Suicide Squad box office prediction

[Pickle-El]

Well, you might well be right, but how many of these perceived underperformances from DC properties do you think it'll take before someone, somewhere decides to bring them to a halt?

Well, here's the thing. The built-in audience. These films keep opening big. Thanks to name recognition and that WB marketing.Neither are going anywhere. This is the supposed 3rd strike in a row, yet here we are still moving along.

WW looks to open big as well. That trailer got serious buzz. Does anyone feel like it will bomb? JL has yet to gear up, but we can safely assume that as well?

This entire 1st phase is almost critic proof, the more I see it roll out. The characters, their history, and iconic status bring people out in droves. I'm sure the studio wants better received films. The truth is, people have short memories. A year later, a shiny new trailer, and a big iconic DC character= a big opening and nice haul. What they are hurting is repeat business that should be in the 3x multipliers, as well as chances for more obscure DC character to get a shot. But, at least they are realizing mistakes and trying to correct them. That much, has been acknowledged. There's still time to fix this.

 

[Pickle-El]

That argument has been made for the past two DC films, because they're the only two that have been in this unique situation.

I don't think DC/WB is as relaxed as you make them out to be. The damage control they were releasing for JL is proof of that. They're will be reactions to SS dropping hard (if it continues to do so). How big those reactions are remains to be seen.

They know money is being left on the table. This had to happen in order for the studio change things. Now we take it in the GJohns/Ben Affleck direction and see what we get.

I hope this gets corrected and better structure is put in place, I think we all want top-quality films, not just big effects and medicore stories.

 

[jmc]

Well, here's the thing. The built-in audience. These films keep opening big. Thanks to name recognition and that WB marketing.Neither are going anywhere. This is the supposed 3rd strike in a row, yet here we are still moving along.

WW looks to open big as well. That trailer got serious buzz. Does anyone feel like it will bomb? JL has yet to gear up, but we can safely assume that as well?

This entire 1st phase is almost critic proof, the more I see it roll out. The characters, their history, and iconic status bring people out in droves. I'm sure the studio wants better received films. The truth is, people have short memories. A year later, a shiny new trailer, and a big iconic DC character= a big opening and nice haul. What they are hurting is repeat business that should be in the 3x multipliers, as well as chances for more obscure DC character to get a shot. But, at least they are realizing mistakes and trying to correct them. That much, has been acknowledged. There's still time to fix this.

The problem is even those core fans are starting to become disillusioned, and there's only so many chances people are going to give it. If WB are happy with Twilight like reception to these films then that's their call, but they are going to have to start slashing the budgets, you can't keep making films that need 600-700m just to break even, it's financial lunacy and investors will get pissed at them for it. The big question going forward is Fantastic Beasts, if that series picks up where Potter left off and is a huge critical and financial success then the DCEU potentially becomes less of a priority.

 

[Legendver2]

I think they see there's cleary an audience that wants to love DC movies, but they're shooting themselves in the foot by delivery poor movies. In the long run they know that's going to be bad for business. At present they are moving forward because they see that potential, but they can't afford their films to have this type of reputation, because as much as there is a core fan base its the mainstream audiences they have to win over. You can't make movies for $200m dollars and get Twilight like results, you are literally leaving hundreds of millions of dollars on the table by doing that.

It's one of those chicken and egg situations. For all we know, this all started out with WB execs meedling with BvS's cut. If the UC was released instead, the narrative might be slightly different. But each film that results in poor results due to them meddling is going to bring more knee jerk reactions taht will meddle with the next film. For all we know, if Ayer got to keep his vision intact, SS might've had better results. It's all a game of what ifs now since WB itself cuts off their own movies potential by messing with the editing towards the end. Right now, we could very well have an incredible WW movie ready to be shown, but this SS debacle might cause them to once again cut off the next film's potential through the editing process again. Hopefully Johns can put a stop to this cycle and calm everyone's butts down for a minute.

 

[jmc]

It's one of those chicken and egg situations. For all we know, this all started out with WB execs meedling with BvS's cut. If the UC was released instead, the narrative might be slightly different. But each film that results in poor results due to them meddling is going to bring more knee jerk reactions taht will meddle with the next film. For all we know, if Ayer got to keep his vision intact, SS might've had better results. It's all a game of what ifs now since WB itself cuts off their own movies potential by messing with the editing towards the end. Right now, we could very well have an incredible WW movie ready to be shown, but this SS debacle might cause them to once again cut off the next film's potential through the editing process again. Hopefully Johns can put a stop to this cycle and calm everyone's butts down for a minute.

That's if he has any real power. He's not in Feige's position where he gets to green light movies as far as we know. At the end of the day does he still have to get approval from WB? At present it would like it has to.

 

[Greenlite]

Sorry, but Forbes and BOF aren't sources I can easily get behind, for a variety of reasons. And rule of thumb with break even is double the total budget, given that distributors pocket approximately 50% over life of the film's run. 350 x 2.

Sorry do you not get behind Deadline neither? 925M b.o for a 410 budget and gives you 200M profit, that's not 410x2=820 break even, and 105M extra gives you 200M. That's not how it works mate. 350 x 2 is just a super simplistic way of calculating it completely ignoring sponsorship/merchandising/rental etc.

