CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › CHUD NUMBERS: Box Office Discussion Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

CHUD NUMBERS: Box Office Discussion Thread - Page 621

post #31001 of 35253
It will be interesting to see tomorrow's actual numbers. BVS' estimated daily weekend numbers were a bit more generous than the actual ones ended up being.

BVS was announced to have a $170.1 million weekend but it turned out to be $166 million.
Edited by catartik - 8/8/16 at 12:23am
post #31002 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post
 

No matter what, WB execs will continue to have no fucking clue.  I think I've officially given up hope on them despite technically liking the movie.  They fucked up the Joker Harley thing, and that's three DC movies in a row of not getting basic things about DC characters.  

 

I mentioned Netflix earlier, in relation to Ayer's next film, and it's funny that there's really nothing that shows their execs are any more artistic or capable of "getting" characters than WB brass. The difference seems to be that the Netflix execs understand this and outsource the creative process, much like they would if they were making planes, jeans or frozen yogurt. I doubt Netflix bought Ayer's BRIGHT because they saw its artistic potential, they bought it because its crew had convincing CVs and Warners and MGM wanted it. This doesn't seem that hard, does it?

post #31003 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virtanen View Post
 

 

I mentioned Netflix earlier, in relation to Ayer's next film, and it's funny that there's really nothing that shows their execs are any more artistic or capable of "getting" characters than WB brass. The difference seems to be that the Netflix execs understand this and outsource the creative process, much like they would if they were making planes, jeans or frozen yogurt. I doubt Netflix bought Ayer's BRIGHT because they saw its artistic potential, they bought it because its crew had convincing CVs and Warners and MGM wanted it. This doesn't seem that hard, does it?

 

The head guys in WB and the like all think they are creatives. They all seem to think they know what the people want and how to give it to them and they're the best people to interfere. They use vague focus groups and test screenings to justify their opinions and meddle just so they think they are involved and protecting their investments.

 

Netflix guys are techies, they know  they don't know much about the creative side of things. That's not what drives them. They geek out over making a powerful content delivery system and getting all kinds of metrics and stats from things. The actual content is more or less irrelevant (or at least uninteresting) to the big wigs there I would imagine... they leave that to the people they hire.

 

And I imagine a big part of that is that Netflix probably has one of the most powerful user analysis systems in commercial existence. They don't have to guess what their customers want. They know what they are searching for, how long they watch a show for before they get bored, what shows they browse over, which ones they linger on to read the descriptions. They get accurate ratings for demographic groups and repeat viewing stats... they know what damned scenes you enjoyed based on the pausing, rewinding and rewatching.

 

But the main thing is, as techies, they care way more about writing systems that give them that information than fine tuning the content, their motivation to fiddle is most likely disproportionately less.

 

If Stranger Things (for example) fails, Netflix will know exactly why. At least way more than the guessing that is going on a WB right now with regards to Suicide Squad's box office/critical reception/audience cinemascore/drop off stats, which are stone age metrics by comparison. It will not be a surprise if they panic again and meddle/help with WW.

post #31004 of 35253
Netflix is absolutely killing it right now. They're operating like a studio in the 70s...recognizing talent and letting them do their thing within budget limits (which forces creativity). Netflix understands they're not filmmakers, and that watching movies doesn't qualify them to tell filmmakers how to make them (much like knowing how to drive a car doesn't qualify you to tell an engineer how to build one).
post #31005 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post

Netflix is absolutely killing it right now. They're operating like a studio in the 70s...recognizing talent and letting them do their thing within budget limits (which forces creativity). Netflix understands they're not filmmakers, and that watching movies doesn't qualify them to tell filmmakers how to make them (much like knowing how to drive a car doesn't qualify you to tell an engineer how to build one).

 

I'm not arguing with you but Beasts of No Nation is probably the only film of note they have produced.

 

Just saying, they have made a lot of Adam Sandler movies.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_original_programs_distributed_by_Netflix#Films

post #31006 of 35253
Yeah, but as soon as you include original television in the mix (that's their bread and butter, after all), Netflix's portfolio looks incredibly diverse and very ambitious.
post #31007 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agentsands77 View Post

Yeah, but as soon as you include original television in the mix (that's their bread and butter, after all), Netflix's portfolio looks incredibly diverse and very ambitious.

