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

[spider-neil]

As long as it makes enough for a sequel that's good enough for me. Also a smaller budget for ASM2 may force them to do more effects 'in camera' which may actually help the look and tone of the movie.

 

[sontin]

Really, if you think about the movie (ignore anything that is opinion), there is no reason to believe that the movie would do anything more than it did. Fits right into the X-men level of business.

Star Power
Director Power
Uniqueness in the market place
Expectation
Marketing tie-ins
Target audience
Competition

TAS lost in each of these categories before it even hit the screen.

But it's the "Spider-Man" tag, which selling the movie. Nobody thought that Spider-Man 1 would be so huge. Spider-Man 1 dropped 37,6% against Atack of the Clones and still holds the best second weekend drop for a movie. The problem with TASM is that it is as best an average movie appealing only to the Spider-Man and Comic fanbase. And with Batman around the corner i guess it will get killed in every market...

 

[hatebox]

But it's the "Spider-Man" tag, which selling the movie. Nobody thought that Spider-Man 1 would be so huge. Spider-Man 1 dropped 37,6% against Atack of the Clones and still holds the best second weekend drop for a movie.

I assume you mean 'superhero' movie, as Avatar drop about 2% in its second weekend.

 

[sontin]

I assume you mean 'superhero' movie, as Avatar drop about 2% in its second weekend.

Oh, thx for the correction.

 

[Spiderdevil]

You realize money isn't going to secure the franchize right??
Look to Spider-Man 3 if you don't know what I mean.

They had no problems with SM3
They were going forward and SM4
They had some problems over the script and Raimi beleived he didnt have enough time to complete the movie in the short time given
He quit and sony decided to reboot the franchise
Rebooting had nothing to do with SM3 being bad

 

[Spiderdevil]

You keep on making the same mistake all over again.
Studios don't get 100% of the DVD/BR sales back.

What Percentage would sony get?

And as for the Spider-Man franchise almost the entire merchandise revenue goes back to Marvel (part of the deal on the character's rights).

Yeah I remember now,The merchandise rights are with Disney,not sure about the details though

But sure the movie will be profitable ... at some point, if you keep on cruching the numbers and hope for excellent home video sales/rentals (without the studio having to spend to much money on advertising). Therein lies TASM's problem.

I am not hoping for excellent home video sales/rentals,As you see,I have assumed it would sell half of what SM1 did

 

[Spiderdevil]

I have a feeling advertisement is included in the budget shown,and even if its not,I dont think it will be that huge

 

[milesalpha]

Well considering that filming in 3D is costly and TASM did that which increased its budget,I dont see why you need to substract the 3D earning and Imax



The Budget of BB would also ride up to 190M adjusted for inflation

You have to level the playing field.
Yes.

 

[milesalpha]

Lets says it budget is 300M including advertising

Lets assume it would end up at 260M Domestic and 450M Oversees
So that means its actual earnings would be
55% of 260M=145M app
15% of 450M=70M app

So thats 215M earnings from box office

SM1 sold its TV Rights for 60M,DVD sales 340M(As of 2004),Merchandise sales 110M,VHS Revenue 90M which puts its net non-boxoffice earnings on 600M,adjusted for inflamation it would be more than 700M

If we assume TASM would earn only half that then its 350M ex-BoxOffice earnings
Thats puts its total earnings on 215+350=565
Which means a net profit of 265M at the very least

Going by a similar calculations BB would have earned 100M net

Close enough on everything except you have not placed a cost on the post box office revenues, the 350M is not pure profit.

 

[milesalpha]

But it's the "Spider-Man" tag, which selling the movie. Nobody thought that Spider-Man 1 would be so huge. Spider-Man 1 dropped 37,6% against Atack of the Clones and still holds the best second weekend drop for a movie. The problem with TASM is that it is as best an average movie appealing only to the Spider-Man and Comic fanbase. And with Batman around the corner i guess it will get killed in every market...

Well, I don't know about the nobody thought that SM1 would be huge part, but agree with the rest.

 

[milesalpha]

What Percentage would sony get?


Yeah I remember now,The merchandise rights are with Disney,not sure about the details though


I am not hoping for excellent home video sales/rentals,As you see,I have assumed it would sell half of what SM1 did

Half of what SM1 did on video would be fairly ambitious, looking at the numbers for similar movies, 15-20% seems more likely.

 

[milesalpha]

I have a feeling advertisement is included in the budget shown,and even if its not,I dont think it will be that huge

Should be pretty easy, look back to when the movie was announced and check it's budget. You can also find this mentioned on most of the major box office sites.

