The Amazing Spider-Man The Amazing Spider-Man: Box Office Thread - Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Anything wrong with that?

Did I say there was anything wrong with that? Only said it's because of 3D that Avengers is on top. That's not saying it's right or wrong. You're jumping to conclusions.

Has anyone ever forced you to watch in 3D?
You are obviously against it because of it being the reason for TDKR not getting close to Avengers

:lmao:

Here you go assuming with what you don't know again.

So when I spoke about Avatar being in 3D...it was because of TDKR, correct? :lmao:

Nope,TDKR still wouldnt have matched it despite having a 30% increased budget.I dont see a closer race.
Opening week aside Avengers would always win if you see the final numbers,it has better legs.3D or not.Shooting or not

47077d1328734115-google-chrome-android-beta-available-now-notsureifserious.png


I don't understand.. why do you hate 3D?

3D done well is very very good.

I really enjoyed the 3D for The Amazing Spider-Man in IMAX 3D, it didn't feel disconcerting at all.

Just don't like it. I saw Toy Story 3 on 3D, but that was just because my girlfriend wanted to see it, but in an animated film, it's fine. Live-action, not so much. Watching Avatar in 3D was annoying, and that was supposed to be the big-named film carrying the 3D torch. I mean, the story itself was garbage and then I had to sit through 3D...what a tragic day.
 
Still, I felt like 3D done well is actually really enjoyable, it's just that today's 3D usually isn't well done.
 
Okay dude...

The Avengers - 7-Day total is $270,019,373

The Dark Knight Rises - 7-Day total is $224,829,000

Take out $30 million from 3D and add the $20 million that was expected before the shooting and it would be

The Avengers: $240 million

The Dark Knight Rises: $240 million

The race would have been way closer.

Hmmm, earlier you said that without the shootings and 3D TDKR would have beaten the Avengers and now you're saying "the race would have been way closer".
So which one is it? :whatever:
 
Can we discuss TASM more in a thread about that film's box office and take TDKR vs Avengers ego stroking to the appropriate forums?
 
Can we discuss TASM more in a thread about that film's box office and take TDKR vs Avengers ego stroking to the appropriate forums?

Yeah, sheesh. How did we get from batman to avengers? This is supposed to be about Spiderman.
 
Hmmm, earlier you said that without the shootings and 3D TDKR would have beaten the Avengers and now you're saying "the race would have been way closer".
So which one is it? :whatever:

Well, if you read what I say...I'm only comparing the first seven days on that one :up:

But, yah, I just needed to reply to that, but, moving on to just Spidey.

What place do you guys think TAS-M will be when the dust settles this week?
 
For the week? Third..
 
Oh, I forgot that released today. I dunno then.

EDIT:

Just for future reference.. I'm mostly a gamer, not a movie-goer.
 
Did I say there was anything wrong with that? Only said it's because of 3D that Avengers is on top. That's not saying it's right or wrong. You're jumping to conclusions.
Then whats the point of mentioning it?


Here you go assuming with what you don't know again.

So when I spoke about Avatar being in 3D...it was because of TDKR, correct?
What else should I decipher then when you are so adamant to take out Avengers 3D earnings to look TDKR earnings look comparative?



TA is close to 1.5 billion
TDKR at the end of its run will have 1.1 Billion at the most.And I dont believe a difference of 400 million is due to 3D or shooting



Just don't like it. I saw Toy Story 3 on 3D, but that was just because my girlfriend wanted to see it, but in an animated film, it's fine. Live-action, not so much. Watching Avatar in 3D was annoying, and that was supposed to be the big-named film carrying the 3D torch. I mean, the story itself was garbage and then I had to sit through 3D...what a tragic day.
Avatar's story was garbage and the only reason I stayed to watch it all was because the 3D was very good
Ditto with TASM,the 3D was very good in the action set pieces which is why I saw it twice in 3D.Thats one of the reason I though they should have had more action
As I said,no one is forcing you to watch in 3D,people who watch it in that format enjoy it and are willing to pay extra for it
 
I thought the 3D in TASM was great in every scene, not just the action sequences :/
 
I know a lot of people who were big fans of Raimi's movies but started liking Nolan's Batman and Avengers after that
My point being Spider-man is now the 3rd most liked character now after Batman and Avengers(not exactly a 'character') when he was the undisputed 1st in 2007.
Big Difference

Yes 3rd like character but when you compare it with 500 millions and more earning movies. I've never said that Spider-Man should have beaten the Avengers or TDK but considering the character's popularity and the reputation of the Raimi trilogy (except for the last movie, wich still was a huge public success), the help of 3D (wich mean it had to sell less tickets), it should have grossed above 300 millions (domestically). Unless there's a problem with the movie or the direction of the franchise.

I remember having the same exact discussion after Spider-Man 3 and Iron Man 2. Explaining during endless debates that the fact their last installements were less successfull (domestically) than their predecessors will hurt both franchises. The result is Raimi left Spider-Man 4 over some creative differences with the studio (wich means they probably interfered too much during pre-production for his tastes) and Shane Black replaced Jon Favreau in the director chair for Iron Man 3 (things were different but he blamed Marvel for being too insistant with the Avengers set up that, in his opinion, hurted the movie).

