DC and Marvel movie results: 1978 to present 5 5

[media_junkie]

On 11/18/2023 at 8:16 PM, VintageComics said:

The movie actually isn't a flop. It's just that the world's expectations weren't managed well by Disney. Disney projected the expectations of a $1BIL film when in fact, if they'd projected the expectations of a $300MIL film everyone would have been thrilled. 

I get what you are saying, but this movie is an absolute flop.  $300 million to make plus another $100 million to advertise.  Disney/Marvel needed this film to do $800 million at the B.O. to break even.  At best this movie is going to do $250 to $300 million.  This is going to cost the studio hundreds of millions of dollars.

[ymisbatg]

Any chance the SAG/AFTRA strike played any part in this? The timing is very coincidental. 

[VintageComics]

On 11/18/2023 at 11:18 PM, media_junkie said:

I get what you are saying, but this movie is an absolute flop.  $300 million to make plus another $100 million to advertise.  Disney/Marvel needed this film to do $800 million at the B.O. to break even.  At best this movie is going to do $250 to $300 million.  This is going to cost the studio hundreds of millions of dollars.

Sorry, you are absolutely correct. 

It is a flop economically, but it's gross is in line with what this movie would have expected to pull.

So yeah, basically they spend triple what they should have spent to make it. 

Question: Did anything change about this movie between Chapek's departure and Iger's arrival?

I'd be very curious to know about this and see if the switch between CEOs had anything to do with the flop.

 

Also, the conversation really was over in the Marvels thread from my end and locking it was unnecessary. I didn't have anything to add since we'd pretty much talked through most of the disagreements. It could probably be opened up safely as I know a lot of people have opinions about the movie after seeing it. 

Is it possible to have it reopened?

[Bosco685]

On 11/19/2023 at 2:20 AM, VintageComics said:

Also, the conversation really was over in the Marvels thread from my end and locking it was unnecessary. I didn't have anything to add since we'd pretty much talked through most of the disagreements. It could probably be opened up safely as I know a lot of people have opinions about the movie after seeing it. 

Is it possible to have it reopened?

Since the topic in this thread is about box office results and how different parties respond to such results (i.e. studios, producers, directors, actors, industry analysts...) I'd shy away from bringing up the other thread. It was locked due to the deviations from the topic it was intended for.

I don't think we want yet another locked thread.

[shadroch]

On 11/18/2023 at 9:18 PM, media_junkie said:

I get what you are saying, but this movie is an absolute flop.  $300 million to make plus another $100 million to advertise.  Disney/Marvel needed this film to do $800 million at the B.O. to break even.  At best this movie is going to do $250 to $300 million.  This is going to cost the studio hundreds of millions of dollars.

With Hollywood bookkeeping, does any one movie matter to the studio? They can make hits lose money on paper, and turn disasters into break-even ventures. 

 

[Bosco685]

On 11/19/2023 at 10:33 AM, shadroch said:

With Hollywood bookkeeping, does any one movie matter to the studio? They can make hits lose money on paper, and turn disasters into break-even ventures. 

 

When one of the three co-leads is supposedly meant to take charge of the future Avengers team, one film can matter to the go-forward plan in this case. Especially when it is part of a ever-progressing franchise versus a standalone film with no linkage to other properties.

The good and the bad of these massive connected universes.

[Bosco685]

[EastEnd1]

On 11/18/2023 at 11:18 PM, media_junkie said:

I get what you are saying, but this movie is an absolute flop.  $300 million to make plus another $100 million to advertise.  Disney/Marvel needed this film to do $800 million at the B.O. to break even.  At best this movie is going to do $250 to $300 million.  This is going to cost the studio hundreds of millions of dollars.

