All Things DCEU News, Discussion, and Speculation - Part 2

[Boy Scout]

Critically disapointing

Critically AND financially.

and as I said regardless of how much they wanted to make they still made a ton of money.

If your goal is to earn $50, but you only make $35, would you call that a win?

The Ultinate Cut of BvS was a major hit on hone video but as I said people ignore that.

What does that have to do with box office gross?

 

[Kane52630]

Just a refresher for those who claim BvS was a boxoffice hit.

http://screenrant.com/batman-v-superman-box-office-billion/

“The film’s reported budget was $250 million, not counting an estimated $150 million spent marketing Zack Snyder‘s superhero showdown. By the time you factor in the revenue split with exhibitors and the mere 25 percent take from Chinese box office, industry insiders said that Warner Bros. may not be left with much in the way of profits on the theatrical release.”

WB expected BvS to get into the billion dollar club, so therefor it was a disappointment.

 

[BH/HHH]

Critically AND financially.



If your goal is to earn $50, but you only make $35, would you call that a win?

Which, somehow, still wasn't enough. Which means that those, movies, while still successful, were disappointing.

What does that have to do with box office gross?

You could intend to sell something for a £100 but instead make £85 you'd still be happy with it.

Because I said it was a financial success which it was.

 

[idiot09]

Damon Caro and Hirota(Second Unit Director and Visual supervisor on BvS and JL) on BvS :

Q : Like I said, it gets a little petty. And it’s just ridiculous. The internet allows people to hide behind anonymous personas and just spew whatever they want, but ultimately it’s something that’s designed to hopefully bring a certain measure of joy, and if it doesn’t work for you, that’s fine, but there’s no reason to send threats to people.

Caro: But I do find it fascinating, in a good way. Clearly to invoke that kind of passion – and it’s still talked about! It came out nine months ago.

Hirota: The movie touched a nerve.

Yeah, there are certainly movies that have come and gone since that have not lingered in the conversation that way.

Caro: Clearly. Hence the passionate debate pro or con. And I’m fine with that. It’s a movie that’s saying something. And if it makes a little money, great, if not, oh well.

Hirota: But the strange narrative of it being a financial flop-

Caro: It’s that old, “you repeat a lie long enough, it becomes the truth.” It made $800-

Hirota: Close to $900 million.

Caro: That’s massive!

Hirota: Not many films gross that number. But ultimately that doesn’t matter. It’s so immaterial. Does Warner Bros. like the fact that people love to pillar this movie? No, they don’t.

Caro: You want both. Did they want it to make a billion? We all wanted it to make a billion, but I’m sorry it was $873 million. That’s not a failure.

 

[Boy Scout]

You could intend to sell something for a £100 but instead make £85 you'd still be happy with it.

That doesn't really answer my question. Would it or would it not be a win?

Because I said it was a financial success which it was.

Don't movies make most of their money from their theatrical runs? If so, a solid performance on home video doesn't transform disappointing financial return into major profit, especially since the home video market isn't what it once was. But (and I mean this sincerely) please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Boy Scout]

Damon Caro and Hirota(Second Unit Director and Visual supervisor on BvS and JL) on BvS :

Q : Like I said, it gets a little petty. And it’s just ridiculous. The internet allows people to hide behind anonymous personas and just spew whatever they want, but ultimately it’s something that’s designed to hopefully bring a certain measure of joy, and if it doesn’t work for you, that’s fine, but there’s no reason to send threats to people.

Caro: But I do find it fascinating, in a good way. Clearly to invoke that kind of passion – and it’s still talked about! It came out nine months ago.

Hirota: The movie touched a nerve.

Yeah, there are certainly movies that have come and gone since that have not lingered in the conversation that way.

Caro: Clearly. Hence the passionate debate pro or con. And I’m fine with that. It’s a movie that’s saying something. And if it makes a little money, great, if not, oh well.

Hirota: But the strange narrative of it being a financial flop-

Caro: It’s that old, “you repeat a lie long enough, it becomes the truth.” It made $800-

Hirota: Close to $900 million.

Caro: That’s massive!

Hirota: Not many films gross that number. But ultimately that doesn’t matter. It’s so immaterial. Does Warner Bros. like the fact that people love to pillar this movie? No, they don’t.

Caro: You want both. Did they want it to make a billion? We all wanted it to make a billion, but I’m sorry it was $873 million. That’s not a failure.

Disappointment =/= failure.

 

[Kane52630]

Hey idiot, I know it's hard for you to understand, but failure does not equal to disappointment. It's not a failure, but it is a disappointment to their expectations. The Damon Caro and Hirota interview even proves my point.

