The Force Awakens Early Star Wars 7 Box Office Prediction Thread - Part 2

[spiderman2]

Oh Jack. Oh Rose. Oh oh Jack. Oh oh Rose.....

I think my list is topped by Crapformers: Age of Suckstinktion. If I hadn't paid like 14 bucks for a ticket at the XD theater, I would have walked out (and I rather like Mark Wahlberg).

The worst movie I have ever seen is transformers 4. The movie is like 3 hours and no joke like 2 hours and 35 minutes is action and repetitive action at that and the last like hour and a half there is nothing but action and like 1 word said and I am not exateratiing either.

So eh, has this movie broken even yet?

Yeah of course I think it had to make around 600 to break even so they have already made a nice profit.

 

[InCali]

There were reports that it had to hit $1.5 billion to be considered a success.

I'm sort of thinking it's a success.

 

[spiderman2]

They've probably broken even on the production budgets for Episodes 7-9.

lol that is not to far from being truet: Or at least by the time the movie is done that will be true.

 

[InCali]

The worst movie I have ever seen is transformers 4. The movie is like 3 hours and no joke like 2 hours and 35 minutes is action and repetitive action at that and the last like hour and a half there is nothing but action and like 1 word said and I am not exateratiing either.

I'm not used to agreeing with people this much. I wonder if there's something wrong with me today. Age of Suckstinktion was downright awful.....painful. Never saw the latest FF movie.

You know they have a T5 slated for 2017. I think I'm gonna pass on that one....brutal.

It took GotG to wash that nasty taste out of my mouth.

 

[Erzengel]

I'm sort of thinking it's a success.

It depends. TASM2 made over to $700 million but due to production, marketing costs etc., it was leaked that it only made a $25 million dollar profit.

I wouldn't be surprised if Star Wars needed to go past $900 million to make even a $100 million dollar profit.

 

[spiderman2]

I'm not used to agreeing with people this much. I wonder if there's something wrong with me today. Age of Suckstinktion was downright awful.....painful. Never saw the latest FF movie.

You know they have a T5 slated for 2017. I think I'm gonna pass on that one....brutal.

It took GotG to wash that nasty taste out of my mouth.

I have only seen transformer 1 and 4 never really was into transformers and the first 1 I heard was the best and even that 1 I thought was just ok. I only saw the 4th one because a friend was up visiting and there was nothing really worth seeing at the time but we wanted to go to the movie. It is the only movie that I hated and felt so bored that I thought about leving the movie early.

 

[spiderman2]

It depends. TASM2 made over to $700 million but due to production, marketing costs etc., it was leaked that it only made a $25 million dollar profit.

I wouldn't be surprised if Star Wars needed to go past $900 million to make even a $100 million dollar profit.

ASM2 had a 250 million budget I think it was said that star wars was only 200 million and also it was said that ASM2 spent to much on marketing to. So I would think it would cost less to break even on this movie then it did for asm2.

 

[Erzengel]

I don't remember a marketing campaign as big as Star Wars the past few months. Car, fast food, cellular companies, etc. I don't think you can go a commercial break without seeing a Star Wars related ad.

I'd say Disney spent a LOT on marketing.

 

[InCali]

I don't remember a marketing campaign as big as Star Wars the past few months. Car, fast food, cellular companies, etc. I don't think you can go a commercial break without seeing a Star Wars related ad.

I'd say Disney spent a LOT on marketing.

And I'll bet they got a TON of money from various business (Subway, etc.) who they allowed to use their name. I got a metal $16 tub of popcorn that I use as a wine bucket. It probably cost about a buck to make. I read about some guy who worked out a deal with Disney to sell SW ICE CREAM...ICE CREAM!!! He said he sold more ice cream in 1 week than he sold the previous year. You think Disney isn't getting some of that? And the merchandising.....holy $#!t. I promise you they are quite happy right now.......

 

[spiderman2]

I don't remember a marketing campaign as big as Star Wars the past few months. Car, fast food, cellular companies, etc. I don't think you can go a commercial break without seeing a Star Wars related ad.

I'd say Disney spent a LOT on marketing.

While that is true so yeah 900 million to make a 100 million may be true but when it comes to them wanting the movie to also make at least 1.5 billion I think a lot of that is that the more you spend on a movie the more you think you are going to make. It takes money to make money and if you make some small comedy I don't think you expect the movie to make has much has some big movie. I remember hearing that the people who made asm2 where expecting the movie to make at least 1 billion or something like that. Also this is star wars and considering that episode 1 made like 900 million and that was with out 3d and 16 years ago with lower ticket prices 1.5 billion would really not be that much. I mean if the movie sold just has many tickets has episode 1 did but with the higher ticket prices and with 3d it would probly make around 1.5-1.8 billion. Plus now you have a bigger international market and people hated episode 1 so it shouldn't be to hard to have more repect views with a star wars movie then episode 1 did.

