The Amazing Spider-Man The Amazing Spider-Man: Box Office Thread - Part 1

[Spiderdevil]

Your example of a potential Batman relaunch is interesting, of course it'll be a problem for WB to have a profitable franchise (wich wasn't the case back in 2005) significantly decaying with a wonky reboot that also received mixed reviews. And I won't say it's a given that it'll make much less than nolan's installements. Just make an actually interesting movie and people will root for it.

Make whatever,it wont earn more than Nolan's Batman
But that doesnt mean they will,'Hey the character is going down from the business stand point'

I mean TASM will likely make just bit more than half of what the first Spider-Man earned back in 2002 (if you adjust the grosses for ticket price inflation of course) with an A-List character that is freaking a cultural phenomenon (wich wasn't the case either by the time the first Spider-Man was released).

Not exactly,It'll make around 700ME WW,Spidey 1 made 800M
Topping Riami was very tough to begin with,and this was a terrible time to release the movie aswell,between Avengers and TDKR

No matter how hard the challenge was (and honestly the first Spider-Man opening numbers are barely up to today's standards for a blockbuster), with a genre that is getting more and more popular (hence the record breaking successes of The Dark Knight and The Avengers)

The film responsible for making people take CBMs seriously and show them that this genre can make truck loads was SM1,which is the reason why today movies like Avengers and TDK are watched so much
And why are you so obsessed with opening numbers? The film made 800M+ plus world wide and that too in 2002,Sony would care less what the opening numbers were

with the ticket price inflation and 3D, TASM's 6-days opening should have been at the very least in the tracks of the first Spider-Man to be an actual success (and that's what Sony expected).

Nope,sony didnt expect that.Their early estimate was 120M from first 6 days,which they hyped to 130M later,it has earned about 140M so it above their estimates

I can't be the only one surprised that after 3 pretty well-received movies (and financially highly successful installements), a movie with and highly popular A-List character won't even reach the domestic numbers of 2008 Iron Man (wich was barely a C-List character by the time the movie comes out).

Iron man was an excellent movie,it was new character and plus Robert Downey Junior.People wanted to watch that
TASM is too similar to SM1 and the action is not as much in amount as Riami's version,thats the two complaints I've heard from the GA
Sony is totally responsible for that,they didnt allow any change and the little change there was,they chopped it off.And then they advertised it as 'The Untold Story' which it wasnt.False advertising

On top of it they went with the Lizard and made his personality an exact copy(and yet a much poorer version) of Goblin in SM1 and Doc Ock in SM2,a mad scientist who wants to work for the good of man kind with his experiment and ends up corrupted by evil tentacles/serum/formula

They hired Marc Webb because they wanted character development,the man did a terrific job at that but they should've known people watching Spider-man care more about action sequences than character development

Best thing to do would have been to go with Kingpin as the main villian and Shocker/Kraven as the secondary villian

 

[TheVileOne]

To me, I think it was a big mistake not having Jameson in this movie. Even in a cameo.

 

[JKKS085]

With TDKR opening on the 20th, yeah opening numbers for TASM were crucial.

As for Sony's expectations, the "early tracking numbers" your talking about don't reflect what they hope the movie will make on its first 6-days but what the polls and pre-sales showed the movie can make and that was already below what they expected.

Now as for the Batman reboot, sure maybe it'll make a little less money than the last two Nolan's but I garantee you that if the next installement makes less than 300 millions, it'll be a problem. Because there's no valid reason for a popular character to decay that much (unless there's a problem with the movie itself and the direction the franchise is taking).

I mean these guys are here to make profits (and with that kind of franchise, huge profits), not to please fans or moviegoers. If Sony actually spent 220 millions to relaunch the Spider-Man franchise that's because they expected the movie to earn at least 300 millions (on the domestic market, keep in mind that I'm always talking about domestic numbers since the the studio only get a small share of the international revenues).

Let's put in a an other context. Imagine that you've just been appointed head of the Departement A at Corporate Whatever. Under your predecessors' regime the departement was highly profitable and made 1 million a year. Corporate Whatever also noticed that the market is more profitable now that it was before and they grant you with some extra budget and new offices for the coming year. At the end of the year you'll have to explain why, despite better circumstances and an higher budget, your departement made 500K instead of a million. How do you think the shareholders will react to the announcement ?

I totally agree with the rest of your analysis though. Advertising an "untold story" and finally cutting it out of the movie was a really bad move and makes indeed the movie look too similar to Spider-Man. And that's pretty much the reason why it's not performing as it should have. Rebooting is not an easy task and Batman Begins succeeded because it was a fresh take on the character with an original perspective. TASM sorely lacks that kind of singularity.

