Reality Check(Budget vs. Profit)

[ntcrawler]

Wasn't it curious how TDC wasn't released for review before it was released to the box offices? That is usually an indication of a studio that knows it has a stinker on it's hands...

Relating to that, was X3 released to a limited test audience to gauge audience reaction to certain elements in order to fine-tune the final product?

 

[ntcrawler]

All I recall is that after the initial script review of Aint it Cool News Came out Fox released a statement about the script being old and that many changes were made to it. In reality 90% of what was in the original script was kept.

Yeah pretty much. They talked about it like it was something that was written on napkins during lunch and took about 80 minutes to do, and that fans shouldn't worry because there will be many many revisions.

Yep sounds like deception to me.

 

[ntcrawler]

Well yea because alot of ppl have this wonderful notion that without him there are no X-Men.

We'll never know though.

Oh you still have an X-Men, just like you can have a Starship Enterprise with Spock at the control and no Kirk.

But without Cyclops you just can't have a Phoenix Saga. Wolverine started acting and talking like Cyclops. So give the guy credit for stepping up to the plate and taking on some leadership, except it never should have happened in the first place.

 

[Theweepeople]

"Well yea because alot of ppl have this wonderful notion that without him there are no X-Men.

We'll never know though."

I'm not sure why Fox believes Wolverine is going to make so much money for them. Their are other interesting characters in the X-Men movies. I have read about what people thought about Nightcrawler not being in X-Men. I can't recall any fan saying that he not being in the movie was a good idea. Nightcrawler may have been in only one X-Men film but, he had arguably the most exciting action sequence in all the films. Wolverines battles in X-Men 3 looked weird, stupid, and boring compared to what I say in the previous films. The fight between him and Juggernaut was brainless. Wolverine at least 5x more athletic than Juggy and he did not hit Juggernaut once with his claws.

 

[not_a_victim]

Relating to that, was X3 released to a limited test audience to gauge audience reaction to certain elements in order to fine-tune the final product?

Almost all movies are test screened, so I would assume that X3 was, but I dont know for sure. SOmetimes the test screenings are just to studio emplyess and such, where it is not such a big deal to them. Also, most test screenings are rough cuts, with unfinished/temp soundtracks and rough special effects, so as not to simply show the movie early.
I AM NOT AN INSIDER, AND DONT CLAIM TO BE..but I know for a fact that when SM2 was test screened, portions of the CGI that were already completed were taken out and rough CGI was put in it's place for the test screen audiences.

 

[gambitfire]

I'm not sure why Fox believes Wolverine is going to make so much money for them. Their are other interesting characters in the X-Men movies. I have read about what people thought about Nightcrawler not being in X-Men. I can't recall any fan saying that he not being in the movie was a good idea. Nightcrawler may have been in only one X-Men film but, he had arguably the most exciting action sequence in all the films. Wolverines battles in X-Men 3 looked weird, stupid, and boring compared to what I say in the previous films. The fight between him and Juggernaut was brainless. Wolverine at least 5x more athletic than Juggy and he did not hit Juggernaut once with his claws.

Well too me it felt like a cheap thrill and so the quality fell drastically, IMO.

 

[ntcrawler]

Almost all movies are test screened, so I would assume that X3 was, but I dont know for sure. SOmetimes the test screenings are just to studio emplyess and such, where it is not such a big deal to them. Also, most test screenings are rough cuts, with unfinished/temp soundtracks and rough special effects, so as not to simply show the movie early.
I AM NOT AN INSIDER, AND DONT CLAIM TO BE..but I know for a fact that when SM2 was test screened, portions of the CGI that were already completed were taken out and rough CGI was put in it's place for the test screen audiences.

I'm wondering because I heard the story about Star Wars Return of the Jedi where in Lucas' version originally intended was to have Lando die as the Millennium Falcon just did not make it out of the Death Star in time. Which was foreshadowed by Han's comment earlier that he had a bad feeling he would never be seeing his ship again. Audience reaction was so overwhelmingly negative that Lucas was convinced to change the scene to allow Lando to survive.

I just can't believe that having been shown to a test audience no one would have raised a strong objection as to how the characters were handled or the material was presented, soundtrack and special effects notwithstanding. Unless it was really that rushed...

