Anyone else notice that it hasn't opened in many foreign markets compared to other films.

This is the director saying it needs about this much to be successful, remember success and break even are not the same, and remember just beating production budget with box office ticket sales is not break even. 

It won't open in some markets like China due to supernatural elements or something, someone told me this, maybe it was lawlight. 

Of course it varies from studio to studio, who funds it, etc etc. However I think his statement is really in regards to something like his film that has large marketing budget on top of the production budget, plus all the tail end stuff. This was more to highlight do not think just because something costs $150, beating that number equals successful. Again do not think that his point is about breaking even, but more about viability of a franchise aka succesful movie with whatever budget they had. 

There's no reason a Ghostbusters movie couldn't have been made with 80-100 million budget in stead of 140-150 million.

Where did the money go? My guess is special effects in which case tone it down. Nobody sees Ghostbusters as this grand spectacle event. The strength was always characters and writing in a fun premise.

So we can assume they have a flop.

They treated the franchise more like action-comedy ala similar to those of some super hero films, instead of a comedy (which I would say it is). They added a budget to reflect it, and now they are paying for it, since it is not living up to either genre terms of revenue, (action movies have insane beginning numbers, and comedies have better legs). 

You guys are kidding yourselves if you think Ghostbusters need to make 500mil to break even. SonyPictures has been extremely profit cautious for a few years already. They werent happy even when Spiderman 2 made 700mil worldwide (Cap 2 made the same money).

So there's no way they green lit a Ghostbuster movie having need a 500mil breakeven point.

Not having China, the second biggest movie market, is a killer.

Did you read the thread at all, because no where does it say break even (in terms of the content of the quote). People need to stop assuming breaking even mean success. ROI is a thing when it comes to any production. People do not want to invest in productions if they are just breaking even or cannot even beat the basic inflation rates (usually 2% a year), because if that were true, they would be better off investing that same amount of money in the government bond market.   

This is from a quote from Paul Feig himself, saying  “A movie like this has to at least get to like $500 million worldwide, and that’s probably low,”

If it helps, I will put it in the title NOT BREAK EVEN. 

I'm pretty sure it's gonna snatch alot of Razzies aswell. It's a terrible movie from what i hear.

To break even this movie needs to make about $260M WW, as on average theatres end up taking 45% of the box office. Of course, some companies include advertising in the production budget they give, some don't. I'm pretty sure I read this movie didn't. So, it may need more like $300M-$320M to break even. This movie will make $180M-$220M WW, so it's definitely a flop. This is what happens when you make a generic reboot of a comedy classic, then make it about girl power and insult fans of the original.

It'll be interesting to see how Sony precedes. Will they just drop it? Or will they go ahead with the Chris Pratt and Channing Tatum reboot Amy Pascal turned down for this trash heap?