PS:

Not exactly,It'll make around 700ME WW,Spidey 1 made 800M

Since I'm talking about domestic numbers, Spider-Man made 403 millions back in 2002 that translates in 550 millions in 2012 with a 139 millions budget. On the other hand with a production budget around 230 millions TASM is very unlikly to earn much more than 275 millions.

 

[Spiderdevil]

As for Sony's expectations, the "early tracking numbers" your talking about don't reflect what they hope the movie will make on its first 6-days but what the polls and pre-sales showed the movie can make and that was already below what they expected.

So you work for sony aswell,Cool

Now as for the Batman reboot, sure maybe it'll make a little less money than the last two Nolan's but I garantee you that if the next installement makes less than 300 millions, it'll be a problem. Because there's no valid reason for a popular character to decay that much (unless there's a problem with the movie itself and the direction the franchise is taking).

BB made 200M domestically,wasnt a problem then

I mean these guys are here to make profits (and with that kind of franchise, huge profits), not to please fans or moviegoers. If Sony actually spent 220 millions to relaunch the Spider-Man franchise that's because they expected the movie to earn at least 300 millions (on the domestic market, keep in mind that I'm always talking about domestic numbers since the the studio only get a small share of the international revenues).

Didnt know about that

Let's put in a an other context. Imagine that you've just been appointed head of the Departement A at Corporate Whatever. Under your predecessors' regime the departement was highly profitable and made 1 million a year. Corporate Whatever also noticed that the market is more profitable now that it was before and they grant you with some extra budget and new offices for the coming year. At the end of the year you'll have to explain why, despite better circumstances and an higher budget, your departement made 500K instead of a million. How do you think the shareholders will react to the announcement ?

Sony had it coming,for 2 major reasons
1.10 years is too less for a reboot
2.They did an exact same type of plot as in SM1
The way they rushed into things,they arent in a postion to make high estimates,they must be thankful for whatever is coming their way
And they are doing the same for TASM2,rushing into it.It would be so much better to give Webb breathing space and time to work on the script

The best case senario would have been to put Andrew in a Cameo in Avengers and release the movie in mid 2013,away from TDKR and Avengers,with a better plot and a villian like Kingpin

Anyway,whats done is done

 

[JKKS085]

Studios/distributors usually get between 5 and 10% of the overseas gross while they get between 55 and 60% of the domestic gross (they get a higher percentage in the first days, that's another reason why a strong opening is important).

That's pretty much why I said that when you spend 230 millions to make a high-profile movie (not including the marketing costs) you should expect at least 300 millions domestically and a good performance overseas to cover your costs.

BB indeed made 200M domestically but that was more than Batman & Robin, Batman Forever and Batman Returns. Whatever TASM makes now that'll be less than Spider-Man, Spider-Man 2 and Spider-Man 3. And for a major studio, especially one working on a high profile franchise, a perspective of growth is often more interesting than (or at least as interesting as) huge numbers.

 

[Bruce Malone]

So you call it too similar before even the script has been finalised and not a single scene has been shot!!

Dude you are worse than Devin Faraci

I'm just assuming what will happened based on what they've set up. Either they keep a 30+ year old andrew Garfield as a hs student or they send him to college next installment. Or they skip several years ahead and go straight to adult less likely.

Also are you telling me they are not setting up for GG?

 

[Thwip!]

wait..Marc Webb in´t directing the sequel?

he's than likely directing it, he just means that sony wont give him that much free will with it, which is crap because its their editing job that a lot of people are having problems with, not with webb himself

 

[Tony Stark]

To me, I think it was a big mistake not having Jameson in this movie. Even in a cameo.

I agree. They didn't have to focus on him, but he should have been there none the less. Heck Jameson didn't have all that much screen time in SM1, just three scenes one where he tells the Bugle staff to get a decent picture of Spider-man, one where he meets Peter for the first time and one where the Goblin breaks into his office.

 

[metaphysician]

Studios/distributors usually get between 5 and 10% of the overseas gross while they get between 55 and 60% of the domestic gross (they get a higher percentage in the first days, that's another reason why a strong opening is important).

That's pretty much why I said that when you spend 230 millions to make a high-profile movie (not including the marketing costs) you should expect at least 300 millions domestically and a good performance overseas to cover your costs.

BB indeed made 200M domestically but that was more than Batman & Robin, Batman Forever and Batman Returns. Whatever TASM makes now that'll be less than Spider-Man, Spider-Man 2 and Spider-Man 3. And for a major studio, especially one working on a high profile franchise, a perspective of growth is often more interesting than (or at least as interesting as) huge numbers.

To the best of my knowledge, this *was* the case, but hasn't been really true for some years. Hollywood has finally realized that foreign releases aren't something you can ignore as unimportant. So, while they don't make as much on foreign releases as domestic, its not anywhere near that big a difference these days.