MOS made close to 700M on a 350-400M total budget and is more profitable than BvS, with profit of 200-250M+, reported by Deadline, so how does 350M x 2=700 and MOS gets 200M+ profit? Based on "rule of thumb" budget x 2, MOS tanked, it made less than twice its budget yet it's in the positive by 200M.

 

[Infinity9999x]

They know money is being left on the table. This had to happen in order for the studio change things. Now we take it in the GJohns/Ben Affleck direction and see what we get.

I hope this gets corrected and better structure is put in place, I think we all want top-quality films, not just big effects and medicore stories.

I do as well. I hope that we can get live action films to rival the animated universe they built from the 90s through the early 00's.

 

[RLAAMJR.]

If Suicide Squad fails...it will NOT matter.

Geoff Johns entered AFTER Suicide Squad.

SS will NOT affect Wonder Woman and JL under Geoff Johns.

It will be critically upwards starting next year.

It will fail.

 

[Flint Marko]

It will fail.

I didn't like the movie either, but come on. No DCEU film thus far can reasonably be called a "failure" in financial terms. They could be deemed misfires and disappointments, but not failures. I don't think SS is going to break that pattern.

 

[Micromind]

There's always someone here pointing out why Suicide Squad is not going to be profitable for WB, I say take into account the fact that the movie also has lots of merchandising stuff for sale (unlike X-Men Apoclaypse), which will generate some revenue and the fact that it may have better legs compared to BvS as it is more entertaining and has "fun" factor to it which was missing in case of BvS. There will be some viewers who will go for repeat viewings.

 

[The Endless]

I think the saving grace is that WB would never expect Suicide Squad to make a billion like a BvS or JL. 700 million should be good... if it gets there.

But then the thing is... they should've allowed Ayer a bit more creative freedom whilst keeping the budget modest and making it rated R.

Deadpool proved that smaller scale rated R cbms can make big money. Suicide Squad didn't need to have some generic cgi world ending threat that inflates the budget.

 

[Flint Marko]

Agreed.
Safe money is on this making a profit for WB, albeit potentially a slightly underwhelming one akin to BvS. We'll have to see where we're sitting next week.

 

[PacificBoy]

There's always someone here pointing out why Suicide Squad is not going to be profitable for WB, I say take into account the fact that the movie also has lots of merchandising stuff for sale (unlike X-Men Apoclaypse), which will generate some revenue and the fact that it may have better legs compared to BvS as it is more entertaining and has "fun" factor to it which was missing in case of BvS. There will be some viewers who will go for repeat viewings.

Agree. I think the movie will have decent legs for these reasons, plus the sexing up of the Joker-Harley dynamic.

 

[Wildcard]

I think the saving grace is that WB would never expect Suicide Squad to make a billion like a BvS or JL. 700 million should be good... if it gets there.

But then the thing is... they should've allowed Ayer a bit more creative freedom whilst keeping the budget modest and making it rated R.

Deadpool proved that smaller scale rated R cbms can make big money. Suicide Squad didn't need to have some generic cgi world ending threat that inflates the budget.

Exactly. This movie would've benefitted greatly by not going all "let's save the world" and using the Joker as the main villain. Would've affirmed how much of a threat he is by a team being formed to go against him.

Doing so would've allowed the budget to be more modest and if they stuck to their guns (like DP did), they would've gotten a more savory critical reception.

 

[Marvin]

Sorry, but Forbes and BOF aren't sources I can easily get behind, for a variety of reasons. And rule of thumb with break even is double the total budget, given that distributors pocket approximately 50% over life of the film's run. 350 x 2.

...how many cbms does that put in the not breaking even category?
Seems like an inconsistent rule if you ask me.

Just applying this to the say the successful mcu that rulehas like half of their productions not even reaching the black. Seems off.

 

[dragonjo8]

With the recent news of the person who started the petition to have RT shutdown (which was utterly ridiculous since RT does not control how movies are reviewed) I decided to take a look at some of their aggregate scores. I present the following:

RTS = Rotten Tomatoes Score AS = Audience Score

Iron Man RTS - 94 AS - 91 (3 point difference)
The Incredible Hulk RTS - 67 AS - 71 (4 point difference)
Iron Man 2 RTS - 72 AS - 72 (No difference)
Thor RTS - 77 AS - 76 (1 point difference)
Captain America RTS - 80 AS - 74 (6 point difference)
The Avengers RTS - 92 AS - 91 (1 point difference)
Iron Man 3 RTS - 79 AS - 79 (No difference)
Thor 2 RTS - 66 AS - 78 (12 point difference)
Captain America:WS RTS - 89 AS - 92 (3 point difference)
Guardians of the Galaxy RTS- 91 AS - 92 (1 point difference)
The Avengers: AoU RTS - 75 AS - 84 (9 point difference)
Ant-Man RTS - 81 AS - 86 (5 point difference)
Captain America: CW RTS - 90 AS - 90 (no difference)

As you can see from the data, with the exception of Thor 2, all these movies have an RTS vs AS score within 10 points of each other. The discrepancy in the Thor 2 scores might be attributed to a boost from the female portion of the audience that might have given extra points for the fact Hemsworth stars in it.