 

[gambitfire]

Almost all movies are test screened, so I would assume that X3 was, but I dont know for sure. SOmetimes the test screenings are just to studio emplyess and such, where it is not such a big deal to them. Also, most test screenings are rough cuts, with unfinished/temp soundtracks and rough special effects, so as not to simply show the movie early.
I AM NOT AN INSIDER, AND DONT CLAIM TO BE..but I know for a fact that when SM2 was test screened, portions of the CGI that were already completed were taken out and rough CGI was put in it's place for the test screen audiences.

X3 was test screened, This reminds me of the Sentinel footage that was shown on Jay Leno, everyone hated it and so decided to believe it was just a rough that wasn't truly finished since it was 3 weeks left to release, well it turned out they added a shadow and change the color light BFD!!!

BFD= Big F*ing Deal.

 

[gambitfire]

I'm wondering because I heard the story about Star Wars Return of the Jedi where in Lucas' version originally intended was to have Lando die as the Millennium Falcon just did not make it out of the Death Star in time. Which was foreshadowed by Han's comment earlier that he had a bad feeling he would never be seeing his ship again. Audience reaction was so overwhelmingly negative that Lucas was convinced to change the scene to allow Lando to survive.

I just can't believe that having been shown to a test audience no one would have raised a strong objection as to how the characters were handled or the material was presented, soundtrack and special effects notwithstanding. Unless it was really that rushed...

Actually i think this is the reason they don't show Cyclops bite the dust, they couldn't save him because they already shot everything they thought they needed.

 

[Theweepeople]

"Which i don't blame them for lying about because then we would of not liked what we where getting and they would of lost a lot of seats."

Well I understand why they did it but, they had to have known how risky it was to spend a whole year lying to die hard X-Men fans. Deciding to continue with the production of this film after Mathew Vaughn dropped out was absurd.

 

[ntcrawler]

I feel the same way about your NightCrawler comment. Due to circumstances out of my control and my life being complex, I actually didn't have a chance to see X2 until earlier in the week (very very very sorry everyone!) It put tears in my eyes when I saw NightCrawler because he was just so beautifully portrayed. They really went to alot of trouble to put in these little details to really bring the character to life and I was convinced his fans must have been delighted.

Which is why X3 angered me so much. Not just because he wasn't in there but they went to alot of trouble to delight fans with a less prominent char in X2, and then mistreated the more prominent chars so badly in X3.

Stuff already mentioned, like Colossus, the strongest and most durable of the bunch. Not because he didn't have a Russian accent but because someone who's almost indescructible keeps hiding behind things so he won't get hit by flying burning cars, which btw after seeing that humor thread does look like either a bad Hong Kong Action Flick or some messed up Metal video.

 

[gambitfire]

Well I understand why they did it but, they had to have known how risky it was to spend a whole year lying to die hard X-Men fans. Deciding to continue with the production of this film after Mathew Vaughn dropped out was absurd.

Well the message boards havn't heard the end of it have they, that and it's been dropping in the BO.

that sad part is that i had soooo much faith in this film and Ratner especially.

 

[ntcrawler]

"Which i don't blame them for lying about because then we would of not liked what we where getting and they would of lost a lot of seats."

Well I understand why they did it but, they had to have known how risky it was to spend a whole year lying to die hard X-Men fans. Deciding to continue with the production of this film after Mathew Vaughn dropped out was absurd.

They talked about this in an article in Rolling Stones magazine back in Feb I believe. Vaughn's departure was seen as a challenge but they assured everyone that the movie was coming along great, everyone has having a party making the film and there would be so many fan tributaries put in that everyone would love it.

Sometimes you have to laugh. It's the only way to keep from crying.

 

[Theweepeople]

"X3 was test screened, This reminds me of the Sentinel footage that was shown on Jay Leno, everyone hated it and so decided to believe it was just a rough that wasn't truly finished since it was 3 weeks left to release, well it turned out they added a shadow and change the color light BFD!!!

BFD= Big F*ing Deal."

That's pretty funny. Did anyone notice how you could hear Collosus's transformation at one segment in the Danger Room? Then in another part before Collosus throws wolverine at the Sentinel you can't hear it.

 

[not_a_victim]

Well too me it felt like a cheap thrill and so the quality fell drastically, IMO.