 

[idiot09]

Disappointment =/= failure.

Never said it was

Its not big hit. Its not a big loss either. It made a lot of money, but WB wanted more. Its that simple really.

Hey idiot, I know it's hard for you to understand

 

[Boy Scout]

Never said it was

Okay, so...how is what you posted relevant to the discussion? I don't think anyone called the film a financial failure. And if they did, they're wrong.

 

[idiot09]

Okay, so...how is what you posted relevant to the discussion? I don't think anyone called the film a financial failure. And if they did, they're wrong.

Its relevant because this thread is discussing the financial success/failure of BvS. They discussed it as well.

And their views are similar to what mine is. I didnt go thoroughly throw the current debate to see which side was saying what. I just shared the interview which matched my opinion on the subject...

 

[Greens]

The simple fact is that the first Batman/Superman movie of all time bombed with the critics and with a big chunk of the audience as well. That is a failure and not how it was supposed to go.

 

[Boy Scout]

Its relevant because this thread is discussing the financial success/failure of BvS. They discussed it as well.

Right, but who called it a failure? The word I've seen thrown around is "disappointment" - which we've agreed isn't the same thing.

And their views are similar to what mine is. I didnt go thoroughly throw the current debate to see which side was saying what. I just shared the interview which matched my opinion on the subject...

Oh, okay, I understand now. I thought you were responding to a specific comment. Hope I didn't come off as aggressive, that wasn't my intention.

 

[BH/HHH]

That doesn't really answer my question. Would it or would it not be a win?

Don't movies make most of their money from their theatrical runs? If so, a solid performance on home video doesn't transform disappointing financial return into major profit, especially since the home video market isn't what it once was. But (and I mean this sincerely) please correct me if I'm wrong.

Yes it would be IMO, it's like selling a house you might want a certain price but if you get X amount and it's below that you can still be happy because you've sold your house.

Films still make profits on home video, from what I've read on stuff over the years it's when the home video hits that the studios really start to recoup money. But I'm not a 100% sure, however if somethings making a killing on video I'm sure it's lining someone's pocket. I imagine with the addition of digital sales that things are better than they once was.

 

[Boy Scout]

Yes it would be IMO, it's like selling a house you might want a certain price but if you get X amount and it's below that you can still be happy because you've sold your house.

I personally wouldn't consider it a victory to sell my house for less than it's worth, but I get where you're coming from. Agree to disagree?

Films still make profits on home video, from what I've read on stuff over the years it's when the home video hits that the studios really start to recoup money. But I'm not a 100% sure, however if somethings making a killing on video I'm sure it's lining someone's pocket,

For sure, but isn't it all basically chump change in comparison? If a movie is financially successful during its run, making a killing on home video would be like icing on a cake. Otherwise, it probably jut softens the blow. But again, I don't know for sure.

 

[Bagide]

Was a billion the true target for WB or it's the expectations of people that since it's Batman \Superman the film should do a billion?

 

[idiot09]

Right, but who called it a failure? The word I've seen thrown around is "disappointment" - which we've agreed isn't the same thing.

Oh, okay, I understand now. I thought you were responding to a specific comment. Hope I didn't come off as aggressive, that wasn't my intention.

Oh we agree then. Its a disappointment for the simple fact alone that the first Batman/Superman film didnt crack a billion. Everybody knows this, and it doesnt bother me as a fan to admit this.However it still made close to $900M which is a LOT of money, so it certainly made its money back & more, never mind the fact it made a killing in home media sales, and the UC was comparatively viewed more warmly. Still we all expected better, so in that regard yes, it was disappointing, no two ways about it. I think the most recent similar example I can find(although being widely different) is Lego Batman. That movie will make its money back and more, as it is poised to end in the range $320-350M(according to my amateur analysis). But I'm sure WB wanted it to go in the $400M range. Am I making sense?

 

[idiot09]

Was a billion the true target for WB or it's the expectations of people that since it's Batman \Superman the film should do a billion?

Both I think. People expected that since its Batman/Superman movie, and WB probably the same. It made a profit, but they wanted a bigger profit( as it is their most valuable IP) and I think the BTS changes have indicated that.

 

[idiot09]

For sure, but isn't it all basically chump change in comparison? If a movie is financially successful during its run, making a killing on home video would be like icing on a cake. Otherwise, it probably jut softens the blow. But again, I don't know for sure.

They are certainly not chump change. For example Man of Steel made $160M in promotions and tie-ins. And in home media Man of Steel made a beastly $110M.

 

[The Batman]

Too sweet.

 

[BH/HHH]

I personally wouldn't consider it a victory to sell my house for less than it's worth, but I get where you're coming from. Agree to disagree?

