I would like to say that real people actually fell for this marketing tactic, duped so hard they can't even tell what's real anymore.
i was waiting for scientist man's return
I had a straight face the entire time but lost it at the ppinion part
[QUOTE=DiscoInferno;50817446]I would like to say that real people actually fell for this marketing tactic, duped so hard they can't even tell what's real anymore.[/QUOTE]
Doubt it considering its a massive fucking bomb and cost Sony at least 170 million they'll never see again.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;50817540]Doubt it considering its a massive fucking bomb and cost Sony at least 170 million they'll never see again.[/QUOTE]
I didn't say a lot of them fell for it, just someone I spoke to did. And another went to see it just to spite the haters, alledgedly. And some people seriously think it looks good.
[QUOTE=DiscoInferno;50817557]I didn't say a lot of them fell for it, just someone I spoke to did. And another went to see it just to spite the haters, alledgedly. And some people seriously think it looks good.[/QUOTE]
Oh.
In any event i doubt this'll happen again.
I was waiting or them to mention the coordinated group of people down voting, kinda bummed they didn't
[QUOTE=AaronM202;50817540]Doubt it considering its a massive fucking bomb and cost Sony at least 170 million they'll never see again.[/QUOTE]
I predicted it would at least break even. I guess I should give movie goers more credit.
"Well I think the first question now is how often do we see females in film—and we don't"
I actually lost it from laughing, RLM is go good at editing in terrible quotes at the right moments.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;50817540]Doubt it considering its a massive fucking bomb and cost Sony at least 170 million they'll never see again.[/QUOTE]
words cannot describe how fucking glad i am this film bombed
[QUOTE=ThatSprite;50817957]words cannot describe how fucking glad i am this film bombed[/QUOTE]
For all the shit Sony pulled behind the scenes? [B]Yes, absolutely[/B]; no one can deny how utterly unscrupulous they were in this entire thing.
Special mention goes to a corrupt business executive for neutering the franchise and a manchild for making the cast go through utter hell, both shoving their beliefs down everyone's throats while they were at it.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;50817540]Doubt it considering its a massive fucking bomb and cost Sony at least 170 million they'll never see again.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Raidyr;50817902]I predicted it would at least break even. I guess I should give movie goers more credit.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=ThatSprite;50817957]words cannot describe how fucking glad i am this film bombed[/QUOTE]
I don't know very much about how this stuff works, how is it a bomb if it made more than its budget back and counting?
[IMG]http://puu.sh/qnDAo/242d56114f.png[/IMG]
I'm really glad that there are people who took the time to research this and make a lengthy and informative video about it.
[QUOTE=Flubbman;50818245]I don't know very much about how this stuff works, how is it a bomb if it made more than its budget back and counting?
[IMG]http://puu.sh/qnDAo/242d56114f.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Because that figure most likely doesn't include marketing costs, which for a film like this is probably in the hundreds of millions.
[QUOTE=DiscoInferno;50817557]I didn't say a lot of them fell for it, just someone I spoke to did. And another went to see it just to spite the haters, alledgedly. And some people seriously think it looks good.[/QUOTE]
It's like how someone I knew bought Mighty No. 9 twice on different systems because they thought the controls would be better, so that they could prove everyone wrong that it wouldn't be a bad game.
Or in short: why would you subject yourself to this shit when you don't have to?
[QUOTE=Flubbman;50818245]I don't know very much about how this stuff works, how is it a bomb if it made more than its budget back and counting?
[IMG]http://puu.sh/qnDAo/242d56114f.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
a) on that $144 million [U]production cost[/U] you need to add [U]marketing costs[/U] that range from $50-$100 million for these big movies.
b) it made $160 million in [U]theaters[/U] which means they need to split it with the theaters.
c) the director said himself the movie needs to make 400-500 million to turn profit, a high figure compared to initial 144$ million, but it makes sense if you consider a) and b).
The early screening joke is brilliant
[QUOTE=AntonioR;50818307]a) on that $144 million [U]production cost[/U] you need to add [U]marketing costs[/U] that range from $50-$100 million for these big movies.
b) it made $160 million in [U]theaters[/U] which means they need to split it with the theaters.
c) the director said himself the movie needs to make 400-500 million to turn profit, a high figure compared to initial 144$ million, but it makes sense if you consider a) and b).[/QUOTE]I somehow assumed the budget included the whole package, silly me.
Well fuck that's bad. Should hopefully deter people from trying something like this again.
[QUOTE=Flubbman;50818348]I somehow assumed the budget included the whole package, silly me.
Well fuck that's bad. Should hopefully deter people from trying something like this again.[/QUOTE]
If there's one thing we've learned, it's that we never learn.
[QUOTE=AntonioR;50818307]a) on that $144 million [U]production cost[/U] you need to add [U]marketing costs[/U] that range from $50-$100 million for these big movies.
b) it made $160 million in [U]theaters[/U] which means they need to split it with the theaters.
c) the director said himself the movie needs to make 400-500 million to turn profit, a high figure compared to initial 144$ million, but it makes sense if you consider a) and b).[/QUOTE]
Not to turn a profit, for Sony to consider it a success (as in, they would make another one). I mean obviously the movie isn't doing great (though it still has to launch in at least the huge market of, eh, Denmark), but my impression is that it could've gone worse. I doubt even Sony would be stupid enough to do a sequel now, though.
I love that bit with Melissa McCarthy at the end acknowledging how small a minority the misogynists were, getting slowly covered by clickbait.
Still those 30,000 odd misogynistic comments are pretty fucked up. Even weighed against the total views and total comments.
[QUOTE=Flubbman;50818245]I don't know very much about how this stuff works, how is it a bomb if it made more than its budget back and counting?
[IMG]http://puu.sh/qnDAo/242d56114f.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Production Budget: 144 mil.
Ad Budget: 100+ mil (likely higher).
Total: 244+ million.
Average estimated domestic gross studio cut: 50%
Average estimated foreign gross studio cut: 33.3%
Domestic Gross: 107.8 mil, only get approx 53.9 mil.
Foreign Gross: 51.7 mil, only get approx 17.2 mil
Total Gross: 159.6 million
Total Studio Cut: 71.1 million of 244+ million total budget.
Loss: Approximately 172.9+ million (likely higher).
I might be wrong on the studio cut averages but thats what ive been told.
[editline]2nd August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;50818459]Not to turn a profit, for Sony to consider it a success (as in, they would make another one). I mean obviously the movie isn't doing great (though it still has to launch in at least the huge market of, eh, Denmark), but my impression is that it could've gone worse. I doubt even Sony would be stupid enough to do a sequel now, though.[/QUOTE]
No, actually, thats probably what it needs to break even and begin turning a profit.
You'd need to just about double the budget for this movie based on its total budget to make it back, which would be around 488-500 million.
[QUOTE=Flubbman;50818245]I don't know very much about how this stuff works, how is it a bomb if it made more than its budget back and counting?
[IMG]http://puu.sh/qnDAo/242d56114f.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
the fantastic 4 movie cost about 120 million but made about 160 million at the box office and it was considered such a flop that they cancelled the sequel
Even if a film makes more than all costs combined that doesn't necessarily mean it is a success. A lot of the time large films like this are expected to make a large profit on top of earning back what it cost.
[QUOTE=Flubbman;50818245]I don't know very much about how this stuff works, how is it a bomb if it made more than its budget back and counting?
[IMG]http://puu.sh/qnDAo/242d56114f.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
We're talking opening weekend here. That blew chunks.
Also a $10 Million profit, weeks later after the fact, isn't nothing to brag about.
[QUOTE=Flubbman;50818245]I don't know very much about how this stuff works, how is it a bomb if it made more than its budget back and counting?
[IMG]http://puu.sh/qnDAo/242d56114f.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
that's just the production, and the box office isn't what they get 100%, revenue would be more accurate, the box office is going to need to be around 300m to 500m for them to break even
350m would be lowballing it, for a franchise they would be looking for the 400-500 million figure Paul Feig dropped.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;50819462]350m would be lowballing it, for a franchise they would be looking for the 400-500 million figure Paul Feig dropped.[/QUOTE]
And so far it's not even made 25% of that supposed profit.
Yeah we have a bomb here.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/B5Wztba.png[/IMG]
mike about to lose it when rich is saying how he "lives in a manchild basement"
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