Compare TASM to BB not TDK
And if Nolan 'earned' the freedom through BB,why do you think Webb hasnt despite TASM being more successful box-office wise?

Because Sony is not WB (the studio is known for heavily interfering during productions), and because Webb doesn't have Nolan's experience nor is as critically acclaimed as Nolan was after Batman Begins (and that's really important when it comes to freedom. Fincher makes movies free of studio interferences, despite poor box office figures, just because he often receives tremendous reviews).

Indeed TASM will get better numbers but it'll end up being just as profitable as BB (0.9$ earned for every dollar spent, marketing costs aside).

The money earned was due to SM1 and 2's reputation.The movie is still disliked almost as much as B&R,and it is more fresher in people's mind than B&R was in 2005.

Spider-Man 3 received a fresh rating on rottentomatoes (with 72% of the audience liking the movie, on imdb the average rating is 6.3/10). I personnaly think that it was a mediocre movie but its public and critical reception is nowhere near the disaster B&R was for the Batman franchise (12% on the tomatoemeter, and 3.6 over at imdb).

(To see how TASM and BB's earnings are compared to the highest grossing in their respective franchise)
BB/Batman(1989) = 410/646 = 0.63
TASM/SM3 = 700/1118 = 0.62

Wich is more interesting to see (because your calculation includes raw international numbers) is that TASM will be the first SM movie not to break even over the course of it's theatrical run. So far, here's how the SM franchise looks like in term of profit figures, not accounting for marketing costs.

Spider-Man: 139 million PB / 284,3 million back to Sony
$2,04 profit for every dollar they spent

Spider-Man 2: 200 million PB / 266,65 million back to Sony
$1,33 profit for every dollar they spent

Spider-Man 3: 258 millions PB / 267,9 million back to Sony
$1,33 profit for every dollar they spent

(If TASM makes 255 millions domestically and 450 millions overseas)
TASM: 230 millions PB / 207,75 millions back to sony
$0,10 loss for every dollar spent.

Batman Begins (that has around the same profitability profil as TASM's still not accounting marketing cost) came after a movie that lost 50 million dollars and it managed to almost restore the profitability of the franchise. TASM on the other hand came after a profitable movie but will fail, for the first time in the franchise, to break even. That makes for a totally different context.

Please explain to me your logic,How can interfering with the movie guarantee them more income?

Because they'll micromanage the movie, making sure it'll please every target they can possibly think of, not letting the creative team in charge the opportunity to make the movie they want. Maybe that works for shampoos but when I go see movie I expect watching something else other than just a marketing product.

Untill it does that,its in loss here.
I can also state than TASM's DVDs are gonna sell like hot cakes but thats not the point,The thing we are talking about now are box office earnings

Indeed, and from that stand point TDKR will report lower loses than TASM.

I am only quoting the hollywood economist because its the only site which gives the percentage of Box office earnings
I still have a hard time believing that the studios spend dozens of millions promoting the film overseas and in the end they get some 15% of the ticket sales

Those 15% are after expenses (that includes marketing cost).

Did Arad said it himself to your 'source'?
'Hey you know we are expecting 300M in ticket sales domestically'
Sorry but I will believe what Arad has himself said in an interview and Sony's statement afterwards stating that they are pleased with the numbers

My "source" is an excutive over at Sony Pictures Releasing France so while I doubt he got it from Arad himself (who isn't on Sony's payroll BTW) I fully trust his word. Then again, aftewards, every studio is publicly pleased with their movies' numbers. That's PR 101.

And you CLEARLY NEED to learn some manners

Probably and for that I apologize. English is not my first language and when I'm irritated I may sound too harsh. Hope there's no hurt feelings. ;)
 
Last edited:
TASM still needs to release in China dude, the movie's gonna break even in theaters.

EDIT: Besides that, including advertising they spent $305 million, the movie already broke even.
 
I guess I'll have to be the bigger man and listen to the mod when he said stick to Spidey :up:

Anywho...so, TAS-M got down to the sixth spot apparently. TDKR, Step Up Revolution, The Watch, Ice Age 4, Ted, TAS-M.
 
I don't even understand how Ted jumped up.
 
TASM still needs to release in China dude, the movie's gonna break even in theaters.

EDIT: Besides that, including advertising they spent $305 million, the movie already broke even.

No it won't, even with a 305 million budget (including marketing). But like I said in previous posts there is no way Sony only spent 75 millions to promote TASM.

The low domestic figures are the TASM's problem. So basically no matter how much it makes in China (unless it's a billion dollars) the movie won't break even in theatres.
 
No it won't, even with a 305 million budget (including marketing). Like I said in previous posts there is no way Sony only spent 85 millions to promote TASM.

The low domestic figures are the TASM's problem. So basically no matter how much it makes in China (unless it's a billion dollars) the movie won't break even in theatres.

:huh: Hasn't it already broke even? 305 million budget, it's worldwide total is 600+ million
 
No because the studio only gets back around 55% of the domestic gross and 15% of the overseas revenue.
 