 

No doubt, but isn't there far more leeway afforded to the creator of a television show just given the sheer amount of material needed to record a full series?

 

Movies (and audiences) tend to be a lot less forgiving.

 

Television in general has become a spaghetti at the wall throwing exercise as it is.

 

I do think Netflix has demonstrated a lot of ambition with it's content and I'm glad they're pushing the boundaries of content delivery and the content itself.

 

To be honest, the first season of Orange is the New Black was some of the best television I've ever watched. I don't know how that show came apart so fast -- maybe the pressure that comes with so much popularity (that comes with being so widely binge-watched by so many subscribers) de-railed it. It's a shame.

post #31008 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill View Post
 

 

No doubt, but isn't there far more leeway afforded to the creator of a television show just given the sheer amount of material needed to record a full series?

 

Movies (and audiences) tend to be a lot less forgiving.

 

Television in general has become a spaghetti at the wall throwing exercise as it is.

 

 

Agreed. A 2hr movie is a hell of a lot more scrutinized than seasons of a television show just by the sheer amount of material.

 

Every frame of a television show isn't analyzed like a movie.

post #31009 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill View Post

I'm not arguing with you but Beasts of No Nation is probably the only film of note they have produced.

Just saying, they have made a lot of Adam Sandler movies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_original_programs_distributed_by_Netflix#Films

They just gave "Bright" the greenlight, a Max Landis/Ayer scripted sci-fi film no studio would allow as a hard R rated film...its why Landis/Ayer specifically sold it to Netflix rather than a studio. Adam Wingard's "Death Note" is filming...another film only Netflix would allow to be made hard core. Don't let their first Adam Sandler decision fool you (which was a smart financial move anyway).
post #31010 of 35253
David Ayer sci-fi?! Yay!
Oh. Max Landis. Boo.
post #31011 of 35253
And Joel Edgerton as an orc and Will Smith as Big Willie. Yay..?
post #31012 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by catartik View Post

It will be interesting to see tomorrow's actual numbers. BVS' estimated daily weekend numbers were a bit more generous than the actual ones ended up being.

BVS was announced to have a $170.1 million weekend but it turned out to be $166 million.

134M

post #31013 of 35253
Weekend actual for Suicide Squad is $133.6 million.
post #31014 of 35253

CCCC lied to us!!!!! 

post #31015 of 35253

I'll never trust an internet message board ever again!

post #31016 of 35253
Front loaded as usual. Won't have legs. How's that shared cinematic universe plan working out for ya WB?
post #31017 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSaxon View Post
 

CCCC lied to us!!!!! 

 

Where is he anyway?

post #31018 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post

Front loaded as usual. Won't have legs. How's that shared cinematic universe plan working out for ya WB?

 

post #31019 of 35253
Isnt anything that opens that high gonna be front loaded, barring a completely weird phenomenon?
post #31020 of 35253
When people talk about front loaded, I think they're talking about to how much a degree it's front loaded. The numbers end up being a good indication of what its total gross will end at.

It's just a 'business savvy' way of saying "yeah it opened great, but people aren't really liking it much so it will probably top out at $_______!"

not like MILPOOL
post #31021 of 35253

I get that. I'm just thinking they're probably okay with the 134 million opening. It's going to get over 200, that's a win for sure. Especially with everyone apparently hating it.

post #31022 of 35253
With the budget of this movie along with how they reacted to the grossed of steelman and batsup...

I think they're happy with a great opening...for now... but will soon have that wear off and then get into their usual panic mode if the movie really drops afterwards.

Nothing is ever enough for these people!
post #31023 of 35253

All the reporting that they beat Deadpool - by about $1 million while leaving out that the reported production cost alone was over 3 times that of Deadpool - by about $1 million.

 

It's going to decay faster and gross less overall worldwide than Deadpool too - it's definitely making them much less money when all is said and done.

post #31024 of 35253

Plus, they have Ayer's cut standing by for the inevitable re-release/double-dip.

post #31025 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd View Post

I get that. I'm just thinking they're probably okay with the 134 million opening. It's going to get over 200, that's a win for sure. Especially with everyone apparently hating it.

