The Amazing Spider-Man 2 The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Box Office Prediction Thread - Part 4

[Serpico Jones]

Yes IMDB ratings, how could one possibly argue against them?!!
Yes, I got the job!t: I swear to run the franchise even further into the ground.

Can you explain to me why you think the next film will cost less?

Because the executives at Sony are not insane enough to green light a film that costs that much.

 

[Bullseye1]

They should go with Kravens last hunt.

 

[JKKS085]

It's not a significant difference.

Of course not. I mean it's not like they could have produced an entire film with the extra 90M they spent on TASM2 (compared to TASM). And it's not like it could be dissapointing in any way to get lower returns on your ever-growing investment. If you can spend 345M on a movie to get 752M at the box office would you be dissapointed if 2 years later you were to invest 445M to get 710 millions ? Of course not because you obviously have money to throw out of the window.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

If things were so bad so bad for the Spidey franchise Sony would stop making Spidey movies because no movie studio is going to continue producing movies that LOSES the company money. That makes ZERO sense. It's not great but it isn't a disaster either.

It actually is a pretty huge disaster as far as Sony is concerned considering they intended for this to be a launching pad for a Spidey universe. You have to remember that it will take several more films before Sony realizes they wont be able to make any many with the way they are doing things and if the current trend continues that is going to be the case. When that happens then they will either sell the rights back to Marvel or let them revert.

 

[JKKS085]

Because the executives at Sony are not insane enough to green light a film that costs that much.

That's what everyone said after they spent 230M on TASM.
In the light of declining domestic numbers they were supposed to keep their budget under control in order for the sequel to be profitable without the need to hit 800M+ and look how things turned out.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Because the executives at Sony are not insane enough to green light a film that costs that much.

Sony is all about being insane. They have kept Avi Arad around despite him being kinda horrible and they keep reshooting and redoing Marc Webb's Spider-Man movies on the fly. They might not greenlight the 280mil budget but after their annual meddling and rounds of reshoots I have very little doubt that the budget will end up around that amount.

 

[Angryfantasyfan]

Sony CEO Kaz Hirai says that his hands-on approach includes suggesting changes to movie endings and binge-watching television series that the company is involved in.
"I spend a lot of time trying stuff out for myself," Hirai said at a roundtable at Sony's Tokyo headquarters on Monday.
"I went to see the final edits for The Amazing Spider-Man 2 before it came out; [Sony Entertainment CEO] Michael [Lynton] and [SPE co-chairman] Amy [Pascal] just wanted to get my thoughts on a few things," Hirai explained.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/sony-ceo-details-hands-approach-707075



As a lifelong Oakland Raider fan, this is all too familiar.

 

[TheWallCrawler]

It's not a knock on the quality of BB. It's a knock on how pathetic Spider-Man has become that a $250 million film about Spider-Man in his 5th film can't beat a reboot of Batman coming off of Batman Forever and Batman and Robin. It goes to show that when you make a great second movie in a rebooted series that the audience is not confident fully about yet (TDK) as opposed to a terrible second movie (ASM2) then you fail. Sony and Webb should be ashamed. When you add in inflated prices, 3D tickets, and of course an extra $100 million in costs...it is truly, truly pathetic.

that's true, but one might argue that the underwhelming ticket sells of TASM2 aren't likely so much this film's fault as it is probably the first film's, regardless of whether this film would be considered good or bad artistically. Batman Begins is a testament to the importance of the opening investment to a franchise, it didn't do well because of prejudice against the concept, but it was a really good plus entertaining film thus a sequel was worth green lighting because there would be more audience next time. WB is smart like that (don't know if Sony would've green lighted a sequel for BB with the profits it got or if they would've scrapped that and gone for something like Superman & Batman straight out of the gate)

Sony was ignorant to the importance of delivering in TASM because subconsciously and with some consciously, they (producers) still thought this as just the 4th Spider-man project, they didn't fully get that this was their new opening bid and how important it was. I enjoyed TASM for what it is, but it is admittedly a screw up, especially as the opening bid

and it's probably obvious to everyone that TASM2 is a much more viable film for the mainstream market in all it's colorfulness, humor and over the top action. But half of the masses were very much burned by TASM1, and had TASM1 being a similar film to this in the first place, the film and it's sequel would've made a lot more money

so my main point is, even if TASM2 in the eyes of the majority of the audience was on the level of Batman Begins or even TDK, it still would've made very close to the amount of what it has made now. it would've underperformed regardless of the artistic quality because of the damage TASM1 caused

 

[Spider-Fan]

I think we all agree JKK and Spider-Fan, the overseas numbers are actually not as good as they appear in comparison with past Spider-Man films and they do not indicate growth but declining interest in the franchise. And it's not that I expect every franchise to grow but there has to be some stability and this franchise has very little. The excuse of re-introducing the character can't work anymore, it's put up or shut up time.

