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

[roach]

they already have announced the sequel..ramifications of the BO will be determined at a later date...im guessing it will be a lower budget

 

[spider-neil]

they already have announced the sequel..ramifications of the BO will be determined at a later date...im guessing it will be a lower budget

Didn't WB announce a sequel for Green Lantern?

A smaller budget isn't a big deal if you choose the right villian.
That 230m budget sounds CRAZY, with that kind of money they could have got Weta or ILM to do the effects.

 

[AF3619]

they already have announced the sequel..ramifications of the BO will be determined at a later date...im guessing it will be a lower budget

i hope TASM 2 will make more money, they really need to top their game if they don´t want to loose the rights

 

[roach]

Didn't WB announce a sequel for Green Lantern?

A smaller budget isn't a big deal if you choose the right villian.
That 230m budget sounds CRAZY, with that kind of money they could have got Weta or ILM to do the effects.

I don't think they ever did announce a sequel.

 

[roach]

i hope TASM 2 will make more money, they really need to top their game if they don´t want to loose the rights

as long as they keep making movies they will keep the rights

 

[AF3619]

as long as they keep making movies they will keep the rights

but what if they have to sell the rights? are they still in danger of going bankrupt?

 

[roach]

this movie reminds me of Superman Returns in some ways.

SR cost 209M and did 391M at the BO
It took its weekend and posted a 5 day record
It would have gone on to do more but two films came out and slaughtered it: The Devil Wears Prada and POTC Dead men's chest

 

[GuestStar2004]

if sony did end up giving the rights back to marvel could we expect marvel to carry on makin sequels for TASM?

 

[roach]

if sony did end up giving the rights back to marvel could we expect marvel to carry on makin sequels for TASM?

I would expect a whole new cast and crew...if this movie doesn't break even why would Marvel continue with a "Failed" series

 

[AF3619]

if sony did end up giving the rights back to marvel could we expect marvel to carry on makin sequels for TASM?

Didn´t something like that happened to Chronicles of Narnia?

 

[Jick]

Hopefully, we won't have a CGI villain in the next movie, so maybe they can have a smaller budget?

 

[AF3619]

Hopefully, we won't have a CGI villain in the next movie, so maybe they can have a smaller budget?

true.. maybe if they are using GG they make him like the classic and not Ultimate

 

[roach]

its a little more than that....they still used digital stuntmen for Spiderman

 

[grieven]

they already have announced the sequel..ramifications of the BO will be determined at a later date...im guessing it will be a lower budget

I'm remembering now that when movies go through development hell, all the money spent during the process, even if unseen in the final movie, goes into the movie's costs. So if Sony spent $50 million to develop Spider-Man 4 (made up number) and then scrapped it all to do a reboot, that $50 million goes into the costs of The Amazing Spider-Man. Same thing happened with Superman Returns I think, or some other such film. I have no idea how much of the resulting SM4 costs were carried over to TAS, but I'm sure it wasn't negligible (time costs of writers, Raimi, concept art, early cgi for characters like Vulture, etc).

As for the sequel, since the writers, actors, and director (hopefully Webb comes back) are in place, they can just spend the money on the sequel to TAS rather than try to find their footing like with the last film. I think it's critical not to short-change the film, make TAS2 everything it can be. If that means spending $230 million or more then so be it. It will pay dividends down the road, don't try to "go cheap".

 

[roach]

while I agree with your sentiments studios are a business and if a movie doesn't break even but they want to continue they will do so with a lower budget

 

[Spider-Dude23]

I'm remembering now that when movies go through development hell, all the money spent during the process, even if unseen in the final movie, goes into the movie's costs. So if Sony spent $50 million to develop Spider-Man 4 (made up number) and then scrapped it all to do a reboot, that $50 million goes into the costs of The Amazing Spider-Man. Same thing happened with Superman Returns I think, or some other such film. I have no idea how much of the resulting SM4 costs were carried over to TAS, but I'm sure it wasn't negligible (time costs of writers, Raimi, concept art, early cgi for characters like Vulture, etc).

