By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Movies & TV - The Fans Have Spoken, Last Jedi Drops A Massive 68%

Conina on 10 January 2018
haxxiy said:
A_C_E said:

You could point to this being bad if you simply compare this $1.2B movie to movies that have grossed more than it, and that it didn't meet their arbitrary expectations, but that is their opinion. The fact is it is down almost 38% from TFA and Star Wars fans still supported it by bringing in 6X its budget....and that's a bad thing?

If TLJ is as bad as people say it is (it isn't) and still makes as much as it did on a $200M budget then Disney is laughing their way to the bank and will continue to do so with this trilogy and the next. Stick around, you'll see.

You forgot to count the marketing budget, which wasn't reported (on all likehood as massive as the movie budget itself, if not bigger) and the fact Disney likely sees about half of the revenue the movie is reported to make, with the remainder going to theaters, foreign distributors etc.

A production like TLJ takes over 800 million to turn a profit. It is well known even movies from new franchies with lesser budgets and greater risks etc. often take over 500 million to break even. So, around 1.5x investment return, not 6x, which should place it on the lower end of Disney movies on profit alongside, say, a modern Pirates of the Caribbean or the Marvel movies of lesser characters.

I sincerely doubt Disney expected it to be smaller than an Avengers movie. A lot of people try to save face mentioning that "well, SW movies always drop on the second act" but a mere two is such a ludicrous sample to base it from (given it isn't exactly normal behaviour for movie trilogies) that it is more likely a coincidence than a pattern. Specially given the reasons of ANH being so massive have been extensively discussed here and elsewhere.

And you forgot the additional revenue streams besides the box-office gross: home video (DVD, Blu-ray, UHD), television broadcast rights, streaming revenue (Netflix, iTunes, AMazon Video...) and merchandising: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films

"When a film is highly exploitable as a commercial property, its ancillary revenues can dwarf its income from direct film sales. The Lion King earned over $2 billion in box-office and home video sales, but this pales in comparison to the $6 billion earned at box offices around the world by the stage adaptation. Merchandising can be extremely lucrative too: The Lion King also sold $3 billion of merchandise, while Pixar's Cars - which earned $462 million in theatrical revenues and was only a modest hit by comparison to other Pixar films - generated global merchandise sales of over $8 billion in the five years after its 2006 release. Pixar also had another huge hit with Toy Story 3, which generated almost $10 billion in merchandise retail sales in addition to the $1 billion it earned at the box office."

 

 



Around the Network
KLAMarine on 10 January 2018
Soundwave said:
Lucas-Rio said:

Your hate come about 15 years too late.

Attack of clones is my least liked movie out of the 6 GL SW. It is still much better than SW8.

There's only 3 real Star Wars movies and that's IV, V, VI.

The Ewoks can go die in a fire.



Mr.GameCrazy on 10 January 2018
KLAMarine said:
Soundwave said:

There's only 3 real Star Wars movies and that's IV, V, VI.

The Ewoks can go die in a fire.

I honestly found thr Ewoks being able to beat up the stormtroopers to be pretty silly. Didn't keep me from enjoying Return of the Jedi, though.



KLAMarine on 10 January 2018
Mr.GameCrazy said:
KLAMarine said:

The Ewoks can go die in a fire.

I honestly found thr Ewoks being able to beat up the stormtroopers to be pretty silly. Didn't keep me from enjoying Return of the Jedi, though.

VI is good but the Ewoks drag it down. They make the stormtroopers look like a joke.



thismeintiel on 10 January 2018
KLAMarine said:
Mr.GameCrazy said:

I honestly found thr Ewoks being able to beat up the stormtroopers to be pretty silly. Didn't keep me from enjoying Return of the Jedi, though.

VI is good but the Ewoks drag it down. They make the stormtroopers look like a joke.

To be fair, they were getting plenty of help from the Rebels. They only made up 1/2 of 1/3 of the final battle. Though, I do agree with what someone said earlier, that it should have been a planet of Wookies. Or at least a slightly smaller cousin to them. 



 

Around the Network
thismeintiel on 10 January 2018

Tuesday numbers are in and TLJ actually performed worse than RO for the same day. RO did $2.53M VS TLJ's $2.37M, down 6%. This lowers the rate that TLJ has been outperforming RO, outside of opening weekend, to 8.5%.



 

KLAMarine on 10 January 2018
thismeintiel said:
KLAMarine said:

VI is good but the Ewoks drag it down. They make the stormtroopers look like a joke.

To be fair, they were getting plenty of help from the Rebels. They only made up 1/2 of 1/3 of the final battle. Though, I do agree with what someone said earlier, that it should have been a planet of Wookies. Or at least a slightly smaller cousin to them. 
mZuzek said:
KLAMarine said:

VI is good but the Ewoks drag it down. They make the stormtroopers look like a joke.

Lol because the stormtroopers were never a joke before

Stormtroopers were already having a hard time prior, I don't need to see them losing to f***ing teddy bears!