Last edited:
Yes 3rd like character from franchises with 500 millions and more earning movies. I've never said that Spider-Man should have beaten the Avengers or TDK but considering the character's popularity and the reputation of the Raimi trilogy (except for the last movie, wich still was a huge public success), the help of 3D (wich mean it had to sell less tickets), it should have grossed above 300 millions (domestically).
As I've been saying,the popularity isnt the same as it was in 2007

Because Sony is not WB (the studio is known for heavily interfering during productions), and because Webb doesn't have Nolan's experience nor is as critically acclaimed as Nolan was after Batman Begins (and that's really important when it comes to freedom. Fincher makes movies free of studio interferences, despite poor box office figures, just because he often receives tremendous reviews).
That is if Webb returns for TASM2,he may not return and sony may appoint a bigger director and give him creative freedom
Point is,nothing is certain at this point,we cant jump to conclusions
As for domestic earnings,it was a terrible time to release the movie,between two superhero heavy weights
People will definitely go see the TA and TDKR and you cant expect them to watch 3 superhero movies in a span of 2 months
I Believe had this movie been released near september or october,it would have crossed 300M

Indeed TASM will get better numbers but it'll end up being just as profitable as BB (0.9$ earned for every dollar spent, marketing costs aside).
So whats the point of your panic then?

Spider-Man 3 received a fresh rating on rottentomatoes (with 72% of the audience liking the movie, on imdb the average rating is 6.3/10). I personnaly think that it was a mediocre movie but its public and critical reception is nowhere near the disaster B&R was for the Batman franchise (12% on the tomatoemeter, and 3.6 over at imdb).
I tend to agree but the expectations of SM3 was a lot lot more than B&R which is why it felt like a bigger failure which it wasnt


Wich is more interesting to see (because your calculation includes raw international numbers) is that TASM will be the first SM movie not to break even over the course of it's theatrical run. So far, here's how the SM franchise looks like in term of profit figures, not accounting for marketing costs.
Very very less loss though,almost broke even from the box office run itself

Batman Begins (that has around the same profitability profil as TASM's still not accounting marketing cost) came after a movie that lost 50 million dollars
You keep on bringing in Batman and Robin to make BB's numbers look good but I am not buying it,this is the same franchise which earned 420M from only a 35M budget

and it managed to almost restore the profitability of the franchise.
It didnt break even from the box office run either

Because they'll micromanage the movie, making sure it'll please every target they can possibly think of, not letting the creative team in charge the opportunity to make the movie they want. Maybe that works for shampoos but when I go see movie I expect watching something else other than just a marketing product.
As I said earlier,you are jumping to conclusions
I would like to stay optimistic despite Sony's reputation

Indeed, and from that stand point TDKR will report lower loses than TASM.
It shouldnt report losses at all,its the third movie of the franchise,not the first

Those 15% are after expenses (that includes marketing cost).
Still hard to believe
Though its the only data we have..

My "source" is an excutive over at Sony Pictures Releasing France so while I doubt he got it from Arad himself (who isn't on Sony's payroll BTW) I fully trust his word. Then again, aftewards, every studio is publicly pleased with their movies' numbers. That's PR 101.
Well different people have different expectaions,some may have expected as low as 200M and some as high as 350M.No particular person represents 'Sony'

Probably and for that I apologize. English is not my first language and when I'm irritated I may sound too harsh. Hope there's no hurt feelings. ;)
No hard feeling either
 
Last edited:
No it won't, even with a 305 million budget (including marketing). But like I said in previous posts there is no way Sony only spent 75 millions to promote TASM.

The low domestic figures are the TASM's problem. So basically no matter how much it makes in China (unless it's a billion dollars) the movie won't break even in theatres.

Maybe it was promoted along with other movie like Total Recall and MIB3 so the marketing budget came down
 
I don't even understand how Ted jumped up.


Sony and distributors, predictably, yanked another 600 theaters from TAS run, bringing the total to over 1100 screens pulled since it opened. Ted lost only 50 screens and the two are now about equal. Ted's genre competiton (The Watch) looks incredibly weak, TAS's competition, not so much. With TAS managing only 601.00 per screen, even with so many less theatres to fill, the writing is on the wall.
 
No because the studio only gets back around 55% of the domestic gross and 15% of the overseas revenue.

I guarantee that 15% number is suspect. The only thing I can find says specifically that it is only China where the studios only get 15% because they must use a domestic distributor there:

Unfortunately, Hollywood has learned (as have many other industries) that great sales in China do not always translate into great profits. In America distributors tend to receive 50-55% of box-office receipts, with the rest going to the cinemas. Elsewhere the average take is 40-45%. In China, where Hollywood must use a domestic distributor, the proportion is roughly 15%. American films may be yanked in favour of domestic ones (“Avatar” had to make way for “Confucius” last year). The World Trade Organisation has ordered China to reform, but few moguls expect it to.

I really don't know why anyone would believe that studios only make 15% overseas. They make entire movies that are intended to make most of their gross overseas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"