Now here are the DC scores...

Man of Steel RTS - 55 AS - 75 (20 point difference)
Batman v Superman RTS - 27 AS - 65 (38 point difference)
Suicide Squad RTS - 26 AS - 72 (46 point difference)

I'm no mathematician...but it sure looks like something funny is going on here. One would not need to take too much of a leap to assume there might be some sort of agenda on the part of the critics. Or, perhaps, errors in the algorithms RT uses to aggregate the data.

In short...

 

[Juan1193]

With the recent news of the person who started the petition to have RT shutdown (which was utterly ridiculous since RT does not control how movies are reviewed) I decided to take a look at some of their aggregate scores. I present the following:

RTS = Rotten Tomatoes Score AS = Audience Score

Iron Man RTS - 94 AS - 91 (3 point difference)
The Incredible Hulk RTS - 67 AS - 71 (4 point difference)
Iron Man 2 RTS - 72 AS - 72 (No difference)
Thor RTS - 77 AS - 76 (1 point difference)
Captain America RTS - 80 AS - 74 (6 point difference)
The Avengers RTS - 92 AS - 91 (1 point difference)
Iron Man 3 RTS - 79 AS - 79 (No difference)
Thor 2 RTS - 66 AS - 78 (12 point difference)
Captain America:WS RTS - 89 AS - 92 (3 point difference)
Guardians of the Galaxy RTS- 91 AS - 92 (1 point difference)
The Avengers: AoU RTS - 75 AS - 84 (9 point difference)
Ant-Man RTS - 81 AS - 86 (5 point difference)
Captain America: CW RTS - 90 AS - 90 (no difference)

As you can see from the data, with the exception of Thor 2, all these movies have an RTS vs AS score within 10 points of each other. The discrepancy in the Thor 2 scores might be attributed to a boost from the female portion of the audience who might have given extra points for the fact Hemsworth stars in it.

Now here are the DC scores...

Man of Steel RTS - 55 AS - 75 (20 point difference)
Batman v Superman RTS - 27 AS - 65 (38 point difference)
Suicide Squad RTS - 26 AS - 72 (46 point difference)

I'm no mathematician...but it sure looks like something funny is going on here. One would not need to take too much of a leap to assume there might be some sort of agenda on the part of the critics. Or, perhaps, errors in the algorithms RT uses to aggregate the data.

In short...

I pointed that out earlier in a different thread. I think the huge discrepancies come from critics either holding DC to a much higher standard than Marvel or the fact that DC's way of world building has been very different from Marvels approach, which critics have gotten very used to over the past 8 years.

In my view the DCEU movies do not deserve the ratings they've gotten so far from the critics and the audience score is much closer to score i believe the movies warrant.

MOS (6/10)
BVS (6.5/10)
SS (8/10)

 

[dragonjo8]

I pointed that out earlier in a different thread. I think the huge discrepancies come from critics either holding DC to a much higher standard than Marvel or the fact that DC's way of world building has been very different from Marvels approach, which critics have gotten very used to over the past 8 years.

In my view the DCEU movies do not deserve the ratings they've gotten so far from the critics and the audience score is much closer to score i believe the movies warrant.

MOS (6/10)
BVS (6.5/10)
SS (8/10)

I must have missed your previous post.

I agree with your view to a point...from a psychological standpoint, the critics views/scores obviously have influence over what the audiences scores will be. I think the audience scores would have been higher if the critics scores had been higher.

My scores for the DC films...

MOS (80/100)
BvS (75/100 after first viewing, 70/100 after 2nd viewing and critical influence, 80/100 for the Ultimate Edition)
SS (80/100)

 

[VelcroWallet]

WB paid YouTube personalities money for favorable video game reviews. Who's to say studios can't do the same with movie critics?

 

[LoganGambit87]

WB paid YouTube personalities money for favorable video game reviews. Who's to say studios can't do the same with movie critics?

you didn't read that story at all did you

WB didn't pay for favorable reviews they paid youtubers to play their game their reviews were still thier own

 

[jmc]

...how many cbms does that put in the not breaking even category?
Seems like an inconsistent rule if you ask me.

Just applying this to the say the successful mcu that rulehas like half of their productions not even reaching the black. Seems off.

I think what you'll find is most big budgeted films these days don't make all that much money. The real returns is in merchandise.

 

[Zant]

you might well be right, but how many of these perceived underperformances from DC properties do you think it'll take before someone, somewhere decides to bring them to a halt?

They may come to a halt when they start having. Alice 2, John Carter and Lone Ranger type box office returns. That's not happening anytime soon.

 

[Predator jp]

same studio, same franchise.
Deadpool RTS - 84 AS - 91 (7 point difference)
X-Men: Apocalypse RTS - 48 AS - 71 (23 point difference)

and just throw these in here.
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen RTS - 19 AS - 58 (39 pont difference)
Battleship RTS - 34 AS - 54 (20 point difference)

does it look like something funny is going on here?

 

[Thread Manager]

This thread is now closed it has a continuation thread [split]517987[/split]