 

[Raiden]

Best thing to do would have been to go with Kingpin as the main villian and Shocker/Kraven as the secondary villian

I guess you don't know that Fox holds the movie rights of Kingpin, so he isn't available for Sony to use in a Spider-Man movie. Besides, I don't want to see Spider-Man fighting against someone like Kingpin who just isn't exciting visually or power-wise for Spider-Man.

 

[AbsractPo3tic]

To the best of my knowledge, this *was* the case, but hasn't been really true for some years. Hollywood has finally realized that foreign releases aren't something you can ignore as unimportant. So, while they don't make as much on foreign releases as domestic, its not anywhere near that big a difference these days.

Exactly. Which is why Disney is going to continue making Pirates movies until the foreign markets dry up.

@Raiden Avi and Matt Tolmach did an interview for superherohype last week saying that they loaned Kingpin to Fox for Daredevil but he's still a spider-man character and if a kingpin story comes along that they want to tell, they can tell it

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

I haven't seen the movie yet, but I'll be shocked if Webb returns based on what we know or is assumed. Unless they give him more leeway to do his thing. Or maybe he would bite his tongue and take the money.

But I think it's a strong chance we get a new director. And this time around the critiques would be justified. So start thinking of guys you would love to see directing the sequel and put it out there. Who knows it just may stick.

 

[JKKS085]

To the best of my knowledge, this *was* the case, but hasn't been really true for some years. Hollywood has finally realized that foreign releases aren't something you can ignore as unimportant. So, while they don't make as much on foreign releases as domestic, its not anywhere near that big a difference these days.

That's possible. Do you have any idea what kind of fraction of the foreign gross they get these days ?

Though I highly doubt that they get much more than 20% with distribution costs, taxes, currency conversion and trade dues. Those are mostly fixed costs that do not depend upon the will of studios (unlike foreign advertising, prints ...).

 

[chaseter]

Thats like saying BB wasnt needed

FFS it made just 370M world wide.Thats Pathetic money!!

No it's not like saying that. Batman and Robin made $107 million domestic and $238 WW with a budget of $125 million. It failed at the box office. It didn't even break even. Batman was in a desperate need for a reboot.

 

[ALP]

I totally agree. And it's like people have totally forgotten how there were 20 Bond films before they ever thought to reboot that series, with 5 different actors. Some films were successful, some weren't but that was the definition of a franchise. Now everyone wants to make a trillogy and then reboot. Comic books are a medium that begs for a long running series.

Yeah, it will really get tiring if every superhero franchise is rebooted with another origin story after every single trilogy.

In this case, I loved ASM and it ranks as my favorite Spider-Man movie but there was definitely reluctance on the part of the GA. Even every kid has seen Raimi's first Spider-Man and everyone was just going "why are they retelling this." I think it worked well for this film but I definitely caution against it after every trilogy. It even hurt this movie financially no doubt. I know I will be pissed if the next Batman movie covers his origins training in the mountains again for the first hour.

 

[Spiderdevil]

BB indeed made 200M domestically but that was more than Batman & Robin, Batman Forever and Batman Returns. Whatever TASM makes now that'll be less than Spider-Man, Spider-Man 2 and Spider-Man 3.

Batman and Robin,Batman Forever and Batman Returns are absulutely NOTHING in comparison to SM1,2 and 3.So not a legitimate comparison to start with

 

[Spiderdevil]

I'm just assuming what will happened based on what they've set up. Either they keep a 30+ year old andrew Garfield as a hs student or they send him to college next installment. Or they skip several years ahead and go straight to adult less likely.

Also are you telling me they are not setting up for GG?

You cant be so sure about that,Masse's sudden appearance and disappearance in a locked Jail cell looked more like Mysterio than Norman TBH

Also College life is hardly a similarity,we saw about 5 minutes of Peter's high school in SM1 and I dont think we ever saw his college in it.So how come that part is similar?

As for GG,I agree it is very difficult to better Dafoe's Potrayal as it was near perfect but lets see..The story surrounding him can be made different,along with his appearance and ofcourse Gwen Stacy's death...

 

[Spiderdevil]

I guess you don't know that Fox holds the movie rights of Kingpin, so he isn't available for Sony to use in a Spider-Man movie. Besides, I don't want to see Spider-Man fighting against someone like Kingpin who just isn't exciting visually or power-wise for Spider-Man.

Nope,Kingpin was on Loan to Fox,Arad said it himself in an interview

Basically all the Villians introduced in the Spiderman comics are under sony..

As for being visually exciting,Pair him with someone like Electro/Shocker
Problem solved

And Electro also works for Kingpin in the Ultimate Comics

 

[Spiderdevil]

No it's not like saying that. Batman and Robin made $107 million domestic and $238 WW with a budget of $125 million. It failed at the box office. It didn't even break even. Batman was in a desperate need for a reboot.