I'm not implying that this movie hasn't disappointed, but just a heads up that most movies aren't profitable based on just the studio's take from box office (generally 50% of the gross).  They usually become profitable after all the secondary revenue streams... downloads, streaming subscription and licensing fees, international rights, broadcast rights, etc. factor in.  You can also layer in more indirect streams like video game licenses, toy licensing deals, character theme park licenses, and so on.  The studios have methodologies for allocating these streams back to the original properties (and btw, those production costs are spread out across the various revenue streams, not just assigned against theatrical box office).  It's not uncommon at all for a box office disappointment to become a profitable movie overall.  Having said that, I'm sure Disney projected a much higher box office for Marvels, which also detrimentally affects all those secondary revenue streams.  Certainly financial forecasts for this film will be missed, and Disney Finance will be hyper-analyzing the results.  But whether they'll actually book a loss at this point is difficult to say.

[Bosco685]

[Bosco685]

 

Edited November 19, 2023 by Bosco685

[paperheart]

On 11/19/2023 at 8:37 AM, Bosco685 said:

 

There is no getting around the fact that this is a historic bomb but the tragedy is that Silvermane is not here to enjoy it

[VintageComics]

On 11/19/2023 at 11:12 AM, EastEnd1 said:

I'm not implying that this movie hasn't disappointed, but just a heads up that most movies aren't profitable based on just the studio's take from box office (generally 50% of the gross).  They usually become profitable after all the secondary revenue streams... downloads, streaming subscription and licensing fees, international rights, broadcast rights, etc. factor in.  You can also layer in more indirect streams like video game licenses, toy licensing deals, character theme park licenses, and so on.  The studios have methodologies for allocating these streams back to the original properties (and btw, those production costs are spread out across the various revenue streams, not just assigned against theatrical box office).  It's not uncommon at all for a box office disappointment to become a profitable movie overall.  Having said that, I'm sure Disney projected a much higher box office for Marvels, which also detrimentally affects all those secondary revenue streams.  Certainly financial forecasts for this film will be missed, and Disney Finance will be hyper-analyzing the results.  But whether they'll actually book a loss at this point is difficult to say.

I would be VERY interested to hear your take on what happened to John Carter (2012), because in my own limited experience that was the first movie with blockbuster like expectations from the comic book world to bomb at the box office. There may have been a Batman movie or something from the 90's that fit that description but JC 2012 stands out to me. 

Are you aware of the circumstances surrounding that film?

In hindsight it makes for a very interesting case study in this discussion about Marvels.

Edited November 19, 2023 by VintageComics

[Bosco685]

On 11/19/2023 at 3:44 PM, VintageComics said:

I would be VERY interested to hear your take on what happened to John Carter (2012), because in my own limited experience that was the first movie with blockbuster like expectations from the comic book world to bomb at the box office. There may have been a Batman movie or something from the 90's that fit that description but JC 2012 stands out to me. 

Are you aware of the circumstances surrounding that film?

In hindsight it makes for a very interesting case study in this discussion about Marvels.

If you get a chance read John Carter and the Gods of Hollywood.

It was purposely sabotaged by incoming Disney executives to spite the outgoing team. Leading to a marketing campaign and movie name that kept it generic without much excitement.

[VintageComics]

On 11/19/2023 at 3:55 PM, Bosco685 said:

If you get a chance read John Carter and the Gods of Hollywood.

It was purposely sabotaged by incoming Disney executives to spite the outgoing team. Leading to a marketing campaign and movie name that kept it generic without much excitement.

Thank you. That jogs my memory now.

So basically, Disney quite literally played with the lives of everyone involved like it was a board game, destroyed entire careers of people who were involved in good faith but they needed to make a point to some rich people they didn't like.

Sounds like a family friendly company that genuinely cares about it's people. 

I'm getting to the point where I may never watch another Disney movie again, even if the FF and X-men come into the universe. 

[Gatsby77]

On 11/19/2023 at 3:02 PM, paperheart said:

There is no getting around the fact that this is a historic bomb but the tragedy is that Silvermane is not here to enjoy it

Gitesh is not necessarily right, tho.

Steel also dropped 78% in its 2nd weekend.

Have to wait to see weekend actuals to determine if it actually bombed harder than Steel.

