CBT Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 (edited) I still keep trying to wrap my head around everyone's box office 'disappointment' for Avengers Age of Ultron. you are overstating what I said. But, in general, to try and answer what you are saying... The movie was good but not outstanding. This was for all intents and purposes due to its length being cut back, and parts removed. This is the main reason its viewed both critically and financially as more like an 8.5/10 than a 10/10 like the first one. Everything was in place for it to challenge the all-time box office highs, and that "something" that is missing held it back, and created somewhat of a headwind on ant-man. If Avengers 2 had set an all-time high, I bet ant-man would have come in 100 million higher or more (world wide total). The buzz train wasnt derailed, but it was certainly slowed. Ant-man still did so well, because its tone, pacing, etc, are perfect, and its universally well received. (things ultron were hurting in). To be honest, imo, its good that Joss Whedon is done. He did amazing work with Avengers 1, but the franchise and MCU has out grown him and his style at this point. Winter Soldier shows the blueprint forward, more adult and visceral, a little bit less campy/fun. Civil War is Avengers 2.5, and its going to set a great tone for the Cap2/3 directors to do Avengers 3/4 in a similar style (tone). Edited September 8, 2015 by CBT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldeneye Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I still keep trying to wrap my head around everyone's box office 'disappointment' for Avengers Age of Ultron. Yeah, I read that Disney was disappointed with the box office for Avengers AOU and I do not get it either. I have my qualms about the story and the villain, but it was an entertaining summer popcorn movie. And it made a ton of money. All I can think is maybe Disney is disappointed that AOU will end up 3rd or 4th globally and 2nd or 3rd domestically for the year. Like they could of predicted the superfight would deplete alot of f potential film goers pockets that same weekend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimik Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 The people that think AOU sucked are the same people that grade a 9.4 an 8.0 in the PGM forum. Conversely, people that think AoU was great are the same people that are calling 8.0 books 9.4 in the PGM forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Namor Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I still keep trying to wrap my head around everyone's box office 'disappointment' for Avengers Age of Ultron. you are overstating what I said. It wasn't aimed necessarily at you, but rather many here who also seem to feel it was a disappointment. But, in general, to try and answer what you are saying... The movie was good but not outstanding. This was for all intents and purposes due to its length being cut back, and parts removed. So as far as it, as a film, you see it as unsatisfying - not as well done as it could have been....Isn't that just opinion? Ant-Man scored higher in both critics and fan ratings, but did... oh, about a billion dollars LESS in revenue.... This is the main reason its viewed both critically and financially as more like an 8.5/10 than a 10/10 like the first one. And that's what I'm wondering.. WHO is viewing this as an 8.5/10 'financially'? 1.4 BILLION on a $250MIL budget? That's an 8.5/10? Who sees that as a very fine plus? Everything was in place for it to challenge the all-time box office highs, and that "something" that is missing held it back, and created somewhat of a headwind on ant-man. Ah, so it's about it's 'potential'. It's about 'how big is my'. But... it DID challenge all-time box office highs. It's #6 worldwide. Puzzling. If Avengers 2 had set an all-time high, I bet ant-man would have come in 100 million higher or more (world wide total). Not sure why that would've helped Ant-man... it certainly hit all of it's projections anyway. The buzz train wasnt derailed, but it was certainly slowed. Ant-man still did so well, because its tone, pacing, etc, are perfect, and its universally well received. (things ultron were hurting in). I agree - I think Ant-man is a better film in terms of all of those things - it still didn't make 1.4 Billion. To be honest, imo, its good that Joss Whedon is done. He did amazing work with Avengers 1, but the franchise and MCU has out grown him and his style at this point. Totally disagree... it wasn't a complete Joss Whedon movie. You said it yourself - some scenes were cut, things were changed - you can tell the pacing is off - that's not Joss's fault - that's the Marvel upstairs' fault. Too many cooks. They give that thing to Joss and let him decide, he'll make a great movie. Even still... for people to call it a disappointment, seems weird to me. To say they were't able to capitalize on the opportunity fully - ok, I can see that. Disappointment? Nonsense. The payday was the 6th highest worldwide grossing film of all time. Winter Soldier shows the blueprint forward, more adult and visceral, a little bit less campy/fun. Hmmm... I thought Age of Ultron was a little less campy fun than the first one... Civil War is Avengers 2.5, and its going to set a great tone for the Cap2/3 directors to do Avengers 3/4 in a similar style (tone). Maybe... a little personality mixed in goes a long way.... Anyway.... It's still millionaires crying over what number followed the billion, and fan boys gnashing teeth over how 'true' the character looked. Bottom line is it's the 6th highest worldwide grossing movie of all time. Could it have been higher? Sure. It also could have been lower. The