When trying to build a brand, having lots of people hate your products isn't a winning business strategy. It needs $750-$800M to break even. Anybody see it getting there without legs? Remember, their flagship character movie BvS could barely crack $800M.

Toxic word of mouth is seriously crippling these movies ability to make the kind money studios expect for these kinds of films, and build a brand like Marvel has.

WB flipping out after the BvS debacle by bringing in trailer editors to retool the movie and demanding reshoots is writing on the wall that they're very conscious of how these movies are received.
post #31026 of 35253

Meanwhile, in comparison, the makers of The Purge Series have so far avoided a rush of blood to the head and have kept things very tight indeed over all three films.

post #31027 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

It's just a 'business savvy' way of saying "yeah it opened great, but people aren't really liking it much so it will probably top out at $_______!"
 

 

That seems to be most films this summer. Star Trek Beyond is dropping like a rock. So is Bourne. I don't even know if "like" has anything to do with it anymore.

post #31028 of 35253

Meanwhile, here are some of the more sensible productions still showing somewhere (as in, had they failed, the studio wouldn't have been much out of pocket because they didn't cost that much for a movie in the first place).

 

Modest budgets and decent to good returns.

 

Bad Moms

Central Intelligence

The Conjuring 2

Me Before You

The Shallows

 

Small budgets and excellent returns.

 

Lights Out

The Purge: Election Year

 

Then, of course, out of cinemas now but the massively successful Deadpool. Which is actually what is an almost extinct species at least once known as the mid-budget movie.

post #31029 of 35253
This was definitely not a year for blockbusters. And while there were unfortunate casualties, there were more that deserved it. Perhaps this will tighten some studio wallets and force some talent for 2018-19 releases.
post #31030 of 35253

Comedy and horror are the two genres that can still get away with medium budgets.

 

Re: the big drops, I think it's partly an overfamiliarity thing. Blockbusters with low drops tend to be the ones that are in some way new or unexpected, where word of mouth can mean building your audience. With long running franchises most people are either on board from day one or they're just not interested.

 

To be honest the main message Hollywood will learn from the box office this year will probably be: keep it up with the superheroes and animals.

 

Has anyone pitched an animal superhero movie yet?

post #31031 of 35253

Even better: An ANIMATED animal superhero movie!

post #31032 of 35253

I guarantee someone will make billions off that idea within the next decade, and we'll be just sat here like "well, shit".

post #31033 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by User_32 View Post
 

Even better: An ANIMATED animal superhero movie!

 

Pretty sure the comics already did a (tongue in cheek) grimdark version of Capt. Carrot--watch DC bring that the screen. Only seriously.

post #31034 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by User_32 View Post

That seems to be most films this summer. Star Trek Beyond is dropping like a rock. So is Bourne. I don't even know if "like" has anything to do with it anymore.

I think it is still that, but more nuanced. People are finding these passable but don't come out all that EXCITED about them. The critics may get collectively positive or incredibly negative about each movie, but audiences are meeting that somewhere in the middle. And everything big this summer has come across fairly bleh.

Except for Finding Dory I guess. People really loved that. But doesn't it already feel like it came out last year?

edit: or what Paul just said
post #31035 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shan View Post

Then, of course, out of cinemas now but the massively successful Deadpool. Which is actually what is an almost extinct species at least once known as the mid-budget movie.

See also: 50 SHADES, KINGSMAN, AMERICAN SNIPER and GONE GIRL.
post #31036 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post


I think it is still that, but more nuanced. People are finding these passable but don't come out all that EXCITED about them. The critics may get collectively positive or incredibly negative about each movie, but audiences are meeting that somewhere in the middle. And everything big this summer has come across fairly bleh.