[Axelrod]

On 11/19/2023 at 3:55 PM, Bosco685 said:

If you get a chance read John Carter and the Gods of Hollywood.

It was purposely sabotaged by incoming Disney executives to spite the outgoing team. Leading to a marketing campaign and movie name that kept it generic without much excitement.

Haven't read this, though I am generally interested in books about the business.  I know I posted a breakdown of this movie some time back with a few of my issues with it.  I just didn't think it was good, irrespective of marketing (though I agree the bland and borderline ridiculous name change did not help).

[Bosco685]

On 11/19/2023 at 4:25 PM, Gatsby77 said:

Gitesh is not necessarily right, tho.

Steel also dropped 78% in its 2nd weekend.

Have to wait to see weekend actuals to determine if it actually bombed harder than Steel.

Steel was in the MCU?

I had no idea. I will now look at that film differently.

But he is right about the 78% drop based on the estimates released by Disney. Tomorrow, as you noted, will be actuals.

[Bosco685]

On 11/19/2023 at 5:54 PM, Axelrod said:

Haven't read this, though I am generally interested in books about the business.  I know I posted a breakdown of this movie some time back with a few of my issues with it.  I just didn't think it was good, irrespective of marketing (though I agree the bland and borderline ridiculous name change did not help).

I liked the film. I disliked the generic title and horrible marketing plan leading to its demise and the trilogy not happening. It's a shame what Disney allowed to fall flat at the box office. It still sits poorly with the director, as he had a vision where this was going.

John Carter: Director talks sequel titles & details during appearance at SDCC (2022)

Quote

Our very own Chris Bumbray was in attendance when director Andrew Stanton spoke about the film at San Diego Comic-Con, and he revealed titles for the sequels along with plot details.

 

The first sequel would’ve been called John Carter: Gods of Mars, and it would’ve found Carter returning after ten years on Mars to find that his wife has a child who was kidnapped and is advanced to adult age and sent to kill his father. The sequel would have ended with Carter reuniting with his wife and man-son.

 

The next sequel would’ve been called John Carter: Warlord of Mars, and it would have dealt with the overthrow of mars, and Carter would have been killed. He would wake up on earth again and return to mars and save the planet, being named “warlord of mars” by the film’s conclusion.

 

[media_junkie]

On 11/19/2023 at 6:04 PM, Bosco685 said:

I liked the film. I disliked the generic title and horrible marketing plan leading to its demise and the trilogy not happening. It's a shame what Disney allowed to fall flat at the box office. It still sits poorly with the director, as he had a vision where this was going.

John Carter: Director talks sequel titles & details during appearance at SDCC (2022)

 

Yeah, I really enjoyed the film.  I also read the book about how it was screwed up from the get go.  Interesting book, tragedy what happened to the movie.

[Bosco685]

Oh boy

FORBES: Like It Or Not, ‘The Marvels’ Has Now Bombed In Every Way Possible

Quote

“Justice for The Marvels!” I cry, as I watch every news story about it torch its performance. I liked the film, I thought it was fun. And while I don’t think it deserves to fail, it very much…has failed. Pretty much by every metric possible.

 

You can blame the strike erasing a press tour with its charismatic stars. You can blame YouTuber jerks dumping on the film for months ahead of release. You can blame the superhero fatigue that has also infected DC. But whatever the case, this has been the end result:

 

• The Marvels has the lowest MCU domestic opening ever: $46 million
• The Marvels has the lowest MCU global opening ever: $110 million
• The Marvels has the largest week two drop off of any superhero movie ever: -78%
• The Marvels is the third lowest scored MCU movie in series history on Rotten Tomatoes: 62%
• The Marvels got a rare B Cinemascore, tying it with Eternals and Quantumia, the lowest in MCU history.
• The Marvels is expected to end its theatrical run with $210 million to $240 million at the global box office, under its $270 million budget and that would be, you guessed it, the lowest total for an MCU movie ever.

 

Edited November 20, 2023 by Bosco685