Jackman is doing an excellent job with the material he was given, make no mistake about that.
He was, however, miscast. One of Logan's tradmarks was that he was so short, and I think the studio just didnt think that a short guy could come across on the screen the was a taller man could.
I could see how they could think this, and I can only assume that they TRIED to cast a more realistic Logan, then just decided it wasn't gonna work, and maybe they were right. That one dude, "Hypnotica" or whatever the crap he calls himself, LOOKS dead on the part, but I hear he can't act. I had even heard that Glen Danzig was considered, for however shortly for the part. That would have been....interesting.
The point (and I did have one, I think) is that studios have to weigh the pros and cons of each decision, and run with what they think will work for the widest audience, and that is why we dont see comic books literally transposed to films. They are translations, not transpositions. And yes, that will make purists mad, but purists must realize they are COMIC purists, not movie purists.

 

[gambitfire]

Jackman is doing an excellent job with the material he was given, make no mistake about that.
He was, however, miscast. One of Logan's tradmarks was that he was so short, and I think the studio just didnt think that a short guy could come across on the screen the was a taller man could.
I could see how they could think this, and I can only assume that they TRIED to cast a more realistic Logan, then just decided it wasn't gonna work, and maybe they were right. That one dude, "Hypnotica" or whatever the crap he calls himself, LOOKS dead on the part, but I hear he can't act. I had even heard that Glen Danzig was considered, for however shortly for the part. That would have been....interesting.
The point (and I did have one, I think) is that studios have to weigh the pros and cons of each decision, and run with what they think will work for the widest audience, and that is why we dont see comic books literally transposed to films. They are translations, not transpositions. And yes, that will make purists mad, but purists must realize they are COMIC purists, not movie purists.

I love how you lost your point and confused the crap out of me .

Anyways, i didn't think it was a cheap thrill because it didn't go exactly like the comics.

This is another wonderful notion ppl seem to have, is it so hard to believe ppl didn't like the film because it wasn't a good film and not because it didn't follow the comics. It's a cheap shot everyone who loves the film takes, its like well your just mad because they didn't do things the way it is in the comics. How about No im just mad because they didn't stay true in the sense of personality emotion, and it wasn't done as well as the others. This of course is my opinion so it doesn't make me right nor does it make anyone who enjoyed the movie correct either.

 

[not_a_victim]

I love how you lost your point and confused the crap out of me .

You think you're confused, I went back and read it, and it didnt make any sense to me, either. And I wrote it!

I think my central point (if I had one) was that you can have talented actors, good scripting, and such, and still have a movie that falls short, and sometimes you cant point to any one (or multiple) things and say,"this is why this movie sucks."
Edit: Man, going back and reading it again, did I even respond to the right post? I need coffee.

 

[Theweepeople]

"Stuff already mentioned, like Colossus, the strongest and most durable of the bunch. Not because he didn't have a Russian accent but because someone who's almost indescructible keeps hiding behind things so he won't get hit by flying burning cars, which btw after seeing that humor thread does look like either a bad Hong Kong Action Flick or some messed up Metal video."

Collosus hiding behind burning cars was pretty stupid. But, there were many other things about that battle that made no sense. The first thing Magneto would have done was have Arclight destroy those plastic de-mutation guns even before the battle began. Magneto is no idiot. He must have known about those guns or at least have spies who had heard rumours about the existence of these weapons. However, just suppose Magneto did not know about the guns. How in the would could the guns de-mutanize the mutations if there were no metallic needles in them?!!!! If the guns did have needles in them then magneto could have stopped the needles.

 

[ntcrawler]

Collosus hiding behind burning cars was pretty stupid. But, there were many other things about that battle that made no sense. The first thing Magneto would have done was have Arclight destroy those plastic de-mutation guns even before the battle began. Magneto is no idiot. He must have known about those guns or at least have spies who had heard rumours about the existence of these weapons. However, just suppose Magneto did not know about the guns. How in the would could the guns de-mutanize the mutations if there were no metallic needles in them?!!!! If the guns did have needles in them then magneto could have stopped the needles.

Yeah see it's these little nitpicks that may not bother some but for other people takes away the credibility of the scene. I wanted to shout at the guy: OK, so the guns are plastic. Fine! Then try controlling the syringes themselves! Focus on the needles!"

And no they can't be plastic or glass needles. no such thing.

But if we keep this up, the movie will collapse upon itself from lack of logic. Like the distance from Alcatraz to shore being longer than all of the Golden Gate bridge. Yeah just small things like that

 

[not_a_victim]

Yeah see it's these little nitpicks that may not bother some but for other people takes away the credibility of the scene. I wanted to shout at the guy: OK, so the guns are plastic. Fine! Then try controlling the syringes themselves! Focus on the needles!"