The costs are rising and interest is declining how exactly does Sony expect to make money off of this so called expanded universe again?

In their current format, they can't. Their profits, especially without merchandise due to selling those to Marvel, will be very low as this trend continues. If they had the merchandise rights to these movies, they'd certainly have more incentive to invest the 250+ mil into the franchise despite diminishing returns. But, without those, Sony needs to change their plan of attack with making Spidey films. They need to stop reshooting basically a whole new movie everytime. They need to focus harder on a quality product. They need to plan this out more.

I know Sony won't do these things, but I think they need to delay TASM3 and their spin-offs a year each, and focus harder on the scripts and make a new business model.

 

[Wildcard]

Sony doesn't have the business sense to take the logical step & lower the budget. I don't see why a Spider-Man movie should cost that much any damn way. It's not like it's the MCU where there tons of things going on...it's just Spider-Man and whatever villain is in the mix.

I bet Marvel could pull off some awesome Spider-Man movies under $200 million.

 

[Serpico Jones]

In their current format, they can't. Their profits, especially without merchandise due to selling those to Marvel, will be very low as this trend continues. If they had the merchandise rights to these movies, they'd certainly have more incentive to invest the 250+ mil into the franchise despite diminishing returns. But, without those, Sony needs to change their plan of attack with making Spidey films. They need to stop reshooting basically a whole new movie everytime. They need to focus harder on a quality product. They need to plan this out more.

I know Sony won't do these things, but I think they need to delay TASM3 and their spin-offs a year each, and focus harder on the scripts and make a new business model.

I think you hit the nail on the head. They seriously need to stop reshooting the entire god damn movie, it's completely insane that they do that.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I agree that I'd like to see Sony focus on getting a better script together.

 

[JOE]

Only one thing can save this franchise, a proper symbiote story. Give the audience what they want with a cliffhanger leading to Venom. Clock tower scene, whatever. That's how you'll build hype for your spinoff, don't shoehorn anything in.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Don't quote me on this cuz i haven't seen the official numbers yet but I'm willing to bet Guardians of the Galaxy cost less than this film and it's a CGI heavy space opera. That is hilarious to me

 

[hippie_hunter]

ASM3 doesn't have to make that much domestically for it to succeed.

Even though the international box office has increased its clout (especially in Asia), the rule of thumb is still to make back the budget domestically and then use overseas to make the profits. The overseas market should not be used to try and make up for overly bloated budgets.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Only one thing can save this franchise, a proper symbiote story. Give the audience what they want with a cliffhanger leading to Venom. Clock tower scene, whatever. That's how you'll build hype for your spinoff, don't shoehorn anything in.

I only see this ending in apathy and more critics asking why this reboot series exists when they're rehashing the symbiote storyline that was saw in SM3. I don't think the black suit saga ups the BO potential anymore. Sure, SM3 era it did because we didn't see it. Now that is was done once before, I don't think that level of enthusiasm is there.

 

[BestGirl]

that's true, but one might argue that the underwhelming ticket sells of TASM2 aren't likely so much this film's fault as it is probably the first film's, regardless of whether this film would be considered good or bad artistically. Batman Begins is a testament to the importance of the opening investment to a franchise, it didn't do well because of prejudice against the concept, but it was a really good plus entertaining film thus a sequel was worth green lighting because there would be more audience next time. WB is smart like that (don't know if Sony would've green lighted a sequel for BB with the profits it got or if they would've scrapped that and gone for something like Superman & Batman straight out of the gate)