For sure, but isn't it all basically chump change in comparison? If a movie is financially successful during its run, making a killing on home video would be like icing on a cake. Otherwise, it probably jut softens the blow. But again, I don't know for sure.

Probably best haha but in any case mate hope you don't think I was getting annoyed or if I was coming across that way.

I don't know either in fairness.

 

[metaphysician]

You could intend to sell something for a £100 but instead make £85 you'd still be happy with it.

Because I said it was a financial success which it was.

That's not the case, though. Or rather, it depends on how much the item you sold *cost*. . . and how much you need the money. Buying and making something costs money, marketing something costs money, and all that time and money could have been used for other things. If you intend to sell something for $100, and only get $85. . . but you could have made $88 with the same resources spent on some zero risk investment that would have used far less time and effort? You just lost out.

( So why would you do this in the first place for just 12 bucks? Because a 13% return over zero-risk is a really nice profit. )

 

[misslane38]

Oh lord! You don't like him fine, you don't like the movies fine but regardless of what you think they were both successful movies for the studio. JL was ready for production righ after BvS.

They were ready, but there was indisputable turmoil going down between BvS release and JL filming. Both his films were critical disappointments, one of which was heavily panned, and both made considerably less than what WB wanted. If JL didn't start a month after BvS was released, he's making that Ayn Rand movie as we speak.

NO I'm not saying WBs were happy with the critical response nor am I say they didn't expect more money for BvS but people not to stop acting like they know everything and what would have happened if so and so didn't etc.

What I am saying is the facts are like it or not the DC properties are making money at the box officials de and on home video (which people live to ignore) and that's partly due to Zack Snyder.

Successful, but also disappointing. Which sounds contradictory, but there you go.

Critically disappointing and as I said regardless of how much they wanted to make they still made a ton of money. The Ultimate Cut of BvS was a major hit on hone video but as I said people ignore that.

Looking over the conversation, it seems there is mostly agreement. Both sides agree that DCEU films, BvS in particular, were critical and financial disappointments. The critical disappointment claim hasn't been debated, but the financial side has been. Specifically, some are okay with describing BvS as a financial success, but also call it a disappointment, and there could be the notion that it wasn't even a success; but that is tricky to support since being a financial success isn't the same as saying it wasn't a financial disappointment. There also seems to be some gray area when it comes to the adjectives used to describe the amount of money made or the gap between the high hopes for profit and the actual result with one person saying that the film made "considerably less" than expected, while another said it did make a "ton" of money both in theaters and in home media sales.

In short, one can perceive the nearly $900 million that BvS made toward its $1 billion goal as a successful, yet disappointing, financial result, or one can perceive it as a considerable shortcoming that makes the film financially unsuccessful AND financially disappointing. I personally feel that it was a financial success (and a disappointment), and I believe the studio feels the same way. I think they were content (not ecstatic or satisfied) with the financial result, but naturally they want to do better so they can make even more money and win over more critics and audience members.

 

[BH/HHH]

Looking over the conversation, it seems there is mostly agreement. Both sides agree that DCEU films, BvS in particular, were critical and financial disappointments. The critical disappointment claim hasn't been debated, but the financial side has been. Specifically, some are okay with describing BvS as a financial success, but also call it a disappointment, and there could be the notion that it wasn't even a success; but that is tricky to support since being a financial success isn't the same as saying it wasn't a financial disappointment. There also seems to be some gray area when it comes to the adjectives used to describe the amount of money made or the gap between the high hopes for profit and the actual result with one person saying that the film made "considerably less" than expected, while another said it did make a "ton" of money both in theaters and in home media sales.

In short, one can perceive the nearly $900 million that BvS made toward its $1 billion goal as a successful, yet disappointing, financial result, or one can perceive it as a considerable shortcoming that makes the film financially unsuccessful AND financially disappointing. I personally feel that it was a financial success (and a disappointment), and I believe the studio feels the same way. I think they were content (not ecstatic or satisfied) with the financial result, but naturally they want to do better so they can make even more money and win over more critics and audience members.

Yeah I'd say that's fair

 

[Mandon Knight]

Its widely regarded these days from the people I know (in the industry) that they would regard now the cinematic 'run' of a film as the 'pre-curser' to a home release, it's like a starter and main course, you can 'bank' on the starter not filling you up but the main course will take care of any hunger. The split on dependence of $$$ for 'bankability' with a release is firmly with a dvd/blu ray release and not a cinematic run these days, as I say, as far as conversations with friends that are industry based is concerned.

 

[ManWithNoName18]

Interesting, always wanted to know.

Is internet piracy actually stealing any meaningful amount of Hollywood's profits?