Actually from what I understand they had to redo a lot of the visual effects. Probably what made the budget balloon like it did. Yeah, but theres a degree of speculation there. Post production on a film like this would have been massive and yet they didn't push the release date, so to what degree that happend beyond the normal last minute tweaks is not really known. 23 minutes ago, Fall Bass said: It probably would have done even better if they hadn't released it the weekend before Solo (which even if it underperformed, still pulled in over $100 million on its opening box office weekend), in Summer Blockbuster Season with earlier blockbusters like the Avengers still in theaters. The first Deadpool came out in February. Like I said, "boat loads of money". Still, all of this is perfectly consistent with supposed blockbuster fatigue. Judging from what I'm seeing on Box office mojo, not many movie tickets were sold in the last few weeks, though April was a record month, Largely thanks to the MCU. Jurassic world and Incredibles 2 will be a clue to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 I thought Disney's Marvel's Avengers' Solo: A Star Wars Movie was delayed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 No it’s the only Disney Star Wars to not get delayed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadlines? What Deadlines? Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 Deadpool 2 got moved up 2 weeks back in January. It was originally supposed to open the week after Solo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red snow Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 It's also concerning how Disney can avoid cannibalising itself if it ever gets the fox properties as the market is clearly crowded and Deadpool, avengers and solo must have taken money off each other. While it may all end in Disney's pockets there's still some calculation to be made where the cost of adding another film to the slate really isn't worth it. Again this is where all the peripheral money comes into play. The fact Disney allowed Sony to keep the Spidey box office makes it clear that merchandise is massive. Although Spidey is the number one by a massive margin 1.3 billion Vs batman at 500 million or all the avengers at 300 million. So it's also worth bearing in mind that merchandise isn't gigantic for all properties and it'd be interesting to see how much money is made from a film related surge as I guess there's a baseline irrespective of movie releases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted June 10, 2018 Author Share Posted June 10, 2018 3 hours ago, Darth Richard II said: Um, it was confirmed by Reyonds that there isn’t going to be a Deadpool 3. There absolutely will be a third Deadpool film, but what's up in the air is if it's going to be X-Force or Deadpool 3, or both. I think the current plan is to do an X-Force movie and then let Reynolds take a break before they decide to do a Deadpool 3 or not (sort of like the relationship between Iron Man and the original Avengers movie). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red snow Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 2 hours ago, Werthead said: There absolutely will be a third Deadpool film, but what's up in the air is if it's going to be X-Force or Deadpool 3, or both. I think the current plan is to do an X-Force movie and then let Reynolds take a break before they decide to do a Deadpool 3 or not (sort of like the relationship between Iron Man and the original Avengers movie). I hope they have the courage to let Deadpool take a backseat in the X-force film and allow it to be from Cable and X-force POV. It'd be interesting to see a film where everyone else has to deal with a maniac who thinks/knows he's in a film. Otherwise it'll probably suffer from Johnny Depp syndrome where the actual film is lost due the black hole if the leads persona. It's fine in a Deadpool film but not for X-force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Relic Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 Man, is this Solo movie THAT bad that you guys are talking about shitty ass Deadpool instead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted June 10, 2018 Share Posted June 10, 2018 4 hours ago, Werthead said: There absolutely will be a third Deadpool film, but what's up in the air is if it's going to be X-Force or Deadpool 3, or both. I think the current plan is to do an X-Force movie and then let Reynolds take a break before they decide to do a Deadpool 3 or not (sort of like the relationship between Iron Man and the original Avengers movie). Last I read the x force film was heavily into pre production, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spring Bass Posted June 11, 2018 Share Posted June 11, 2018 11 hours ago, Relic said: Man, is this Solo movie THAT bad that you guys are talking about shitty ass Deadpool instead? 12 pages deep. Honestly, not much more to talk about with it. We're still going to get the Obi-Wan movie, the Boba Fett movie (which will undoubtedly make Disney a ton of merchandise money), and possibly a Lando movie given that he was one of the highlights of Solo. We might even get another Solo movie if it clears $400 million at the box office, since it would still be worthwhile to try again as long as they keep it in a $100 million budget area. I'm admittedly a little skeptical on that last one, since Disney's release strategy is to do a small number of releases that cost a ton of money but make massive box office returns. But then again they gave Ant-Man a sequel, and that one performed a bit on the low-end of MCU movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadlines? What Deadlines? Posted June 11, 2018 Share Posted June 11, 2018 11 hours ago, Relic said: Man, is this Solo movie THAT bad that you guys are talking about shitty ass Deadpool instead? we're talking of Solo moneys versus Deadpool moneys. Also indirectly Avengers, which posesses all the moneys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted June 11, 2018 Share Posted June 11, 2018 5 hours ago, Fall Bass said: We might even get another Solo movie if it clears $400 million at the box office, since it would still be worthwhile to try again as long as they keep it in a $100 million budget area. The days of $100 million big studio VFX films is long gone. There's no way you're making a Star Wars movie for much less than $200 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.