 

[Erzengel]

The difference between Star Wars and TASM2 besides obviously quality and quantity is that Sony had 0 merchandising rights.

I don't think we'll ever really know the breakdown on everything but I didn't include merchandising in my assumption.

 

[SomeOldGuy]

I don't remember a marketing campaign as big as Star Wars the past few months. Car, fast food, cellular companies, etc. I don't think you can go a commercial break without seeing a Star Wars related ad.

I'd say Disney spent a LOT on marketing.

At least as far as broadcast ads are concerned, my understanding is that Disney spent next to nothing, relatively speaking. Their total TV ad buy for TFA was reported around $22 million. All those car, fast food and cell commercials you saw were produced by their co-brand and tie-in partners, who spent something like $90 million total advertising their products in connection with the movie. So basically The Mouse got about $112 million worth of advertising for $22 million (and some of that I'm sure went to media properties also owned by Disney, like ESPN).

 

[Erzengel]

While that is true so yeah 900 million to make a 100 million may be true but when it comes to them wanting the movie to also make at least 1.5 billion I think a lot of that is that the more you spend on a movie the more you think you are going to make. It takes money to make money and if you make some small comedy I don't think you expect the movie to make has much has some big movie. I remember hearing that the people who made asm2 where expecting the movie to make at least 1 billion or something like that. Also this is star wars and considering that episode 1 made like 900 million and that was with out 3d and 16 years ago with lower ticket prices 1.5 billion would really not be that much. I mean if the movie sold just has many tickets has episode 1 did but with the higher ticket prices and with 3d it would probly make around 1.5-1.8 billion. Plus now you have a bigger international market and people hated episode 1 so it shouldn't be to hard to have more repect views with a star wars movie then episode 1 did.

Well even though Episode I is considered by many as the "worst" Star Wars movie, it still as of last week was still the highest grossing domestic and WW out of the franchise.

And yes inflation does have to be taken into account. Which is why no movie has technically been as successful as Gone with the Wind after inflation.

 

[Erzengel]

At least as far as broadcast ads are concerned, my understanding is that Disney spent next to nothing, relatively speaking. Their total TV ad buy for TFA was reported around $22 million. All those car, fast food and cell commercials you saw were produced by their co-brand and tie-in partners, who spent something like $90 million total advertising their products in connection with the movie. So basically The Mouse got about $112 million worth of advertising for $22 million (and some of that I'm sure went to media properties also owned by Disney, like ESPN).

I sometimes forget that Disney owns like everything with ABC, Family, ESPN etc. So I'm sure they did save more.

 

[Lord]

I have always hated titanic its on my list of top 5 worst movies I have ever seen before. While yeah it only needs around 108 million to get to titanic. It may get to like 750 by the end of the weekend.

How many films have you seen in your life? I mean, Transformers film, Adam Sandler films, Uwe Boll films, all of those are truly bad films, naming Titanic, which was an impressive achievement on many technical levels, as one of the worst films seems weird.

 

[InCali]

Well even though Episode I is considered by many as the "worst" Star Wars movie, it still as of last week was still the highest grossing domestic and WW out of the franchise.

And yes inflation does have to be taken into account. Which is why no movie has technically been as successful as Gone with the Wind after inflation.

I always get suckered into this. What kind of inflation? I "think" when they talk about inflation, they usually mean "ticket" inflation. That's different than the inflation we usually talk about. I believe ticket prices have gone up WAY more than inflation and, therefore, going to a movie is much more expensive now (relatively speaking) than it was years ago. There's a reason that almost no movies in the last 16 years are in the top 30 adjusted for inflation and that's because using "only" ticket inflation unnaturally weights older movies.

If we're trying to figure out seats sold, let's just say so, but adjusted for inflation (ticket inflation) doesn't give you any real sense of how much profit a movie made.

OK....I'll shut up......for a while.....I think......

 

[Iceman]

Well even though Episode I is considered by many as the "worst" Star Wars movie, it still as of last week was still the highest grossing domestic and WW out of the franchise.

And yes inflation does have to be taken into account. Which is why no movie has technically been as successful as Gone with the Wind after inflation.

