Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie Musings >> RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 12/3/2012 12:06:34 PM   
st3veebee


Posts: 2353
Joined: 3/9/2006
From: 9303 Lyon Drive
quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82

It'll eventually break in to profit. All blockbusters do. There's a really great analysis of how this sort of thing really works in The Good, The Bad & The Multiplex. Box office aside any major release like this will pocket a fortune from home video and TV rights.


Yeah it ulimately will. 100 mill in its first weekend though?: none too shabby (even though poor US BO).

_____________________________

Latest Films:

Two days in New York: 4/5

Prometheus: 3.5/5

Abe Lincoln: VH 3/5

Twin Peaks: FWWM 3.5/5

(in reply to adambatman82)
Post #: 61
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 12/3/2012 6:13:39 PM   
directorscut


Posts: 10597
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation

It still won't be enough to pay back the marketing costs though, and it will still suffer to get its budget back.


It'll eventually break in to profit. All blockbusters do.


No they don't.

quote:

Box office aside any major release like this will pocket a fortune from home video and TV rights.


No it won't.

TV rights are negotiated and are dependent on how much a film makes at the box office. There won't be any big bucks TV deals for a flop like John Carter.

Home video sales are also proportionate to BO gross. Even massive hits like Avatar or Harry Potter only made 25% of what they made in the cinema on home video.

_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to adambatman82)
Post #: 62
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 12/3/2012 6:30:56 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19037
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park
JCs box office actully went up from Friday to Saturday. So who knows how it will do in the end.

Interesting to see the international numbers there.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.


(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 63
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 12/3/2012 6:32:12 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19037
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park
As for DC - this might interest you - a chart about how profitable movies are

http://acatcalledfrank.com/content/filmstrips-visualisation/index.html

Even something like Green Lantern still made a profit.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.


(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 64
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 12/3/2012 6:40:08 PM   
directorscut


Posts: 10597
Joined: 30/9/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

As for DC - this might interest you - a chart about how profitable movies are

http://acatcalledfrank.com/content/filmstrips-visualisation/index.html

Even something like Green Lantern still made a profit.


That chart makes no sense at all from both a design and content point of view.

Green Lantern is one of the top ten biggest money losers of all time. It lost $90 million at the box office. In no way did it turn a profit.

PS. That site seems to think that the studio gets 100% of the gross. They don't. They also don't take into account marketing + distribution costs.

< Message edited by directorscut -- 12/3/2012 6:43:43 PM >


_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 65
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 12/3/2012 6:53:57 PM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

Green Lantern is one of the top ten biggest money losers of all time. It lost $90 million at the box office. In no way did it turn a profit.



It made $219 million at the box office. It cost $200 million. Thats a profit of $19 million. And thats not including home video. Or merchandising. Or product placement/branding/endorsements.

(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 66
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 12/3/2012 6:55:55 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19037
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

As for DC - this might interest you - a chart about how profitable movies are

http://acatcalledfrank.com/content/filmstrips-visualisation/index.html

Even something like Green Lantern still made a profit.


That chart makes no sense at all from both a design and content point of view.

Green Lantern is one of the top ten biggest money losers of all time. It lost $90 million at the box office. In no way did it turn a profit.

PS. That site seems to think that the studio gets 100% of the gross. They don't. They also don't take into account marketing + distribution costs.


But likewise we don't know how much money Warners got from all the GL merch that was out there.

It will be a movie which will get into profit. Pluto Mars won't ever for instance. Nor will Mars Needs Mums - but neither of those had extra profits coming in from elsewhere. Plus Lantern is a title that can be issued and re-issued in the future.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.


(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 67
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 12/3/2012 6:56:03 PM   
directorscut


Posts: 10597
Joined: 30/9/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

Green Lantern is one of the top ten biggest money losers of all time. It lost $90 million at the box office. In no way did it turn a profit.



It made $219 million at the box office. It cost $200 million. Thats a profit of $19 million. And thats not including home video. Or merchandising. Or product placement/branding/endorsements.


You're taking the piss with me, aren't you?

Ha ha. Very funny.

_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to adambatman82)
Post #: 68
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 12/3/2012 7:08:48 PM   
directorscut


Posts: 10597
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44


quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

As for DC - this might interest you - a chart about how profitable movies are

http://acatcalledfrank.com/content/filmstrips-visualisation/index.html

Even something like Green Lantern still made a profit.


That chart makes no sense at all from both a design and content point of view.

Green Lantern is one of the top ten biggest money losers of all time. It lost $90 million at the box office. In no way did it turn a profit.

PS. That site seems to think that the studio gets 100% of the gross. They don't. They also don't take into account marketing + distribution costs.


But likewise we don't know how much money Warners got from all the GL merch that was out there.

It will be a movie which will get into profit. Pluto Mars won't ever for instance. Nor will Mars Needs Mums - but neither of those had extra profits coming in from elsewhere. Plus Lantern is a title that can be issued and re-issued in the future.