arguing at Marvel has more to do with ego than dollars. The disappointment at the only place that matters is about who gets what credit for what success and who gets what blame. Bottom line is, it was a MONSTER success to Marvel's bottom line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prez Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 The people that think AOU sucked are the same people that grade a 9.4 an 8.0 in the PGM forum. Conversely, people that think AoU was great are the same people that are calling 8.0 books 9.4 in the PGM forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gsims718 Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I still keep trying to wrap my head around everyone's box office 'disappointment' for Avengers Age of Ultron. Yeah, I read that Disney was disappointed with the box office for Avengers AOU and I do not get it either. I have my qualms about the story and the villain, but it was an entertaining summer popcorn movie. And it made a ton of money. All I can think is maybe Disney is disappointed that AOU will end up 3rd or 4th globally and 2nd or 3rd domestically for the year. Like they could of predicted the superfight would deplete alot of f potential film goers pockets that same weekend but the people that did see it where much less enthused about it than the original film, thus hurting future sales. The opening weekend does not break the record books, a steady stream of people seeing it does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paperheart Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I still keep trying to wrap my head around everyone's box office 'disappointment' for Avengers Age of Ultron. Yeah, I read that Disney was disappointed with the box office for Avengers AOU and I do not get it either. I have my qualms about the story and the villain, but it was an entertaining summer popcorn movie. And it made a ton of money. All I can think is maybe Disney is disappointed that AOU will end up 3rd or 4th globally and 2nd or 3rd domestically for the year. Like they could of predicted the superfight would deplete alot of f potential film goers pockets that same weekend but the people that did see it where much less enthused about it than the original film, thus hurting future sales. The opening weekend does not break the record books, a steady stream of people seeing it does. yep- look at the Avengers multiple of opening weekend for domestic BO (3x) vs AoU (2.4). Word of mouth wasn't nearly as good so it didn't have the legs of the first one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjrjr Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 (edited) I still keep trying to wrap my head around everyone's box office 'disappointment' for Avengers Age of Ultron. Yeah, I read that Disney was disappointed with the box office for Avengers AOU and I do not get it either. I have my qualms about the story and the villain, but it was an entertaining summer popcorn movie. And it made a ton of money. All I can think is maybe Disney is disappointed that AOU will end up 3rd or 4th globally and 2nd or 3rd domestically for the year. Like they could of predicted the superfight would deplete alot of f potential film goers pockets that same weekend but the people that did see it where much less enthused about it than the original film, thus hurting future sales. The opening weekend does not break the record books, a steady stream of people seeing it does. yep- look at the Avengers multiple of opening weekend for domestic BO (3x) vs AoU (2.4). Word of mouth wasn't nearly as good so it didn't have the legs of the first one. Looking at domestic box office alone is an interesting exercise. Many, many movies would be considered failures based on domestic BO alone, even Ant Man. ($175 million BO domestically versus $130 million to make not counting marketing.) Most of today's movies couldn't have been made before the international box office opened up to U.S. movies. Many of the big blockbusters don't make 2.5 to 3x cost domestically. The fact that AoU made 2.4x domestic BO is actually pretty good for a modern blockbuster. I remember some of those first $100+ budget movies. I believe it took 2 studios coming together to get them made. Then the International market came along and now $100+ budgets are commonplace. Here are the most expensive movies made to date: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_films Avengers AoU is the 3rd most expensive movie ever made. Maybe that is why Disney was expecting it to be the top movie of the year, not 3rd or 4th. Bets are the next Avengers movie won't cost as much. But then again, maybe it will. Scanning over the most expensive movies shows that Disney is not afraid to spend money on their product. Edited September 8, 2015 by rjrjr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco685 Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Avengers AoU is the 3rd most expensive movie ever made. Maybe that is why Disney was expecting it to be the top movie of the year, not 3rd or 4th. Bets are the next Avengers movie won't cost as much. But then again, maybe it will. Scanning over the most expensive movies shows that Disney is not afraid to spend money on their product. AoU was THE highest Marvel Studios budget yet, and Ant-Man was the lowest so far. And that's before adjusting for inflation. As far as the highest movie budgets ever, here is what thenumbers.com estimated. And yes, AoU still comes up in the Top 10. Disney made a massive investment in AoU. So it needed a massive return that exceeded any of the results of the previous movies, including Avengers (2012). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco685 Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Here are the most expensive movies made to date: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_films Whoever updated the wiki site information missed some movies (and details). thenumbers.com: Movie Budget and Financial Performance Records Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjrjr Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 (edited) The other large cost to a movie is the marketing budget. I had no idea that it cost so much to market a blockbuster movie! I figured $25 - 50 million tops. Not so: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/200-million-rising-hollywood-struggles-721818 I'm guessing Disney spent a pretty penny on marketing AoU. Could the real cost for this movie be north of $450 million? I wouldn't be surprised. But then again, this helps: http://www.businessinsider.com/superman-movie-will-have-100-marketing-tie-ins-2013-6 I honestly don't remember any of the product placements in Man of Steel outside of the obvious Walmart one. Apparently there were a ton more. I'm not sure if that was money well spent or not if I don't remember any of the other products. Edited September 8, 2015 by rjrjr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paperheart Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I still keep trying to wrap my head around everyone's box office 'disappointment' for Avengers Age of Ultron. Yeah, I read that Disney was disappointed with the box office for Avengers AOU and I do not get it either. I have my qualms about the story and the villain, but it was an entertaining summer popcorn movie. And it made a ton of money. All I can think is maybe Disney is disappointed that AOU will end up 3rd or 4th globally and 2nd or 3rd domestically for the year. Like they could of predicted the superfight would deplete alot of f potential film goers pockets that same weekend but the people that did see it where much less enthused about it than the original film, thus hurting future sales. The opening weekend does not break the record books, a steady stream of people seeing it does. yep- look at the Avengers multiple of opening weekend for domestic BO (3x) vs AoU (2.4). Word of mouth wasn't nearly as good so it didn't have the legs of the first one. Looking at domestic box office alone is an interesting exercise. Many, many movies would be considered failures based on domestic BO alone, even Ant Man. ($175 million BO domestically versus $130 million to make not counting marketing.) Most of today's movies couldn't have been made before the international box office opened up to U.S. movies. Many of the big blockbusters don't make 2.5 to 3x cost domestically. The fact that AoU made 2.4x domestic BO is actually pretty good for a modern blockbuster. I remember some of those first $100+ budget movies. I believe it took 2 studios coming together to get them made. Then the International market came along and now $100+ budgets are commonplace. Here are the most expensive movies made to date: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_films Avengers AoU is the 3rd most expensive movie ever made. Maybe that is why Disney was expecting it to be the top movie of the year, not 3rd or 4th. Bets are the next Avengers movie won't cost as much. But then again, maybe it will. Scanning over the most expensive movies shows that Disney is not afraid to spend money on their product. that's not the 2.4x i'm referring to. total domestic box office divided by opening weekend. Avengers 3x is excellent, AoU 2.4 is ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
makeminemego Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 AoU did excellent business. But it also did underwhelming business based upon expectations. Reason being: not nearly as many repeat viewings out of fanboys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjrjr Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Here are the most expensive movies made to date: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_films Whoever updated the wiki site information missed some movies (and details). thenumbers.com: Movie Budget and Financial Performance Records I think this website is wrong. I bet they are mixing production numbers and production + marketing numbers. Box Office Mojo and the Wiki show the Lone Ranger production budget as $215 and $225 respectively with the wiki claiming the $225 number is confirmed. Maybe the extra $50 million that is reported on the-numbers.com is marketing for that movie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjrjr Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I still keep trying to wrap my head around everyone's box office 'disappointment' for Avengers Age of Ultron. Yeah, I read that Disney was disappointed with the box office for Avengers AOU and I do not get it either. I have my qualms about the story and the villain, but it was an entertaining summer popcorn movie. And it made a ton of money. All I can think is maybe Disney is disappointed that AOU will end up 3rd or 4th globally and 2nd or 3rd domestically for the year. Like they could of predicted the superfight would deplete alot of f potential film goers pockets that same weekend but the people that did see it where much less enthused about it than the original film, thus hurting future sales. The opening weekend does not break the record books, a steady stream of people seeing it does. yep- look at the Avengers multiple of opening weekend for domestic BO (3x) vs AoU (2.4). Word of mouth wasn't nearly as good so it didn't have the legs of the first one. Looking at domestic box office alone is an interesting exercise. Many, many movies would be considered failures based on domestic BO alone, even Ant Man. ($175 