• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Daredevil film is a bust.......will you still buy DD back issues?

Started by blowout,

99 posts in this topic

delekkerste

delekkerste

Posted
Posted

First, as FF and others have pointed out, DD is going to be a

substantial financial success overall.

 

DD's critics have never said that they expected DD to pull in Spider-Man sized numbers. What they have said is that the studio clearly expected the film to ride Spidey's coattails to much higher box office grosses than a puny Parker-sized $100 million domestic. That figure is sad and pathetic given what was budgeted for both production and marketing costs. I'm sure they hoped that the movie would gross $250-$300 million worldwide, which it is clearly going to miss.

 

Mark Steven Johnson says in interviews that he would be happy for DD to gross what Blade I and II did worldwide (both around $150 million). Uh, is there anyone who is stupid enough to believe that he & the studio would be happy for a film that cost more than Blade I and II, had the star power of Ben Affleck, Jennifer Garner, Colin Farrell, etc., and was marketed like crazy to gross the same as a B-vampire movie starring Wesley Snipes? If so, I've got some great CGC'd non-key Moderns I'd like to sell to you at 20x guide... shocked.gifwink.gifgrin.gif

 

Gene

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fantastic_four

fantastic_four

Posted
Posted

I'd characterize both the Daredevil movie AND comic to be B-level efforts. I was surprised yet pleased that it was Daredevil they chose to bring to the big screen after X-Men and Spidey; I figured it would be a while since he's not a premiere Marvel title.

 

The studio probably isn't "happy," but I'd say they're pleased and may not spend as much to advertise any sequel. They can't be unhappy to make a profit. Disappointed to not come close to Spidey numbers, yea, but pleased enough to consider a sequel. Any film which makes tens of millions in profit has a chance for a sequel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crowzilla

Crowzilla

Posted
Posted

Okay, a little late to this topic, but a few thoughts...

 

FF - are you sure the studio will see any money from merchandising or is that all Marvel's money? Wouldn't the studio usually only get merchandise money from a propery it owns and not buys the rights for a movie?

 

Yes, as far as February openings go, DD is a big winner. but January/February and Sep/Oct are known as the absolute worst opening months and usually when studios dump product that they don't think will do well against strong competition.

If DD had opened in May, $40 Mil wouldn't even crack the top ten openings.

As it stands DD will still gross less than "Batman & Robin", which had the distinction of being the lowest grossing movie to ever open with $40 Mil+.

It's hard to think of a movie that cost as much as DD did and will make less than B&R as a success.

 

As far as overseas Boxoffice is concerned, DD (as of last weekend) had made $22.8 Mil in 15 different markets including the UK, Spain, Mexico and Sweden.

It has yet to open in Japan (usually the #2 market outside the US), Australia, Germany or France but has been very underwhelming so far overseas. In the UK, it opened at #2 behind Two Weeks Notice (despite opening a week later), and then quickly fell behind Treasure Planet and The Wild Thornberries (two other movies it opened after).

 

DD is not in the clear yet, but I suspect it will turn a profit after the DVD/VHS sales are figured in (and this is where a lot of movies finally make a profit), but most likely it will NOT add $10s of millions of dollars to the bottom line of Fox.

We'll see when their next quarterly report is issued where they tag it.

 

Usually your box-office take has to be close to double costs/marketing to make a profit in the theaters, and DD will not come close to that, even after figuring in International Box Office. Most likely it will end up with a total take of around $170-180 Mil worldwide.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crowzilla

Crowzilla

Posted
Posted

Have you guys really seen articles that the studios were hoping DD would do Blade II numbers - or is that what they said after it started falling at the box-office?

 

Blade II's combined production/marketing budget was $79 Mil - $44 Million LESS than Daredevils budget. Why would they be happy with a movie that did the same box office (dollars not percentage) when it cost them nearly 60% more?

 

Blade II's domestic gross actually went slightly over combined production/marketing totals, whereas DD's domestic gross will come about 20% short of it's production/marketing totals.

 

I find it hard to believe the studios are happy about those kind of numbers.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Illiterati-migration

Illiterati-migration

Posted
Posted

Basically, it is the fanboys who were irked by this movie that it did not live up to their geek expectations that are whining about this film---movie people and even comic creators who expected the film to limp to 50 million, are not very vocal about proclaiming their hate for this film.