Successful merchandise for films is an exception not a rule. The amount of films that have one that could cover the budget of the film is even fewer - ie, Star Wars, Harry Potter, Toy Story. A flop like Green Lantern most likely didn't have one and it certainly didn't generate $90 million for the studio.


_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 69
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 12/3/2012 7:13:29 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19037
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park
Warners would have sold the rights to the toys to another company, rather than do it in house, thus they make the money before even one action figure or lunchbox is sold.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.


(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 70
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 12/3/2012 7:17:45 PM   
directorscut


Posts: 10597
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Warners would have sold the rights to the toys to another company, rather than do it in house, thus they make the money before even one action figure or lunchbox is sold.


They didn't sell the license for $90 million.

Toy companies also get a bigger share of the sales.

For most blockbusters the merchandise is a marketing write off. They don't expect to make much money at all, if any. It's primarily about brand exposure and if the merchandise happens to be a success that's a bonus.

_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 71
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 12/3/2012 7:20:24 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19037
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Warners would have sold the rights to the toys to another company, rather than do it in house, thus they make the money before even one action figure or lunchbox is sold.


They didn't sell the license for $90 million.

Toy companies also get a bigger share of the sales.

For most blockbusters the merchandise is a marketing write off. They don't expect to make much money at all, if any. It's primarily about brand exposure and if the merchandise happens to be a success that's a bonus.


Where you getting this from?

And maybe not 90 million, but certainly quite a bit of dosh. Then you have to remember that a lot of marketing costs are done "in-house" so while Warners may have spent 80 million in marketing, much of that will have been paying another department. This is how they can claim the Harry Potter movies haven't been in profit yet.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.


(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 72
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 13/3/2012 1:08:03 PM   
spark1

 

Posts: 6822
Joined: 18/11/2006
but what was the actual budget for 'john carter' minus the development cost accured over years by disney?

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 73
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 13/3/2012 4:12:02 PM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: spark1

but what was the actual budget for 'john carter' minus the development cost accured over years by disney?


I think it was $170 million. The film came in under budget too.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/andrew-stanton-john-carter-lie-over-budget-disney-reshoots-292488

(in reply to spark1)
Post #: 74
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 13/3/2012 4:26:42 PM   
Timon


Posts: 14584
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Bristol
I'd be interested to see this 170 minutes cut. It did feel like a lot was cut.

_____________________________

"I put no stock in religion. By the word 'religion', I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called 'The Will of God'. Holiness is in right action and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves."

Twitter: @timonsingh

(in reply to adambatman82)
Post #: 75
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 13/3/2012 4:37:25 PM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Timon

I'd be interested to see this 170 minutes cut. It did feel like a lot was cut.


I think the film would benefit from a 90 minute cut. Get rid of all of the overly complicated background info and whatnot.

(in reply to Timon)
Post #: 76
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 13/3/2012 5:06:17 PM   
directorscut


Posts: 10597
Joined: 30/9/2005
No, it cost at least $250 million.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01cvkdd/Front_Row_Andrew_Stanton_William_Byrd_sports_documentaries

In this interview Stanton argues with the interviewer over everything but the $250 million budget.

< Message edited by directorscut -- 13/3/2012 5:07:22 PM >


_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to adambatman82)
Post #: 77
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 13/3/2012 5:21:46 PM   
Darth Marenghi

 

Posts: 3194
Joined: 10/10/2010
From: Manchester

quote:

ORIGINAL: spark1

but what was the actual budget for 'john carter' minus the development cost accured over years by disney?


They only got the rights for Stanton in 2007 - so really the costs wouldn't be any more than is usual for that kind of a film.


_____________________________

Invisible Text for SPOILERS: "color=#F1F1F1" Spoiler text "/color" , then change the quotation marks to square brackets.


(in reply to spark1)
Post #: 78
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 14/3/2012 1:51:50 PM   
spark1

 

Posts: 6822
Joined: 18/11/2006
the history of 'john carter''s journey to the screen-


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Carter_(film)#Development



(in reply to Darth Marenghi)
Post #: 79
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 16/3/2012 10:19:06 AM   
spark1

 

Posts: 6822
Joined: 18/11/2006
'john carter' may survive after all-

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2012/mar/15/john-carter-losses

at least it won't be as bad for disney as the mega flop of 'mars needs moms 3 d' from last year.

< Message edited by spark1 -- 17/3/2012 12:43:01 PM >

(in reply to st3veebee)
Post #: 80
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 19/3/2012 10:15:57 AM   
spark1

 

Posts: 6822
Joined: 18/11/2006
and now 'john carter' is near the $200mil mark at international boxoffice-

http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=johncarterofmars.htm


but disney will take a bath over its underperforming-

http://www.movieline.com/2012/03/19/disney-predicts-200-million-loss-on-john-carter/


http://www.mania.com/flop-or-not_article_132449.html


< Message edited by spark1 -- 20/3/2012 10:09:05 AM >

(in reply to spark1)
Post #: 81
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 20/3/2012 4:44:48 PM   
Rob


Posts: 2473
Joined: 30/9/2005
I think the press are being pretty quick to write off John Carter but the signs certainly aren't promising. Like others I've read The Good, The Bad and The Multiplex and Kermode puts forward a really interesting point in that all blockbusters eventually make their money back. I don't think that's strictly true although final figures are probably closer than people realise.