million BO domestically versus $130 million to make not counting marketing.) Most of today's movies couldn't have been made before the international box office opened up to U.S. movies. Many of the big blockbusters don't make 2.5 to 3x cost domestically. The fact that AoU made 2.4x domestic BO is actually pretty good for a modern blockbuster. I remember some of those first $100+ budget movies. I believe it took 2 studios coming together to get them made. Then the International market came along and now $100+ budgets are commonplace. Here are the most expensive movies made to date: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_films Avengers AoU is the 3rd most expensive movie ever made. Maybe that is why Disney was expecting it to be the top movie of the year, not 3rd or 4th. Bets are the next Avengers movie won't cost as much. But then again, maybe it will. Scanning over the most expensive movies shows that Disney is not afraid to spend money on their product. that's not the 2.4x i'm referring to. total domestic box office divided by opening weekend. Avengers 3x is excellent, AoU 2.4 is ok. I appreciate the correction. Using that ratio is good at determining if a movie has legs and you are right about Avengers AoU not having the same legs as Avengers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco685 Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 The But then again, this helps: http://www.businessinsider.com/superman-movie-will-have-100-marketing-tie-ins-2013-6 I honestly don't remember any of the product placements in Man of Steel outside of the obvious Walmart one. Apparently there were a ton more. I'm not sure if that was money well spent or not if I don't remember any of the other products. It was brought up repeatedly in the Man of Steel movie thread. Well, all of the Man of Steel movie threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjrjr Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 (edited) Here are the most expensive movies made to date: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_films Whoever updated the wiki site information missed some movies (and details). thenumbers.com: Movie Budget and Financial Performance Records I think this website is wrong. I bet they are mixing production numbers and production + marketing numbers. Box Office Mojo and the Wiki show the Lone Ranger production budget as $215 and $225 respectively with the wiki claiming the $225 number is confirmed. Maybe the extra $50 million that is reported on the-numbers.com is marketing for that movie? Nope, the estimated marketing cost for the Lone Ranger is $150 million worldwide. Astonishing! Assuming Avengers AoU had a similar marketing cost, the movie better make well more than $1 billion dollars. Bosco, you are probably right about the Avengers AoU not being the 3rd most expensive movie made. But it is definitely up there near the top. Edited September 8, 2015 by rjrjr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco685 Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Here are the most expensive movies made to date: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_films Whoever updated the wiki site information missed some movies (and details). thenumbers.com: Movie Budget and Financial Performance Records I think this website is wrong. I bet they are mixing production numbers and production + marketing numbers. Box Office Mojo and the Wiki show the Lone Ranger production budget as $215 and $225 respectively with the wiki claiming the $225 number is confirmed. Maybe the extra $50 million that is reported on the-numbers.com is marketing for that movie? Nope, the estimated marketing cost for the Lone Ranger is $150 million worldwide. Astonishing! Assuming Avengers AoU had a similar marketing cost, they movie better make well more than $1 billion dollars. The three movie analytic sites try to report on just the production budget, though boxoffice.com started plugging in an estimate of marketing expenses a few years back. Avengers: Age of Ultron thenumbers.com (production budget): $250,000,000 boxofficemojo: $250,000,000 boxoffice.com: $340,000,000 (*) * BoxOffice.com's total budget numbers are a combination of production budget figures and estimated domestic P&A costs I would assume boxoffice.com is plugging in the $250 MM plus Print & Advertising expenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjrjr Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 (edited) Here are the most expensive movies made to date: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_films Whoever updated the wiki site information missed some movies (and details). thenumbers.com: Movie Budget and Financial Performance Records This site is lacking information as well. Certainly Star Wars $13 million budget with $460,000,000 BO would land that movie on the most profitable movies based on ROI list. They have Jaws on the list with a similar budget but half the BO. Edited September 8, 2015 by rjrjr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco685 Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 The But then again, this helps: http://www.businessinsider.com/superman-movie-will-have-100-marketing-tie-ins-2013-6 I honestly don't remember any of the product placements in Man of Steel outside of the obvious Walmart one. Apparently there were a ton more. I'm not sure if that was money well spent or not if I don't remember any of the other products. It was brought up repeatedly in the Man of Steel movie thread. Well, all of the Man of Steel movie threads. By the way, the final figure - $160 MM (+) in product placement. Superman Reboot 'Man of Steel' Snares $160M in Promotions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