Except for Finding Dory I guess. People really loved that. But doesn't it already feel like it came out last year?

edit: or what Paul just said

 

At least in the case of Bourne, that really was IMO qualitatively the weakest of the series by far. Not a single new idea in it and a host of scenes replicated from one of the others which had already done it much better. The previous films didn't add huge amounts to the mythology but this was the first one to feel truly disposable. To add, the flashback with his father, finding out what he was responsible for, and who the person was who set off the explosion being who it was, was one bridge too far in a series of revelations as well and just made the whole thing ridiculous.

post #31037 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virtanen View Post

See also: 50 SHADES, KINGSMAN, AMERICAN SNIPER and GONE GIRL.
I forgot 50 Shades of Gray was even a thing. I haven't seen the movie and don't really plan to..
post #31038 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraid uh noman View Post


I forgot 50 Shades of Gray was even a thing. I haven't seen the movie and don't really plan to..

 

I don't know if it's true or not but the narrative out there that the two leads detest each other in real life is highly entertaining. 

post #31039 of 35253
Correct me if I'm wrong....but the way 50 Shades struck me (book and film...though I've not read the book either...obviously) is that it's "ooooh kinky, SCANDALOUS" for like REALLY conservative, possibly sexually frustrated people...but that true S and M culture rolls their collective eyes at it as weak sauce....which I find hilarious..
post #31040 of 35253

I also detest the two leads.  Just kidding ... Don Johnson rules, so I guess his kid is ok. 

post #31041 of 35253

Dakota Johnson was really, really good in it.  She's a star in the making if she gets the right roles going forward.  The movie was dogshit, though.

post #31042 of 35253
50 SHADES proofs that you don't need to be a big budget blockbuster to be front-loaded as hell.
post #31043 of 35253
post #31044 of 35253

gimme dat pirates deal

 

I want the pirates deal

post #31045 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post
 

gimme dat pirates deal

 

I want the pirates deal

 

Are you a pirate?

 

If not

 

then no.

post #31046 of 35253
Shame, because I know Taika Waititi specifically fought for some really bold and amazing treatment for people working down there. He's hired a lot of aboriginals and people that haven't had an opportunity to work on stuff like this, and is even offering a lot of apprentice/training programs right there on set. He's a really thoughtful guy.
post #31047 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virtanen View Post

50 SHADES proofs that you don't need to be a big budget blockbuster to be front-loaded as hell.

 

Exactly.  The audience dying to see a movie goes out in droves on the weekend.  Word of mouth carries it after that.

 

Surely WB are panicking because the writing is on the wall for Suicide Squad.  The movie is not going to turn a profit.  The last minute rejection by China sure has to hurt.

 

Any yes, China does make a difference in pushing your movie over into the black, despite them minimal amount studios get from foreign domestic box office.

 

GotG made $95 million in China alone.  

post #31048 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raynis View Post

Shame, because I know Taika Waititi specifically fought for some really bold and amazing treatment for people working down there. He's hired a lot of aboriginals and people that haven't had an opportunity to work on stuff like this, and is even offering a lot of apprentice/training programs right there on set. He's a really thoughtful guy.

 

I'm sure it's more complex than that in the sense that his hands are probably tied. Also, Marvel are notoriously known to be as tight as possible and always trying for every financial advantage they can, though in (some) fairness, they're not the only ones.

 

Let's hear it for Keanu Reeves who gave a lot (and it was a *lot*) of his Matrix money to the people who worked on it.

post #31049 of 35253

I like hearing that about Waititi.  Keanu was incredibly rewarded for the Matrix sequels, and he (and the Wachowskis) really spread that success around on the sequels.  Nice to see good people share what they can with the people that often get overlooked.

post #31050 of 35253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shan View Post

I'm sure it's more complex than that in the sense that his hands are probably tied. Also, Marvel are notoriously known to be as tight as possible and always trying for every financial advantage they can, though in (some) fairness, they're not the only ones.

Let's hear it for Keanu Reeves who gave a lot (and it was a *lot*) of his Matrix money to the people who worked on it.

Reeves didn't really do that. He's been super charitable, but that MATRIX stuff was all bologna. It came from a false-article saying he worked up a deal that would share his profit sharing points. But every crew member on those sets will tell you it's not true. It went to mostly costume designers, and was under $10 million. He finally laid that rumor to rest last year.

There are maybe a dozen fake stories of Keanu being godlike.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: CHUD.COM Main
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › CHUD NUMBERS: Box Office Discussion Thread