Box Office: 'Ghostbusters' Is (Sadly) A Disappointment - Polidicks

[b]Box Office: 'Ghostbusters' Is (Sadly) A Disappointment[/b] Via [url=http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2016/08/10/box-office-ghostbusters-is-sadly-a-bomb/#7d6edf735bfc]Forbes[/url] _________________________ [quote][img]http://i.imgur.com/YdXGWFS.jpg[/img] It’s apparently time to call “time of death” for Ghostbusters. The Sony franchise reboot, their big play for summer 2016, has earned $180 million worldwide thus far, including $116m domestic, with only France, Japan and Mexico remaining. At this juncture, it it presumed that the picture will crawl to around $225m worldwide (around 1.56x the $144m budget), which according to The Hollywood Reporter will be a loss of around $70m. Even if that number turns out to be a bit high (Sony would argue it is a lot less than that), the female-fronted reboot is not the leggy hit that I thought it would be. It breaks my heart to say this, but Ghostbusters is pretty much a bomb. Although, to be fair, there are co-financing issues in play, the toys sold pretty well, and you can make the case that the Paul Feig/Katie Dippold film reignited pop culture interest in the brand itself, which was the point of the endeavor in the first place. But the film will barely make $125 million domestic off a $46m debut weekend, which is a 2.7x weekend-to-final multiplier. As feared a month ago, the film played not like Melissa McCarthy’s leggy comedies (The Heat, Identity Thief, Spy), but like The Boss (a 2.68x multiplier) or Scarlett Johansson’s Lucy. That sci-fi action-er snagged a 2.88x multiplier for a $126.6 million cume off a $43.8m opening weekend. The massively successful ($463m worldwide) Universal/Comcast Corp. release was an original R-rated 2D offering that cost EuropaCorp and friends just $40m. It couldn’t even manage to be as leggy as Adam Sandler’s vaguely similar Pixels, which earned $78 million from a $24m debut last July. That film made $244m worldwide, which is a total that Ghostbusters will probably not reach. The film was a slight disappointment in North America, but it was lack of overseas interest that crushed this one.[/quote] Yup... saw that coming a mile away. Good riddance, I say.

Actually wasn't a bad movie.

[QUOTE=Dracon;50861603]Actually wasn't a bad movie.[/QUOTE] Nope, it was a colossal travesty. A fucking abortion of a movie.

Well, it made its budget back. That's all that really matters.

[QUOTE]and you can make the case that the Paul Feig/Katie Dippold film reignited pop culture interest in the brand itself, which was the point of the endeavor in the first place[/QUOTE] I'd say it's pretty much the opposite, they were trying to cash in a movie that despite it's age still has a massive cult following and loads of almost weirdly dedicated fans. Some people who never saw the originals probably saw it because of this but I would never agree that this movie has been any kind of revival for ghostbusters.

The patriarchy reigns supreme.

[QUOTE=Cock Boner;50861627]Well, it made its budget back. That's all that really matters.[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/box-office-analysis-why-ghostbusters-911836"]I don't think so[/URL]. It doesn't help that it was banned in China. It didn't make enough to break even. [editline]10th August 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Dracon;50861603]Actually wasn't a bad movie.[/QUOTE] Ehhh... :disgust:

[QUOTE=Raidyr;50861631]The patriarchy reigns supreme.[/QUOTE] Well there's always Wonder Woman.

[QUOTE](Sadly)[/QUOTE] Nah, fuck cashgrabs remake and reboots. [QUOTE=Cock Boner;50861627]Well, it made its budget back. That's all that really matters.[/QUOTE] That's not how investments work.

[QUOTE=Cock Boner;50861627]Well, it made its budget back. That's all that really matters.[/QUOTE] No it didnt. Its lost anywhere between 70 to 170 million.

[QUOTE=Cock Boner;50861627]Well, it made its budget back. That's all that really matters.[/QUOTE] That's not all that matters friendo Box Office - Budget ≠ Final Profit There's a lot more than actually plays into it, marketing, theater cut. Even the main article says, at $225 it'd be around a $70 mil loss. [QUOTE=FezianEmperor;50861689]Well there's always Wonder Woman.[/QUOTE] I don't know, even the comics showed that there's a [url=https://feministelizabethan.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/cant-stop-mansplaining.jpg]limit to her powers[/url]

[QUOTE=Elspin;50861630]I'd say it's pretty much the opposite, they were trying to cash in a movie that despite it's age still has a massive cult following and loads of almost weirdly dedicated fans. Some people who never saw the originals probably saw it because of this but I would never agree that this movie has been any kind of revival for ghostbusters.[/QUOTE] Just like transformers: pre movie it'd be cool to wear a t-shirt or have a sticker on your car, because you'd be ONLY refrensing the 80s original. But now both brands are tainted. I don't see myself ever buying any Ghostbusters related merchandise ever again.

Manchildren: 1 Feminists: 0

Would've been nice if the movie was incredible and didn't try to stir up the entire "basement dwellers shit on movie because of women" ordeal as an attempt to get publicity. Unfortunately that wasn't the case, at which they really had the bombing coming.

[QUOTE=Alrækinn;50861697][url=https://feministelizabethan.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/cant-stop-mansplaining.jpg]limit to her powers[/url][/QUOTE] In DC's defense thats thankfully like, the one time they ever really did that shit. :v: MARVEL on the other hand hoo boy.

Ah, I stand corrected. The movie budget was $144,000,000, so far it made [I]just[/I] $180,899,659. Still a flop, financially speaking. [img]http://i.imgur.com/9jPOgPq.png[/img] [editline]10th August 2016[/editline] [url]http://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Ghostbusters-(2016)#tab=box-office[/url]

[QUOTE=Cock Boner;50861627]Well, it made its budget back. That's all that really matters.[/QUOTE] Aside from others pointing out that it didn't actually make its budget back. This film was supposed to launch an extended cinematic universe, the entire point of this film was to become the cash cow Sony films desperately need. It was supposed to make its budget and marketing costs back, and pay for a ton of films to follow. Instead it barely grossed more than its budget, meaning they didn't even make enough to offset production costs.

Yup. It doesn't help that they knew they had a mediocre movie on their hands but kept on beating on the "b-but misoginy" drum, just to stir shit up.

Hopefully it sends a clear message that insulting your core audience is a very bad idea.

[QUOTE=AaronM202;50861745]In DC's defense thats thankfully like, the one time they ever really did that shit. :v: MARVEL on the other hand hoo boy.[/QUOTE] That's part of Sensation Comics. It's been canceled(duh) and it's not the main WW comic. The writter highjacked WW to push his views, completely missing the entire point of the mordern WW character in the process.

[quote] It couldn’t even manage to be as leggy as Adam Sandler’s vaguely similar Pixels, which earned $78 million from a $24m debut last July. That film made $244m worldwide, which is a total that Ghostbusters will probably not reach. [/quote] Now that's some next level terrible right there. Getting beaten out by by Sandler drivel Pixels?

Ghostbusters is (Thankfully) a Disappointment. Everything about this movie deserved to fail, from the generally shitty quality, to the obvious cash grab, to the stupid manufactured controversy around it. Hopefully this sends the message that shitty movies can't be propped up with appeals to feminist drama.

Good fucking riddance. Fuck Paul Feig.

[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;50861763]Aside from others pointing out that it didn't actually make its budget back. This film was supposed to launch an extended cinematic universe, the entire point of this film was to become the cash cow Sony films desperately need. It was supposed to make its budget and marketing costs back, and pay for a ton of films to follow. Instead it barely grossed more than its budget, meaning they didn't even make enough to offset production costs.[/QUOTE] Trying to catch the MCU train. They were even planning a males only GB.

I'm glad. That movie was a disgrace to the movie industry and all of ghostbusters fans Fuck them

[QUOTE=Dr.C;50861736]Manchildren: 1 Feminists: 0[/QUOTE] I wouldn't classify this movie as "feminist" Feminism is about equality between genders. The movie perpetuates more so an "us vs them" mentality with the casting takeover. It's more like Manchildren:1 Feminazis: 0 People these days don't even know what real feminism is because of all the extremist social justice bullshit.

How long till they blame the audience for being sexist, for not seeing this movie?

[QUOTE=Antimuffin;50862208]How long till they blame the audience for being sexist, for not seeing this movie?[/QUOTE] They were already flinging turds like a bunch of fucking monkeys at James Rolfe after he stated that he wasn't going to review or ever watch the film, you know. [t]http://i.imgur.com/61jDCkE.jpg[/t]

[QUOTE=Antimuffin;50862208]How long till they blame the audience for being sexist, for not seeing this movie?[/QUOTE] I'd love to see that. Go ahead, piss off the people who already told you to fuck off with your "misogyny" bullshit. Double down on the bullshit please. Sony's movie division thinks they're hemorrhaging money now...oh boy. Wanna rape any more beloved franchises while you're digging your graves with an excavator?

[QUOTE=DiBBs27;50862164]I wouldn't classify this movie as "feminist" Feminism is about equality between genders. The movie perpetuates more so an "us vs them" mentality with the casting takeover. It's more like Manchildren:1 Feminazis: 0 People these days don't even know what real feminism is because of all the extremist social justice bullshit.[/QUOTE] I thought he was picking at the fact that the movie's criticism has turned into that when sony decided to go with the sexism route to nullify the bad criticism.