 

[AvengeME]

Lets says it budget is 300M including advertising

Lets assume it would end up at 260M Domestic and 450M Oversees
So that means its actual earnings would be
55% of 260M=145M app
15% of 450M=70M app

So thats 215M earnings from box office

SM1 sold its TV Rights for 60M,DVD sales 340M(As of 2004),Merchandise sales 110M,VHS Revenue 90M which puts its net non-boxoffice earnings on 600M,adjusted for inflamation it would be more than 700M

If we assume TASM would earn only half that then its 350M ex-BoxOffice earnings
Thats puts its total earnings on 215+350=565
Which means a net profit of 265M at the very least

Going by a similar calculations BB would have earned 100M net

Meaning the 265 million would go right back into the sequel.... plus marketing... plus inflation... plus God knows what else.

So who is to say they turn the same profit again and again? In this economy it is simply not enough. 700 million while solid, is not as pretty as a 750-800 million number. Every dollar counts.

 

[Jick]

Well, but they wouldn't spend exactly 265M with the budget alone with the sequel, right?
I mean, they can, but they'll probably play it safe.
I heard that they spent nearly 50M with SM4, so TASM's true budget would be around 180M. I can picture the sequel costing between that and 210 million. Then comes the marketing.

 

[Spiderdevil]

Meaning the 265 million would go right back into the sequel.... plus marketing... plus inflation... plus God knows what else.

If you take it that way then every bit of money TASM2 will make will be straightout profit from day 1

 

[Spiderdevil]

Half of what SM1 did on video would be fairly ambitious, looking at the numbers for similar movies, 15-20% seems more likely.

SM3 was reviewed terribly and yet it earned 170M from DVD sales and rentals,adjusted for inflation it would be over 200M
I dont see how assuming TASM will earn atleast 170M from DVD sales is being over ambitious

 

[sontin]

But more people watched SM3 in the cinema. Here in germany TASM lost more than half of the audience. Looking at the boxoffice run in the USA it's in the same league.

And in a year with The Avengers and Batman i don't think people will choose TASM over both movies.

 

[AvengeME]

If you take it that way then every bit of money TASM2 will make will be straightout profit from day 1

If it makes the same proft. It should- probably will. But you just can't be cetain that the sequel will keep adding on more dollars. Eventually you hit that proverbial plateau and that's that.

The point is, if you keep dumping your profit into more Spidey movies, what exactly is Spidey paying for? If they net 300-350 in profits after the trilogy then it is a solid investment. They have funding for 2-3 big budget films with that in the future. But then you factor in company losses and flops and some of that Spidey money goes there, so all they really got is a budget for the next couple of tentpoles that will surely be less profitable than Spidey. Whereas the OT netted much more pure profit back in 2007 which amounts to much more gains than anything this trilogy can hope for.

 

[milesalpha]

SM3 was reviewed terribly and yet it earned 170M from DVD sales and rentals,adjusted for inflation it would be over 200M
I dont see how assuming TASM will earn atleast 170M from DVD sales is being over ambitious

SM3 is not a particularly good comparison, it's box office was far higher, target audience far wider, 3rd part of a trilogy (people love to own sets). Video rental is not a significant portion of a film's revenues any more and this makes an enormous difference. Have a look at DVD sales in 2007 and then check the top 10 for each year after, notice the steady decline. In 2007 6 movies cracked the 10 million units sold mark, in every year after, only one movie has managed that number. Your figure would put TAS above the recent Potters, the last Twilight, and all Disney and Pixar releases in first year sales.

It should sell better than Cap, X-Men FC, or Thor (Spiderman is marvel's big character after all) but even if we allow for double their figures, that only puts it in the 40-50 million area.

Sorry it lacks the needed ingredients for huge DVD sales, kid friendly or huge box office are the biggest drivers in DVD sales.

I should add the reviews mean dick to sales. I can pretty much guarantee they are the last thing that a potential buyer (corporate or retail) would consider (see the Transformer movies).

 

[Jexx]

The budget including advertisement is $305 million according to boxoffice.com

 

[Spiderdevil]

And in a year with The Avengers and Batman i don't think people will choose TASM over both movies.

Batman's done,there wont be a batman movie for another 10 years
As for Avengers,I dont think Avengers 2 will come out untill 2016

So the stage is clear for TASM,the cast is set,we've got a nice tone
Just a good script and a commanding choice to play the villian and TASM2 will have TDK-esque success

 

[Spiderdevil]

The point is, if you keep dumping your profit into more Spidey movies, what exactly is Spidey paying for? If they net 300-350 in profits after the trilogy then it is a solid investment. They have funding for 2-3 big budget films with that in the future. But then you factor in company losses and flops and some of that Spidey money goes there, so all they really got is a budget for the next couple of tentpoles that will surely be less profitable than Spidey. Whereas the OT netted much more pure profit back in 2007 which amounts to much more gains than anything this trilogy can hope for.