Basically TASM is as good(or pathetic) as BB

 

[JKKS085]

Batman and Robin,Batman Forever and Batman Returns are absulutely NOTHING in comparison to SM1,2 and 3.So not a legitimate comparison to start with

That's definitely relevant because the previous movies in both franchise set the studios' financial expectations regarding the new installements. Now the studio is thinking "What's the matter ? I used to earn 1 with the character 10 years ago why am I only making 0,5 today while I spent even more money on the new movie ?" That's simply how it works (and that's why Raimi lost creative control over SM3).

Like I said numerous times there is no legitimate reason (apart from the quality of the movie) for a character that is far more popular today than Batman was back in 2005 (and than Spider-Man was back in 2002) to have box office results that are actually much lower than any of the previous installements in the franchise. No matter how good they did (and SM3's numbers aren't exactly remarkable or completely out of reach for a big budget 3D movie these days).

 

[GuestStar2004]

i see the news articles of

'The Amazing Spiderman' vs. 'The Dark Knight Rises'
‎
have already started, its a shame that this is going to be troll food

 

[ALP]

Now that the first film has proven itself, the second shoud make more as long as its good. Just like TDK. People were skeptical of the first because it followed a lousy film that ended the previous series.

 

[Spiderdevil]

That's definitely relevant because the previous movies in both franchise set the studios' financial expectations regarding the new installements. Now the studio is thinking "What's the matter ? I used to earn 1 with the character 10 years ago why am I only making 0,5 today while I spent even more money on the new movie ?" That's simply how it works (and that's why Raimi lost creative control over SM3).

BB wasnt the highest grossing Batman of its time even when the highest Grossing was quite low in itself,but WB didnt give up.They didnt go 'Hey the 1989 movie earned 420M from a 35M budget and this one even after being shot 16 years later and with a 5 time more budget,has earned 50M lower,Poor decision from Business standpoint,we are doomed,the quality sucks,no creativity...Blah blabity blah'

Batman faced the same situation in 2005 that TASM is facing now,another superhero was much more popular and thus it was pretty difficult to earn despite being a good movie

Like I said numerous times there is no legitimate reason (apart from the quality of the movie) for a character that is far more popular today than Batman was back in 2005 (and than Spider-Man was back in 2002) to have box office results that are actually much lower than any of the previous installements in the franchise. No matter how good they did (and SM3's numbers aren't exactly remarkable or completely out of reach for a big budget 3D movie these days).

There are reasons
1.Popularity of the character isnt what it used to be,Batman and The Avengers have taken over
2.Too early reboot
3.Same source material

Unless you work for sony,stop saying its below their expectations or anything

 

[roach]

So what is the Box office comparison of this film to the Raimi series?

 

[JKKS085]

BB wasnt the highest grossing Batman of its time even when the highest Grossing was quite low in itself,but WB didnt give up.They didnt go 'Hey the 1989 movie earned 420M from a 35M budget and this one even after being shot 16 years later and with a 5 time more budget,has earned 50M lower,Poor decision from Business standpoint,we are doomed,the quality sucks,no creativity...Blah blabity blah'

Batman Begins received better reviews than TASM and outgrossed 3 out of the 4 previous Batman movies (TASM will outgross none of the Raimi's movies, you know that 3 is better than none right ?). And it also opened bigger than any of them (wich means more income for the studios), then again TASM has the lower opening of all the Spider-Man movies.

They couldn't think that it was a poor business decision because Batman Begins IMPROVED over Batman Returns, Batman Forever and Batman & Robin (financially et critically, at least for the last two). Now with TASM the situation is different you have a character that is at the peak of its popularity (and it's nothing like Batman that suffered badly from two terrible movies), you have 2 out of the first 3 films of the franchise that were critically acclaimed (and the last one that received mixed to positive reviews) and ended up being quite huge financially and yet the movie is grossing significantly lower than any of its predecessors despite that excellent reputation. I've never said that Sony should give up but they'd better be concerned because it might as well be all downhill from here. And given the financial situation of the studio, they surely can't afford to spoil a highly profitable property such à Spider-Man.

There are reasons
1.Popularity of the character isnt what it used to be,Batman and The Avengers have taken over
2.Too early reboot
3.Same source material

Unless you work for sony,stop saying its below their expectations or anything

1. Popularity is more than enough, especially with ticket price inflation, to garantee 300 millions domestic if you have an interesting movie to show. Spider-Man is still, by far, the most revered Marvel solo character. You try to make it sound like it suddenly became a B-List character. BTW none of the Marvel solo films outgrossed the Raimi's Spider-Man.
2. agreed
3. agreed

Finally (and I've pretty much said everything I had to say, this thing starts to sound a little too repetitive for my tastes), when you spend around 300 millions for a movie (marketing included), 300 millions domestic is the very least you expect. That's basic maths.