BvS Batman V Superman Box Office Prediction - - - - - Part 14

[Loden Greatstorm]

Nope

I'm sorry but WB must be beyond disappointed with this...

WOW.

 

[wobbly]

Pretty good number. I don't think any of us had it that high.

Its near 2mil over the 3.9 we thought would be near the mark.

 

[Stark Bauer]

And all three of those movies that were met with both critical disapproval AND lower than expected box office results have one major thing in common: their directors were replaced. And that was a big, big, big part of the marketing for their sequels.

Great observation and that inspires more confidence that Snyder will too be replaced.

 

[wobbly]

This may have stabilized, we'll no more by the weekend, but I suspect another >50% drop coming when Jungle book comes out.

Tomorrows should give us a clue. There's usually a drop (no discounts). If it holds up to or plus $3mil the weekend could see a softer drop. If drops below 2.5 or so it could be hefty again.

Edit; by tomorrow I mean today's actuals.

 

[jokesonm3]

So this wont reach 1 billion?

That ship sailed the day this film dropped by 69% on its 2nd week..... with no competition.

 

[Stark Bauer]

Sure it does. Look at the marketing of all these movies. "From the writer/director of..." Is a big deal to audiences

Yep. I noticed this prominently in The Jungle Book marketing they even put the big IRON MAN logo in the trailer lol. Might as well just put Iron Man's helmet in the trailer with a repulsor sound effect while they're at it.

Also agreed on the director changing strategy. I think a lot more people follow auteur theory.

The perception that a franchise is now being headed by a more competent, capable captain that knows how to sail them into box office success.

A director who knows how to make a movie that appeals to the masses is a big boost to viewer confidence that they will be seeing a quality movie. Also boosts studio execs' confidence that their luck will change and that the Box Office numbers will come in.

 

[SomeOldGuy]

This may have stabilized, we'll no more by the weekend, but I suspect another >50% drop coming when Jungle book comes out.

Yup, possibly. Though its 28% hike was on the low end of yesterday's increases among the top movies...

http://pro.boxoffice.com/statistics/bo_numbers/daily/2016-04-06

 

[Poni_Boy]

Yep. I noticed this prominently in The Jungle Book marketing they even put the big IRON MAN logo in the trailer lol. Might as well just put Iron Man's helmet in the trailer with a repulsor sound effect while they're at it.

Also agreed on the director changing strategy. I think a lot more people follow auteur theory.

The perception that a franchise is now being headed by a more competent, capable captain that knows how to sail them into box office success.

A director who knows how to make a movie that appeals to the masses is a big boost to viewer confidence that they will be seeing a quality movie. Also boosts studio execs' confidence that their luck will change and that the Box Office numbers will come in.

There's a reason Chris Nolan's name was big and bright on MOS trailers. There's a reason why Michael Bay's name is big and bright on TMNT ones. There's a reason Marvel uses "from the studio that brought you..." In their trailers. It all equals more box office dollars. Moviegoers know what they're being sold, and they make their decision based on that.

 

[JangoNate]

unlikely considering JL is about to start shooting. They may add more comedy to appease the marvel crowd but i think that was bound to happen anyway with flash involved.

Man...if they made Flash hum drum I'd be upset.

At least

Spoiler

the brief snippet we had of him in Dawn of Justice

gives me hope that this is not the case.

 

[parkerpete]

Yep. I noticed this prominently in The Jungle Book marketing they even put the big IRON MAN logo in the trailer lol. Might as well just put Iron Man's helmet in the trailer with a repulsor sound effect while they're at it.

Also agreed on the director changing strategy. I think a lot more people follow auteur theory.

The perception that a franchise is now being headed by a more competent, capable captain that knows how to sail them into box office success.

A director who knows how to make a movie that appeals to the masses is a big boost to viewer confidence that they will be seeing a quality movie. Also boosts studio execs' confidence that the numbers will come in.

Exactly. The only way to bounce back from the perception of diminishing returns is to change the branding. The simplest, most effective way to refresh the franchise (if you can't just reboot) is to hire a new director. If DC insists on following through with JL, there is no way they keep Snyder. I expect an announcement very soon that they are postponing JL and replacing Snyder. A lot of people will be more open-minded towards the franchise and willing to give it another look if--but only if--Snyder is jettisoned.

A new director gives marketing some ammo and at the very least creates a news narrative as people speculate about the changes a new director might bring. WB badly needs a new narrative to build hype and change the subject from BvS's disappointing performance.

 

[flickchick85]

There's a reason Chris Nolan's name was big and bright on MOS trailers. There's a reason why Michael Bay's name is big and bright on TMNT ones. There's a reason Marvel uses "from the studio that brought you..." In their trailers. It all equals more box office dollars. Moviegoers know what they're being sold, and they make their decision based on that.

Yep. To most consumers, movies are just like any other product - they find the brands they like and stick with them. But brands in movies can be directors, studios, franchises, or actors. So pushing a film with the right branding ("Christopher Nolan", or "Iron Man") will definitely enhance a movie's box office prospects.

 

[-Arya-]

Assuming SS and WW do well, I'd imagine them using "From the studio that brought you Suicide Squad and Wonder Woman". Using Snyder's name is toxic at this point.

 

[Frodo]

My guess would be that even if they keep Snyder as director for a couple more DCCU films, they're gonna be alot more hardnosed and wary of the scripts which are either mediocre or just passable, especially if they're budget busting stories.

 

[SuperAl]

Assuming SS and WW do well, I'd imagine them using "From the studio that brought you Suicide Squad and Wonder Woman". Using Snyder's name is toxic at this point.