Yes but on the back of the achievements of the OT! It would have made a good few hundred million if the film had just been an opening crawl.

 

[InCali]

Yes but on the back of the achievements of the OT! It would have made a good few hundred million if the film had just been an opening crawl.

True. The hype was unreal. I was walking down the streets in Westwood and there were lines way down the block and the movie wasn't playing for days. There were Darth Maul chairs in the stores and so on. Think that would have been the case if not for Eps. 4-6?

 

[hippie_hunter]

The difference between Star Wars and TASM2 besides obviously quality and quantity is that Sony had 0 merchandising rights.

I don't think we'll ever really know the breakdown on everything but I didn't include merchandising in my assumption.

I think both sides are very relevant.

I actually do agree with you on merchandising. I think that if Sony had control of the merchandising rights, we'd be getting an Amazing Spider-Man 3. Hell look at what Disney does. Tron: Legacy did okay, but not great. But with underwhelming Tron sales, it didn't give Disney the extra push needed to go forward with Tron 3. Meanwhile, Cars is one of Disney's lowest performers when it comes to Pixar films, but it is one of Disney's best performers when it comes to merchandise. Hence why we're getting Cars 3. If Sony had control of the merchandising rights to Spider-Man, they could have easily justified Amazing Spider-Man 3, even with the disappointing box office results.

But they others also bring up a good point in advertising. While Star Wars was indeed everywhere, most of the Star Wars advertising came down to licensing deals with other partners and working with other Disney owned entities. Add in the brand name associated with Star Wars, the Force Awakens got maximum exposure for cheap. While the Amazing Spider-Man 2 also associated with licensing partners, it was nowhere near the level of what Disney did with the Force Awakens. And they relied far more on more expensive traditional styles of advertising. Sony Pictures also doesn't have sister companies like LucasFilm did with ABC, ESPN, etc. to lower costs of traditional advertising. I do think the advertising budget for the Amazing Spider-Man 2 helped drag down the film, on top of blowing a lot of money, it wasn't very effective in dragging people out to movie theaters, the Spider-Man franchise continued its process of declining returns.

 

[Heisenborg]

I don't remember a marketing campaign as big as Star Wars the past few months. Car, fast food, cellular companies, etc. I don't think you can go a commercial break without seeing a Star Wars related ad.

I'd say Disney spent a LOT on marketing.

Disney surprisngly has paid less than the typical blockbuster; it's the other companies that want and pay for Star Wars ads which have been dominating the airwaves:

Movie studios routinely invest $50 million in marketing upcoming releases in the United States and a little more abroad, the Journal notes, with most of that amount devoted to television.

So far, Disney had doled out about $17 million on TV ads, the Journal reports, citing data from the research firm iSpot.tv that extends through midday Monday, although the firm said it expects that figure to ramp up in the home stretch. For comparison, movie studios pushing other films with high ad budgets, such as Mad Max and Mission Impossible, spent about $30 million, or about twice as much, the Journal said, citing the same database.

Tie-ins with a host of other brands are buoying interest in the series on behalf of Disney as well. Seven official partnering companies, like Verizon VZ 0.98% and Proctor & Gamble PG 0.55% , have contributed $38 million in direct advertising, according to the Journal and iSpot.tv. And other companies such as Walmart WMT 1.42% and Electronic Arts EA 0.97% have indirectly added another $51 million by selling products blazoned with the franchise’s name. (That’s to say nothing of the press attention, too. Ahem, Fortune, Time, Entertainment Weekly...)

Even without going all out on the blockbuster elect’s marketing budget, Disney could still land the biggest box office payday ever—depending, of course, upon how the film is received in China. The cultural phenomenon is itself a self-propelling rocket ship.

http://fortune.com/2015/12/08/star-wars-marketing/

With all of these business deals (plus merch) it would be unsurprising if the movie paid for itself even before dominating the box office!

 

[Mysteryman]

There were reports that it had to hit $1.5 billion to be considered a success.

so you're saying that there is a chance!

 

[Erzengel]

They have to make up for the $4 billion dollar purchase price.

 

[InCali]

They have to make up for the $4 billion dollar purchase price.

Oh and they will. As I understand it, "only" 2B was in cash and the rest in stock. Even if it were a cash deal, the folks at Disney look like crooks to me. If they had it to do all over again, I'm quite sure they'd pull that trigger.

 

[OtherwiseKnownAs]

Any word on what the estimates are looking like for today?

 

[Silver Surfer]

Coming in at 28-29 million for Tuesday.