Waterworld is always regarded as a flop but actually turned a profit ultimately. However, in the case of something like Green Lantern I just don't see how that can make it's money back. It cost $200 million to make and grossed $219 million at the box office and an additional $18 million on DVD giving us a rough total of approx $240 million. That doesn't mean it's $40 million profit as there were considerable marketing costs involved and of course the cinemas take rough half of the box office gross. The general rule of thumb is that a film needs to make between 2 or 3 times it's production budget back to break even. It's not an exact science but it's a useful guide.

My main point though is this; if we take the guide above (2 or 3 time production budget = break even) then why on earth are Disney green lighting a $250 million budget for something like John Carter with no A-list talent, a relatively obscure character and a director who's never directed live action before? The film may be the greatest thing ever made but doesn't it seem somewhat optimistic to expect something like John Carter to make between $500 - $750 million?

Anyway predictions for 2012 from me:

TDKR - record breaking opening weekend and will beat TDK's overall total - I expect a larger international gross and will get help from IMAX prices and inflation.

Avengers - It will certainly do well but I think it's really hard to call. Will it be respectable or massive - I think I'm leaning towards the latter.

_____________________________

Same thing happened to me when I played Neil Armstrong in Moonshot. They found me in an alley in Burbank trying to re-enter the earth's atmosphere in an old refrigerator box.

(in reply to spark1)
Post #: 82
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 20/3/2012 4:46:23 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19037
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rob

My main point though is this; if we take the guide above (2 or 3 time production budget = break even) then why on earth are Disney green lighting a $250 million budget for something like John Carter with no A-list talent, a relatively obscure character and a director who's never directed live action before? The film may be the greatest thing ever made but doesn't it seem somewhat optimistic to expect something like John Carter to make between $500 - $750 million?



Avatar is your answer.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.


(in reply to Rob)
Post #: 83
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 20/3/2012 4:47:23 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19037
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park
As for the Dark Knight-  if the final Harry Potter and the fourth Pirates can do over a billion I see no reason why this shouldn't.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.


(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 84
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 20/3/2012 4:50:42 PM   
Spaldron


Posts: 10485
Joined: 6/10/2006
From: Chair
May as well repost this here.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17442200

_____________________________

And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts
And I looked and behold, a pale horse
And his name that sat on him was Death
And Hell followed with him.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 85
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 20/3/2012 4:51:01 PM   
Rob


Posts: 2473
Joined: 30/9/2005
Avatar - you're right. And ultimately my argument is irrelevant because they do green-light these movies hoping for Avatar level success. However, as Avatar was almost a one off then they are going to continue to be disappointed.

_____________________________

Same thing happened to me when I played Neil Armstrong in Moonshot. They found me in an alley in Burbank trying to re-enter the earth's atmosphere in an old refrigerator box.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 86
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 20/3/2012 4:56:03 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19037
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rob

Avatar - you're right. And ultimately my argument is irrelevant because they do green-light these movies hoping for Avatar level success. However, as Avatar was almost a one off then they are going to continue to be disappointed.


Of course, but they saw the story that inspired Avatar, directed by the guy behind Nemo and Wall: E and after that, how could they resist?

In fact Avatar kinda shows up John Carter - both are pretty easy stories, but Cameron knows how to provide the audience with information, and new names. In Carter you are thrown into the film, and face flashbacks, flashbacks to those flashbacks, flashforwards etc and so on in the first 10 minutes.

Then you get all the names...



_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.


(in reply to Rob)
Post #: 87
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 20/3/2012 5:03:45 PM   
Rob


Posts: 2473
Joined: 30/9/2005
If you were the studio head would you have gone for it at that price? I know they did but it still baffles me.


_____________________________

Same thing happened to me when I played Neil Armstrong in Moonshot. They found me in an alley in Burbank trying to re-enter the earth's atmosphere in an old refrigerator box.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 88
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 20/3/2012 5:05:51 PM   
UTB


Posts: 9551
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

As for the Dark Knight-  if the final Harry Potter and the fourth Pirates can do over a billion I see no reason why this shouldn't.


What The Dark Knight Rises will have going for it is scope - it will no doubt be an epic 2.5 hour epic with multiple plot strains and the re-watchability of that will no doubt burst that billion mark I reckon.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 89
RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates - 20/3/2012 5:13:33 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19037
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rob

If you were the studio head would you have gone for it at that price? I know they did but it still baffles me.



I can see why they went for it, and the film is actully not bad. Not amazing or anything - but a solid fantasy adventure film. The reason it has not done as well I think has to come down to marketing and just general interest in that type of film. You saw Prince of Persia and Cowboys and Aliens last year not do that well - John Carter is the natural extension of those two films.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.


(in reply to Rob)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie Musings >> RE: 2012 Box Office Estimates Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.191