Shove your merch bait up your ass Lucas.



A_C_E on 11 January 2018
haxxiy said:

You forgot to count the marketing budget, which wasn't reported (on all likehood as massive as the movie budget itself, if not bigger) and the fact Disney likely sees about half of the revenue the movie is reported to make, with the remainder going to theaters, foreign distributors etc.

A production like TLJ takes over 800 million to turn a profit. It is well known even movies from new franchies with lesser budgets and greater risks etc. often take over 500 million to break even. So, around 1.5x investment return, not 6x, which should place it on the lower end of Disney movies on profit alongside, say, a modern Pirates of the Caribbean or the Marvel movies of lesser characters.

I sincerely doubt Disney expected it to be smaller than an Avengers movie. A lot of people try to save face mentioning that "well, SW movies always drop on the second act" but a mere two is such a ludicrous sample to base it from (given it isn't exactly normal behaviour for movie trilogies) that it is more likely a coincidence than a pattern. Specially given the reasons of ANH being so massive have been extensively discussed here and elsewhere.

@ bold/italics/underline - Why do people insist that people "forget" things if they aren't mentioned? By that logic I forgot sheep exist as well since I didn't mention any sheep. No, I'm quite aware of the marketing budget, which is why I said TLJ made 6X as much money as the production budget in which case I wasn't referencing Disney's ROI.

@ second bold - Doubt arises from those who are diffident and lack empirical data to support a claim. That makes the both of us so I can't really comment on Disney's expectations and I'm not going to pretend that I can. But maybe Disney did expect more, that does not take away from how much they are making from TLJ or from the whole franchise as a whole (TONS!!!!! of money being made in all sectors of Star Wars).

Disney is laughing their way to the bank and this horrible movie (it isn't) can't even sink below $1.2B at the box office. Another way to put it is TLJ can sink below 40% of TFA and still make over $1.2B at the box office.



thismeintiel on 11 January 2018
A_C_E said:
haxxiy said:

You forgot to count the marketing budget, which wasn't reported (on all likehood as massive as the movie budget itself, if not bigger) and the fact Disney likely sees about half of the revenue the movie is reported to make, with the remainder going to theaters, foreign distributors etc.

A production like TLJ takes over 800 million to turn a profit. It is well known even movies from new franchies with lesser budgets and greater risks etc. often take over 500 million to break even. So, around 1.5x investment return, not 6x, which should place it on the lower end of Disney movies on profit alongside, say, a modern Pirates of the Caribbean or the Marvel movies of lesser characters.

I sincerely doubt Disney expected it to be smaller than an Avengers movie. A lot of people try to save face mentioning that "well, SW movies always drop on the second act" but a mere two is such a ludicrous sample to base it from (given it isn't exactly normal behaviour for movie trilogies) that it is more likely a coincidence than a pattern. Specially given the reasons of ANH being so massive have been extensively discussed here and elsewhere.

@ bold/italics/underline - Why do people insist that people "forget" things if they aren't mentioned? By that logic I forgot sheep exist as well since I didn't mention any sheep. No, I'm quite aware of the marketing budget, which is why I said TLJ made 6X as much money as the production budget in which case I wasn't referencing Disney's ROI.

@ second bold - Doubt arises from those who are diffident and lack empirical data to support a claim. That makes the both of us so I can't really comment on Disney's expectations and I'm not going to pretend that I can. But maybe Disney did expect more, that does not take away from how much they are making from TLJ or from the whole franchise as a whole (TONS!!!!! of money being made in all sectors of Star Wars).

Disney is laughing their way to the bank and this horrible movie (it isn't) can't even sink below $1.2B at the box office. Another way to put it is TLJ can sink below 40% of TFA and still make over $1.2B at the box office.

I wouldn't trust that $200M. The source for it on Wikipedia seems dubious, at best. I mean do you honestly think that Disney spent less on this in 2017, than they did on Avengers ($220M) in 2012 or Avengers:AOU ($250M) in 2015? TFA cost $275M.  Since that was such a success, more than likely the budget would have either stayed about the same or gone up to a possible $300M.

They chose not to give BOM the official price tag, so I don't think they want people to know how much it truly cost them. Especially when they are getting less return than both Avengers movies. Avengers:IW is probably just going to make it look worse. 

Last edited by thismeintiel - on 11 January 2018

 

A_C_E on 11 January 2018
thismeintiel said:

I wouldn't trust that $200M. The source for it on Wikipedia seems dubious, at best. I mean do you honestly think that Disney spent less on this in 2017, than they did on Avengers ($220M) in 2012 or Avengers:AOU ($250M) in 2015? TFA cost $275M.  Since that was such a success, more than likely the budget would have either stayed about the same or gone up to a possible $300M. 

I didn't get that number from wikipedia but for sure, let's just assume an extra $100M out of Disney's Star Wars wallet. Would you like to upsize that small order of fries?