And no they can't be plastic or glass needles. no such thing.

But if we keep this up, the movie will collapse upon itself from lack of logic. Like the distance from Alcatraz to shore being longer than all of the Golden Gate bridge. Yeah just small things like that

Actually, there are glass needles. SOme heroin users used to make them themselves. I heard that this was done in "Ray", but I havent seen it.

 

[Theweepeople]

"But if we keep this up, the movie will collapse upon itself from lack of logic. Like the distance from Alcatraz to shore being longer than all of the Golden Gate bridge. Yeah just small things like that."

Instead of ripping off a portion of the Golden Gate bridge I thought it would have made more sense for Magneto and his troops to use stolen boats as a mode for transportation thereby drawing less attention to themselves and making it possible for a suprise attack. Also, if Magneto really wanted to kill leech so bad why not cause the whole building to collapse.(unless of course the building was made out of plastic.) Even if the building was made out of plastic(LOL) I had a hard time excepting the fact that Magneto felt so strongly about killing leech(one of his own). I initially thought the reason Magneto did not collapse the building was because he wanted Leech alive so he could figure out a way to convince him to join forces with the brotherhood or even hold him for some kind of ransom.

 

[Celestial]

Going back to Theweepeople's initial premise...

You can use a formula like that to make a very simplistic comparison of movies and the most part it's going to work. Profitable movies are more likely to get sequels and production cost and domestic box office are significant factors in the profitability of movie.

What is absurd is to assume that the studios use such a flawed instrument to make their decisions. They collect and analyse a huge amount of data, they get to see the true financial figures and they know the secrets of the backend deals in the contracts.

Going into X3, Fox will have had a pretty good idea of the maximum domestic box office they could expect, based on X2. They knew it wouldn't get Spider-Man numbers. Even a movie as well-received as X2 only achieved $215m. So the best they could hope for was $215m + a little extra for fans gained from the X2 DVD + a little for inflation. So realisticially they could expect maybe $250m-$300m at best.

At worst, they would know that domestic box office was falling, that sequels generally do less well than their predecessors and that there have been some high profile failures over the last year or so. So there was a very real risk that X3 wouldn't match X2's figures.

So my guess is the studios realistic expectations for X3's domestic take was in the range $200m - $250m. They would have known this before they agreed the production budget for X3. So why spend so much?

Overseas market - X2 underperformed so there was room for growth. It's an expanding market and with the weak dollar, foreign earnings are worth more.

DVD/TV sales - a big earner for X1 and X2. Not only future sales of X3 but also from people catching up on the backlist.

Tentpole - the studio needed a big film to launch their summer season. High profile, glamourous stars, record-breaking numbers (add in some studio exec ego, too).

I mentioned backend deals above. We hear about the amount of money stars and often directors get paid upfront. These get included in the production costs. But many stars and directors also get a percentage of the "profit". In some instances this has been rumoured to exceed 35% with the payments going to the stars/director before the studio gets a look in. This kind of deal does not show up in the production costs but has a major impact on the profitability of a movie.

 

[not_a_victim]

Lets put it this way, rarely does a movie absolutely LOOSE money for a studio. It might only make a couple million when it's all said and done, but that is still a couple million the studio didnt have before, Right?

 

[Theweepeople]

"I mentioned backend deals above. We hear about the amount of money stars and often directors get paid upfront. These get included in the production costs. But many stars and directors also get a percentage of the "profit". In some instances this has been rumoured to exceed 35% with the payments going to the stars/director before the studio gets a look in. This kind of deal does not show up in the production costs but has a major impact on the profitability of a movie."

I agree with all of this since it supports my beliefs as to why this film is not much of a success financially and should not have been made. Fox should not have green lighted this movie or could have stopped the production of this movie once it became clear making a good X-Men movie in 4 1/2 months would be impossible. Any movie company that decides to invest over 200 million in a film should hire top notch directors, writers, producers, and give them the freedom and time they need to make a quality product.

 

[Theweepeople]

"Lets put it this way, rarely does a movie absolutely LOOSE money for a studio. It might only make a couple million when it's all said and done, but that is still a couple million the studio didnt have before, Right?"

The question is was it worth spending 210 million on a movie that brings in a couple of million dollars for the studio. Movie Companies might as while give up making action and science fiction flicks if the answer to this question is yes, and focus their attention on making low budget comedies and dramas.