As for the sequel, since the writers, actors, and director (hopefully Webb comes back) are in place, they can just spend the money on the sequel to TAS rather than try to find their footing like with the last film. I think it's critical not to short-change the film, make TAS2 everything it can be. If that means spending $230 million or more then so be it. It will pay dividends down the road, don't try to "go cheap".

I agree 100%.
This film is getting such a hard time because it's an origin story. But the sequel has so much potential and i honestly think it could pull a TDK.

 

[grieven]

while I agree with your sentiments studios are a business and if a movie doesn't break even but they want to continue they will do so with a lower budget

I'm not advocating breaking the bank, the money has to be spent wisely and not indiscriminently. But Spider-Man is Sony Picture's cash cow, golden goose, or any other such animal/money comparison. They've got to take care of their franchise, make great Spidey movies that people will want to keep spending money to see. It's critical they make the best movies they can.

 

[roach]

I'm not advocating breaking the bank, the money has to be spent wisely and not indiscriminently. But Spider-Man is Sony Picture's cash cow, golden goose, or any other such animal/money comparison. They've got to take care of their franchise, make great Spidey movies that people will want to keep spending money to see. It's critical they make the best movies they can.

right now this movie is in danger of not breaking even...so while it may have been a cash cow it may no longer be (and I do realize I am counting my chickens before they hatch)

 

[grieven]

right now this movie is in danger of not breaking even...so while it may have been a cash cow it may no longer be (and I do realize I am counting my chickens before they hatch)

I'm not sure where the perception is coming from that the movie is in danger of not making it's money back. While not making as much as its predecessors, it looks on track to make $600-$700 million worldwide. It's already banked $400 million worldwide in just a little over a week. It's still Sony's cash cow, whether or not Ol' Bessy is churning out milk the way she has in the past is another matter. As long as they make a great followup sequel, I have no doubt the cow will be healthy as ever.

Link probably won't work but:

http://www.**************.com/fansites/JoshWildingNewsAndReviews/news/?a=63526

 

[Bruce Malone]

It's not at 400m yet. As for the sequel even though its slotted in at 2014, with negotiations with webb and other factors i would not be surprised if sony makes an announcement regarding the film being pushed back a year.

 

[Spider-Dude23]

If the movie was pushed back a year. I wouldnt mind to much. It'd give them time to come up with a brilliant script.

 

[rayc1971]

they already have announced the sequel..ramifications of the BO will be determined at a later date...im guessing it will be a lower budget

i still say it might not happen tehy still can scrap the sequel.this movie cost 230mill not counting marketing if it makes only 250mill thatsnot good enough.the studio makes more profit from the domestic number that the overseas number.but if they do continue with the sequel they will get the right villain for a cheaper budget say around 175mill like man of steel is.i think the budget was that high because of the lizard cgi.can you believe the first spiderman only cost 139mill and looked just as good.

 

[rayc1971]

http://io9.com/5747305/how-much-money-does-a-movie-need-to-make-to-be-profitable





If TASM makes 275 millions domestic and 425 overseas for a total of 700 millions, the studio will roughly take 215 millions.

If the budget is indeed 330 millions (230 for production and 100 for marketing) they won't even break even with a 700 millions theatrical run.

right people dont realize the domestic number is more profit 55% domestic 15%overseas so people throw those worldwide numbers out there thinkin its all profit.700mill ww is only breakin even.

 

[grieven]

It's not at 400m yet. As for the sequel even though its slotted in at 2014, with negotiations with webb and other factors i would not be surprised if sony makes an announcement regarding the film being pushed back a year.

Article says will break $400 million by end of today.

If they push the movie back a year, so be it. Just make it worth the wait!

 

[rayc1971]

Article says will break $400 million by end of today.

If they push the movie back a year, so be it. Just make it worth the wait!

yeah that might be a good move they dont have webb signed yet.to make that 2014 date is going to be a rush job they would hve to be shooting by jan 2013.i dont why they are rushing with 2yr s between films i mean i know raimi did it but he had a plan and was already in production during spiderman 1.i read webb is not signed and neither is garfield but they have the sequel slated for may 2014.