Not really, you can still name drop 300. I mean Favreau made cowboys and aliens which was dog poop and IM2 is dogpoop (IMO) and his show Revolution was bad. People have selective memory. Plus now George Miller is a producer on JL so they can throw his name in credits for the hell of it too. The only director that really is toxic IMO is M. Night.

 

[SomeOldGuy]

Good breakdown on BvS's estimated profits from Rob Cain at Forbes. He assumes a final WW total of $895 million and includes revenues/costs from DVD, VOD, TV etc. Well worth a full read but here's the nut:

Total estimated costs: $634 million. Deduct that from the $760 million in studio revenue and we wind up with $126 million in net profit. Against Warners’ $415 million in upfront production and marketing expenditures, that works out to a 30 percent ROI.

That 30 percent may look OK, but we need to remember that it takes years for all this money to flow in to the studio’s coffers. The $250 million in production funding is spent long before the movie’s release, and the marketing money is also a big upfront cost. The theatrical rental revenue usually comes back inside of a year after the film’s release, but home entertainment revenue can take several years to trickle in, and TV revenue years more.

Taking into account the time value of money, the IRR on Warners’ investment is probably in the range of 12 to 15 percent. And that’s before we count the studio’s overhead costs, which if amortized against the picture would probably reduce the Batman v Superman profits by another $30 or $40 million. But for the sake of argument let’s say that the merchandise revenue I’ve temporarily set aside makes up for that overhead cost, so the film’s final profit works out to $126 million. Pre-tax.

That’s only a fair-t0-middling return when lined up against comparable films, as illustrated in the table below (the profit estimates come largely from Mike Fleming Jr.’s excellent analyses in Deadline Hollywood). Assuming my estimates for Batman v Superman are in the right ballpark, then on an ROI basis the film appears to be only a modest success for Warner Bros.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/robcain...an-v-superman-a-good-investment/#13dea7d7d67b

 

[parkerpete]

Good breakdown on BvS's estimated profits from Rob Cain at Forbes. He assumes a final WW total of $895 million and includes revenues/costs from DVD, VOD, TV etc. Well worth a full read but here's the nut:



http://www.forbes.com/sites/robcain...an-v-superman-a-good-investment/#13dea7d7d67b

But the big cost that's not accounted for--and it is large--is the blow that the movie has dealt to the brand and the audience's trust in the franchise and its creative team. Despite what the die-hards might wish, the movie did not catch fire with the GA and turned a lot of fans off. The numbers indicate this convincingly. Therefore, the hidden cost to the opening weekend grosses of the FOLLOWING films in the franchise is incalculable.

 

[All-Father]

Not really, you can still name drop 300. I mean Favreau made cowboys and aliens which was dog poop and IM2 is dogpoop (IMO) and his show Revolution was bad. People have selective memory. Plus now George Miller is a producer on JL so they can throw his name in credits for the hell of it too. The only director that really is toxic IMO is M. Night.

Which is another mediocre movie.

 

[Poni_Boy]

Not really, you can still name drop 300. I mean Favreau made cowboys and aliens which was dog poop and IM2 is dogpoop (IMO) and his show Revolution was bad. People have selective memory. Plus now George Miller is a producer on JL so they can throw his name in credits for the hell of it too. The only director that really is toxic IMO is M. Night.

Dude, seriously, you're being obtuse. Snyder's name is undoubtably tarnished now more than ever. And his name + DC brand will be toxic to ticket sales. You really want to see how presales flop when people wait for critics' reactions? That could happen with JL

 

[Pickle-El]

So...everyone is supposedly waiting on the numbers. The numbers come in higher than expected and we talk about....Zack Snyder sucking/a toxic figure and being replaced yet again??

Some of you guys...like to do the very same thing you accuse other posters of doing. De-railing left and right.

Back on topic....has BvS finally stabilized? 4.1 to Furious 4.3 on 2nd Tuesday.....

 

[flickchick85]

Back on topic....has BvS finally stabilized? 4.1 to Furious 4.3 on 2nd Tuesday.....

One day is not really enough to determine "stabilization." We'll need at least a few for that.

 

[wobbly]

Back on topic....has BvS finally stabilized? 4.1 to Furious 4.3 on 2nd Tuesday.....

Possibly. The bump was better than F7's, but still below the gross. See how Wednesdays actuals go before being more confident its settled, and the weekend of course.

 

[wobbly]

Good breakdown on BvS's estimated profits from Rob Cain at Forbes. He assumes a final WW total of $895 million and includes revenues/costs from DVD, VOD, TV etc. Well worth a full read but here's the nut:



http://www.forbes.com/sites/robcain...an-v-superman-a-good-investment/#13dea7d7d67b

Interesting read. If the ww caps at $850 that long term return will be even more modest.

 

[Poni_Boy]

One day is not really enough to determine "stabilization." We'll need at least a few for that.

Especially since the studio is playing this grand withholding game with the numbers. Which is weird.

 

[Pickle-El]

One day is not really enough to determine "stabilization." We'll need at least a few for that.

The last few days have hinted at it comparing to F7.

Since Friday:

Furious 7​

BvS​

$18,863,180​

$15,014,297
​

98%​

129.2% /​

Saturday

$25,459,260

$22,334,278​

35%​

49%​

Sunday

$15,263,490​

$13,986,679​

-40%​

-37%​

Monday

$3,639,980​

$3,192,415​

-76%​

-77%​

Tuesday

$4,363,870​

$4,088,296​

+20%​

+28%​

 

[Pickle-El]

While the grosses aren't quite as high as F7, the holds seem to be much more stable than last week...they were all over the place.