Bwahaha! So you criticize him for looking at one source, yet you look at one market? Also, I thought this was about Sony movies?

Musketeers made $132M WW.  So, the studio saw about $73M of that.  If it had a small marketing budget, it most likely made them profit on home video.

John Carter made $284M WW, which means the studio saw only $156M.  So, yes, it is a flop.  But guess what, so is Ghostbusters.  It'll never break even, even with home video.  

I suggest you stop your blind defense of this movie and look at the facts.  You may have liked it, but that doesn't change the fact that it's a financial disaster.  In fact, I would bet after all this is blown over, you'll watch it again and see it's not that great.  Like Star Wars fans did with the prequels.

No, it won't.  First, I think $250M is too high an estimate, though, it definitely has a shot at $200M.  But, let's say it does make $250M.  After all is said and done, the studio only sees about 55% of the box office gross.  That would mean Sony will only see $138M, below it's production budget AND it doesn't include the millions they spent on advertising.  Like I said earlier, this movie probably needs at least $300-$320M at the box office to break even.

I actually liked the movie, but I have no idea how the budget ended up in the realm of 150m just for production costs.... I've got a feeling Sony just made a mistake handing this to Feig, who'd never done anything like this before, and he didn't realise how much what he invisioned would cost to turn into CG. Ghostbusters is essentially the reboot of an 80's b-movie horror-comedy and should never have been allowed that kind of budget.

how is the budget of this movie so high? It stars a bunch of nobodies...

/t

Owwww... so having bigger flops make this not being a flop... great.

So since a lot of game sell more than 10k or 50k some flops do the other games weren't flop... I'll put you to manage my company and when we are losing a lot of money you can say everything is good because there are companies that do even worse.

Was this how you justified bad grades on school to your parents... there is this colleague that done worse.

I gave one example because you said no one that watched it said it was bad, and on angry joe there are 3 saying it, it already defeats your point.

Couldn't have happened to a nicer movie, director and production company.  When you look into the history of how the Ghostbusters reboot in its current form actually came about from the leaked Sony emails that were made available on the internet, you'll shake your head in disbelief.

Watch Redlettermedia's review and dissection of this abomination of a movie (Angry Joe is a bit over the top for my liking)...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUEKreyTkvA

And then watch this comprehensive clip from Midnight's Edge for the full history behind how the long rumored and dormant Ghostbusters 3 script morphed into the disastrous reboot thanks to the top brass at Sony...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-6VLuz75yw

Sony hack was so benefitial to understanding the bad choices of Amy Pascal in regards to this Franchise. 

I think Hollywood should embrace "mid-tier" films more with the 30-60 million range. You can do quality comedy and horror with range of budget.

Make more films, about good written plots & storys, and less about CGI & crazy stunts + explosions.

Take a more european approach to movies. Its possible to make good movies without too much action in them.

Hollywood loves to go "oh we cant write anything good? its okay... we ll just add a car chase here, and a explosion of something there, a action stun here"

Its like they think they dont need a good script, they can just get away with doing crazy expensive action scenes instead.

I fully agree with you Augen.

More mid tier cost movies instead. Budgets dont need to be this big, and they dont need all those special effects.

What they need is better story telling.