 

It was insultingly bad. It was like having your soccer-playing grandma kick you in the 'nads... it hurt bad enough to make your eyes water, there was absolutely no pleasure derived from it, and you're embarassed when you stumble away from it. (Ask Greggy about it. He'll tell you. He even has pictures of his soccer-playing grandma to share.)

 

How about this, let's start a list of movies that are BETTER than Daredevil (other than direct-to-video disasters because they are from a different world entirely).

 

I'll go first: "The Goonies"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
delekkerste

delekkerste

Posted
Posted

Have you guys really seen articles that the studios were hoping DD would do Blade II numbers

 

I read an interview with the director (Johnson) that said he'd be happy with Blade I/II numbers, but, as both your deductive ability and mine both figured out, that's preposterous given that Daredevil was a much more marketable property and more expensive film than either Blade release. Not sure when the interview was (before or after the movie's release), though.

 

Gene

Link to comment
Share on other sites
delekkerste

delekkerste

Posted
Posted

You do realize that the probable reality of DD is that the studio was hoping the film would clear at least 100 million

 

To believe that the studios would be happy with such low numbers is ludicrous, as the simple math here has shown. Yes, it will be a profitable flick, but the ROI is much lower than expected. You have to realize that the studios count on flicks like DD to make tons of money to subsidize their losses on other films. With a $125+ million total budget (incl. marketing) and let's say $160 million in GROSS (not net) box office receipts, that's not a big ROI. Let's throw in the pay cable, DVD, etc. windows and you're at a respectable figure, but factor in the opportunity cost of tying up 9 figures into this project alone and you can't help but realize that this movie did not live up to expectations, either critically or financially. Perhaps the studio thinks they did well enough to start a DD film franchise, but given that sequels normally do less box office than originals and with the particularly poor word of mouth on this film, they are just setting themselves up for future disappointment.

 

 

DD is technically a second tier comic-character in the eyes of hollywood...It was also dark, and not meant to heavily appeal to anyone who is barely in Junior High when they saw this film.

 

This is just nonsensical. DD the comic is a 2nd-tier property in the eyes of Hollywood, but DD The Movie was a 1st-tier property with a large production and marketing budget and colossal star power - Ben Affleck, the Sexiest Man Alive, Colin Farrell, the Hottest Young Actor in Hollywood, Jennifer Garner, one of the Sexiest Women Alive. Believe me, they wrote in plenty of Affleck/Garner romance material for the sole reason that they wanted the film to appeal to women as well as men (if you didn't know, Garner's "Alias" TV series is watched by a predominantly female audience).

 

 

Basically, it is the fanboys who were irked by this movie that it did not live up to their geek expectations that are whining about this film

 

You must be joking. Not too many non-fanboys had good things to say about it.

 

Gene

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Illiterati-migration

Illiterati-migration

Posted
Posted

You must be joking. Not too many non-fanboys had good things to say about it.

 

Indeed. Think about how damaging this movie was to the comic book movie genre's reputation and public perception. That, combined with the fact that it's NOT going to actually net very much money at all are even MORE reasons why this movie should be erased from our collective memory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
blowout

blowout

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I didn't actually intend this thread to be an anti DD movie fest, but what the heck, the movie was terrible.

I will actually be astonished if the studios make a sequel to DD. The film has been so disapointing both artistically and financially that I can't see the backers having any confidence in a follow up. Maybe an Elektra movie will get made on the strength of Garner alone.

As far as the comics go, everyone so far has said this won't hurt their back-issue spending. But the movies relative faliure is bound to have both a short term and long term effect on the sale/value of DD books.

It looks like the character has missed the chance to be a pop culture icon and todays kids will not want to own any 'lame Daredevil' toys and are not likely to get into DD books. Thereby guaranteing DD's long term obscurity. frown.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fantastic_four

fantastic_four

Posted
Posted
Thereby guaranteing DD's long term obscurity.
It's not a guarantee; the comic has been amongst the top 20 best-selling comics most of the time since Kevin Smith restarted the numbering.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing