| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ShortRaver
Status: Offline
Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Posts: 643
$poons: 185.60
Location: Melbourne
|
 Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
 |
|
| admeister wrote: | | Money wise, it's doing a lot better than Scott Pilgrim in any case. I didn't think it would happen, but Warner Bros just broke even on Sucker Punch. |
But look at it in the long term, and that it is going to make a lot of money in blu-ray sales. I'd say that is where Warner Bros were looking at the movie from in terms of profit.
_________________
Playing: Fallout: New Vegas
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adam
Status: Offline
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 1965
$poons: 0.20
Location: Melbourne
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
I don't want to put a damper on that news, Ads, but don't forget marketing costs and the cut the theatre takes. It's nowhere close to breaking even yet.
I'd say Warner Bros was hoping for $200 million at least at the box office. DVD sales and other lines of distribution could possibly provide enough to push the film over the line, though.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
admeister
Status: Offline
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Posts: 13915
$poons: 983.60
Location: Melbourne
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
I was under the impression that the movie budget included marketing costs, and that the gross revenue would take into account the cut that the theater takes...
_________________
"The first person to prove that cow's milk is drinkable was very, very thirsty." - Fact Sphere.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sin Ogaris
Status: Offline
Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 10616
$poons: 1588.60
Location: Melbourne
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
Gross revenue is is just the money it earns it doesn't factor in ANY expenses, hence gross. Net revenue factors that in.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nietzsche
Status: Offline
Joined: 18 Nov 2008
Posts: 2543
$poons: 119.80
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, Earth
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 2:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
This movie was a massive flop which is three in a row for Sydner. He better hope his Superman does well.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sin Ogaris
Status: Offline
Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 10616
$poons: 1588.60
Location: Melbourne
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 3:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
Personally I think the average consumer is pretty over Superman.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benza
Status: Offline
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 14586
$poons: 119.20
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 3:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
watchmen made back twice it's budget, I wouldn't call that a flop. Not great but not a flop.
And I think the average consumer is over Superman movies cause they all suck.
Atleast Snyder is promising supes is going to fight people on his power level and not fight a land development project
WHAT THE SHIT WAS THAT BRYAN SINGER! HOW CAN YOU GO FROM FUCKING USUAL SUSPECTS TO SUPERMAN FIGHTING A HOUSING DEVELOPMENT!? ARE YOU FUCKING INSANE?!?! WHO THE FUCK DID YOU THINK WANTED TO SEE THAT?! YOU PRETTY MUCH SINGLE HANDEDLY STARTED THE SUPER HERO MOVIE FAD AND THEN YOU MADE THAT?!? WHAT THE FUCK!?!
....
sorry... superman returns bugged me.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fetidchimp
Status: Offline
Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 8666
$poons: 60.20
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 3:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
to be fair, jon peters was involved in superman returns.
_________________
kill, kill, kill.....the white man. Kill the white man, kill
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
admeister
Status: Offline
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Posts: 13915
$poons: 983.60
Location: Melbourne
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benza
Status: Offline
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 14586
$poons: 119.20
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 4:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Fetidchimp wrote: | to be fair, jon peters was involved in superman returns.
|
honestly, I would have preferred the one he wanted to make in that kevin smith rant. As retarded as it would have been it wouldn't have been boring.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nietzsche
Status: Offline
Joined: 18 Nov 2008
Posts: 2543
$poons: 119.80
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, Earth
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 4:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
Looking at box office mojo I can not see any movie that doesn't break even. Even the biggest 'flops' have raked in some money.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
THEMAN
Status: Offline
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 3526
$poons: 719.80
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Nietzsche wrote: | | Looking at box office mojo I can not see any movie that doesn't break even. Even the biggest 'flops' have raked in some money. |
um, budget is budget - just to make the film. Then you pile on marketing + whatnot and yes the biggest flops don't make money.
http://www.parade.com/celebrity/2010/07/biggest-box-office-flops-2010.html
THE SORCERERS APPRENTICE
Budget: $150 million
Opening Weekend: $17.3 million
Total Take: $63,150,991
ROBIN HOOD
Budget: $200 million
Opening Weekend: $36 million
Total Take: $104.8 million
WOLFMAN
Budget: $150 million
Opening Weekend: $31.5 million
Total Take: $61.9 million
it might not sound like much but if you look at it.. its $ millions of dollars in the red. Sorcerer's Apprentice is 90 million in the red.
http://boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=3051&p=.htm
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nietzsche
Status: Offline
Joined: 18 Nov 2008
Posts: 2543
$poons: 119.80
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, Earth
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
WOLFMAN: An Oscar winning film.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
theory
PALGN Moderator
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 9112
$poons: 1275.00
Location: Melbourne
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nietzsche
Status: Offline
Joined: 18 Nov 2008
Posts: 2543
$poons: 119.80
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, Earth
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 8:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
I will agree that those themes were in the movie but they were either handled like a jack hammer through a skull or a whisper in the wind. Too ambiguous for it's own good.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