Sony was ignorant to the importance of delivering in TASM because subconsciously and with some consciously, they (producers) still thought this as just the 4th Spider-man project, they didn't fully get that this was their new opening bid and how important it was. I enjoyed TASM for what it is, but it is admittedly a screw up, especially as the opening bid

and it's probably obvious to everyone that TASM2 is a much more viable film for the mainstream market in all it's colorfulness, humor and over the top action. But half of the masses were very much burned by TASM1, and had TASM1 being a similar film to this in the first place, the film and it's sequel would've made a lot more money

so my main point is, even if TASM2 in the eyes of the majority of the audience was on the level of Batman Begins or even TDK, it still would've made very close to the amount of what it has made now. it would've underperformed regardless of the artistic quality because of the damage TASM1 caused

TASM2 has suffered some pretty steep drops, though. I think it fell 62% from its first to its second weekend. That's s sign of bad WOM, and can't be attributed to the first movie.

 

[OcStat]

You know, a lot of talk has been going about how bad Spider-Man has performed box office wise, but I don't think it is an isolated incident. Godzilla barely beat it by a few million. Captain America exceeded expectations but was still in the 90's. X-Men has made 111 million but their 3 day total was less than all three of those movies, and only the fifth highest Memorial Day debut, now the 4th x-Men movie in a row that hasn't opened bigger than X3. But total world wide BO, DoFP is now Fox's biggest movie ever.

Now I admittedly I don't know squat about Box office results besides what I gloss over every now and then, but I'd imagine the summer so far has not been as successful as some money counters would like. I know you have to take into account the budget, marketing expenses, and how much money is paid out to others before it comes back into the studio.

Still it stands that Spider-Man is still a ways away from the goals the executives would have liked to hit, but I wouldn't be surprised if at the end of the summer it's looked back on as a relatively weak one. Numbers wise anyway. But as DoFP shows, it depends on the criteria you set for those numbers.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

TASM2 has suffered some pretty steep drops, though. I think it fell 62% from its first to its second weekend. That's s sign of bad WOM, and can't be attributed to the first movie.

It's a little of both. Had TASM2 come out right after SM2, it would have done a lot better (look at SM3) because the pre-existing audience would have been larger.

That said, TASM2 underperformed even the lowered expectations due to poor legs. Even after the first already disappointing weekend it was looking like $250 million domestic/$800 million international was going to happen. Now after a month, we know it won't come close. That's on ASM2.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

As for X-Men, that franchise shows how hard it can be to win back an audience once you lose them to a horrible installment like The Last Stand. Every studio needs to take note of that.

 

[TheWallCrawler]

TASM did far worse damage than SM3 despite being better. But anyway, those masses that were alienated by TASM for not having enough entertainment value, they are also the kind of people (I'm generalizing yes, but this is largely true) that take their time before they go and see a newly released film. but those masses have taken hit from TASM, so that's likely a big part of why the box office earnings had a sudden decline from the first weekend to the second weekend

 

[DarthSkywalker]

The bottom line is Sony are making money. If and when that stops being the case they'll stop making Spidey movies. 1.4 BILLION for 2 movies when ASM2 finishes it's run not to mention home video and tv syndication.

No they aren't.

Yeah, it's like the same 5 people posting over and over again negative comment after negative comment. I think a lot of people just stopped posting here because no one wants to see that on a movie you liked.

Looking at this thread you would think this movie was horrible, yet it currently holds a 7.4 on IMDB, higher than the new Godzilla.

And this right here is why fanboying is amazing.

Frack reality. THE MOVIE WAS AMAZING AND MADE ALL THE MONIES!!!! I KNOW BECAUSE IMDB SAID SO!!!!!

 

[ShadowEdgeworth]

Ugh. While I hope Sony will take note, I suspect that their resolution will be to throw MORE money at TASM3 in the vain hope that it'll help. I liked TASM2, but there's no denying that it hasn't gone down so well outside of fandom - and I use the term loosely as within fandom it's divided the ranks. I just hope Sony do a reasonably sensible thing or this franchise will be going the same way as the original Superman and Batman quadrilogies...

 

[Bruce Malone]

Don't quote me on this cuz i haven't seen the official numbers yet but I'm willing to bet Guardians of the Galaxy cost less than this film and it's a CGI heavy space opera. That is hilarious to me

Well I believe the Avengers actually cost less than TASM, so that's a good bet.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

The sources I'm seeing say Guardians of the Galaxy had a $150 million production budget, but we'll get more accurate information closer to release. Films do go over budget rather frequently.