Had WB though like that after BB,we wouldnt have the fantastic trilogy

 

[Spiderdevil]

It should sell better than Cap, X-Men FC, or Thor (Spiderman is marvel's big character after all) but even if we allow for double their figures, that only puts it in the 40-50 million area.

TIH alone has 60M for the DVD sales and we all know that this movie and popularity of the character is a lot better than Hulk,I am pretty sure TASM will have more than double of that

Sorry it lacks the needed ingredients for huge DVD sales, kid friendly or huge box office are the biggest drivers in DVD sales.

BB lacked those aswell,yet it did fine in that area

 

[The Joker]

Wow, I was pleasantly surprised to see the movie jumped to 614 mil worldwide

 

[Pedro Parque]

Iron Man and Iron Man 2 were ultimately far more successful than TASM.

And I don't think a Spider-Man movie beating a Thor/Cap movie is really worth celebrating, I mean this is Spider-Man we're talking about, reboot or not.

For everyone who keeps bringing up it's doing good for a reboot don't most modern reboots make more money than their predecessor?

Begins did, Casino royale did, even the TIH did. Now i don't know if sony were expecting TASM to match S3 numbers i think they were hoping for it be close at least though, i think otherwise they probably would have just pushed ahead with spider-man 4 which would have been a more sure thing.

Sorry, but you two couldn't be more wrong. The Amazing Spider-Man, very much like Batman Begins back in 2005, it's a reboot of a superhero franchise. And as a reboot of a superhero franchise, it's set to become the highest grossing reboot of all time.

Let's take a look at the numbers.

1. The Amazing Spider-Man (2012): $614,611,425 WW (3rd weekend)
2. Iron Man 2 (2010): $623,933,331 WW
3. Iron Man (2008): $585,174,222 WW
4. Thor (2011): $449,326,618
5. Captain America: First Avenger (2011): $368,608,363
6. The Incredible Hulk (2008): $263,427,551

So taking in context with his fellow Marvel Films, The Amazing Spider-Man is bound to keep the crown as the highest grossing solo Marvel superhero. The only Marvel property based on Marvel characters that made more than any other Spider-Man film is The Avengers, which is an assemble never done before kind of superhero film.

Now if we look to the other reboots:

1. The Amazing Spider-Man (2012): Domestic $228,611,425 + Foreign $386,000,000 = $614,611,425 WW (3rd weekend)
2. Star Trek (2009): Domestic $257,730,019 + Foreign $127,950,427 = $385,680,446 WW
3. Batman Begins (2005): Domestic $205,343,774 + Foreign $167,366,241 = $372,710,015 WW
4. Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011): Domestic $176,760,185 + Foreign $305,040,68 = $481,800,873 WW
5. Cassino Royale (2006): Domestic $167,445,960 + Foreign $426,793,106 = $594,239,066 WW
6. X-Men First Class = Domestic $146,408,305 + Foreign $207,215,819 = $353,624,124

Even though the foreign grosses counting isn't how Bruce Malone quoted from an article some pages ago, The Amazing Spider-Man still comes up on the road of becoming the highest grossing reboot of all time, topping Star Trek in domestic grossings and with a far more profitable foreign grossing.

So let's see:

Still biggest solo superhero Marvel solo franchise: Check
Biggest box office reboot of all time: Check
Successfully making a reboot that pleases new and old fans: Check

Unlike you two have posted, neither Iron Man 1 and 2 were bigger successes than The Amazing Spider-Man or the purpose of a reboot is to make more than its previous film. The purpose of a reboot is to get a franchise back in a position of being profitable again. The Amazing Spider-Man achieves that in spades, and it has still a shot of topping Spider-Man 2 WW grosses, which is $783,766,341. And even if doesn't top that, I have a feeling that just like Batman Begins compared to TDK, the sequel will benefit from a huge jump in the grosses. So yeah, my point is that Sony not only managed to make the second best superhero film of the year and best Spider-Man film yet, The Amazing Spider-Man is a winner.

And I pity those who rooted against it. The Dark Knight Rises seems that will have FAR MORE problems to break even without blu-ray sales than The Amazing Spider-Man ever will.

This summer has been incredible for superhero movies.
Avengers
ASM
TDKR

I've loved all three movies and all 3 are day one Blu ray purchases. If I have to put them in order of enjoyement it would be;
1. TDKR
2. ASM
3. Avengers

It has been an incredible summer for superhero movies indeed, and like you I'll be purchasing the blu ray releases of all of them. With that said, I can't deny how disappointed I am with TDKR. For all the talk of Best Picture nominations, I was ready to see The Amazing Spider-Man as 3rd and The Avengers as 2nd best superhero film of the year. Instead I'm rating them like this:

1. The Avengers 10/10
2. The Amazing Spider-Man 9.5/10
3. The Dark Knight Rises 4/10

I'm still thankful to Nolan for two of the best Batman films ever though.