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

[JKKS085]

BB is pitted against a mole hill compared to a mountain for TASM

Batman 89 still grossed more domestically than any of the Raimi movies. So much for the mole hill.

 

[spider-neil]

We are not talking 'After the run'
We are talking about the present

And BTW it makes no sense to compare pre-reboot Batman movies to pre-reboot spider man movie since Spider man always made more than double the money.It isnt fair to compare the reboots like that when BB is pitted against a mole hill compared to a mountain for TASM

Unadjusted for inflation all the batman movies (not including TDKR) is 2.6b and all the Spidey movies (not including ASM) is 2.5b

 

[JKKS085]

So they put in 3 years worth of work and an 260M investment to get a profit of 7 million?

*Applaudes*

Yep because the 890 millions the movie generated in theaters is just about 18% of its overall revenue. *this is getting quite boring*

 

[JKKS085]

Someone posted another link which say 40-45%

Indeed, but before expenses.

 

[Spiderdevil]

The WSJ uses Epstein's method to make their projections but YOU need other sources even though you strongly believe an out of the blue 45% share getting back to studios while there's NO SOURCE AT ALL to support your theorie. You're a pretty funny dude.

Someone posted a source in the earlier pages,just check back

 

[spider-neil]

Batman 89 still grossed more domestically than any of the Raimi movies. So much for the mole hill.

B89 made 251m unadjusted - 507m adjusted
SM made 400m unadjusted - 557m adjusted

 

[Spiderdevil]

Batman 89 still grossed more domestically than any of the Raimi movies. So much for the mole hill.

And it couldnt outgross it
As I said TASM has a better ratio to Raimi's movies than BB has to B89(After adjusting for infaltion)

Not to mention Batman(1989) profits must be huge because of such a low budget and most of the earnings being domestic.
So basically BB profit is NOTHING compared to the profit Batman(89) made
While TASM's profit despite being lesser,is comparable to Raimi's numbers

 

[Spiderdevil]

Unadjusted for inflation all the batman movies (not including TDKR) is 2.6b and all the Spidey movies (not including ASM) is 2.5b

How many Batman movies? 6
How many Spider man movies? 3

Nice smokescreen you put up there

 

[JKKS085]

B89 made 251m unadjusted - 507m adjusted
SM made 400m unadjusted - 557m adjusted

My bad, I forgot to adjust SM1 numbers

 

[Spiderdevil]

Yep because the 890 millions the movie generated in theaters is just about 18% of its overall revenue. *this is getting quite boring*

How so?

 

[Spiderdevil]

Indeed, but before expenses.

No
So its 15% from China BEFORE including expenses?
So whats the figure in China after expenses? 1%?

 

[Spiderdevil]

My bad, I forgot to adjust SM1 numbers

How convinient

 

[spider-neil]

How many Batman movies? 6
How many Spider man movies? 3

Nice smokescreen you put up there

Nope, I was just saying that Spidey has been incredible at the BO and ASM always had an uphill struggle to match that.

 

[Spiderdevil]

Nope, I was just saying that Spidey has been incredible at the BO and ASM always had an uphill struggle to match that.

Definitely much Better than Batman on the big screen pre-reboot era
Which is why I believe it is ridiculous to compare TASM to Raimi's version just to make BB look great(Batman before that,excluding Batman89 was mediocre box office wise)

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

Isn't Batman (1989) still one of the most profitable movies ever made?

 

[JKKS085]

How so?

Again Epstein in THE.
When you take the overall revenue generated by a movie on itself (so without merchandising), theaters account for 17,9 %, Home Video for 45,6%, Pay TV for 16,6%, TV for 19,9 %.

 

[Anno_Domini]

My point is box office earnings is not always directly proportional to the movie's quality

Of course not, but none of these three CBMs are anywhere near Spider-Man 3 or the Transformers films. All are in the good or great category, but TDKR and Avengers are still "beating" TAS-M financially and critically.

If it was released along side BB?
Definitely yes,BB's earnings,whatever little they were,would have taken a bashing

A "bashing"? I wouldn't say that now.

The curse is overrated to say the least
How would the 3rd part of 2-3 series failing would have an effect on TDKR's chances?
Stupid superstitious beliefs

X-Men was good, X2 was great, X3 destroyed the trilogy.

Spider-Man was good, Spider-Man 2 was great, Spider-Man 3 destroyed the trilogy.

Batman was great, Batman Returns was pretty damn good, Batman Forever destroyed the trilogy.

Superman was phenomenal, Superman II was amazing, Superman III destroyed the trilogy.

Blade was great, Blade II was great, Blade: Trinity destroyed the trilogy.

Not superstitious at all.

 

[Spiderdevil]

Again Epstein in THE.
When you take the overall revenue generated by a movie on itself (so without merchandising), theaters account for 17,9 %, Home Video for 45,6%, Pay TV for 16,6%, TV for 19,9 %.

The figures are different for different movies
Some movies do well at the box office but not on Home Video and others vice versa

 

[spider-neil]

Isn't Batman (1989) still one of the most profitable movies ever made?

Absolutely.

Superhero movies unadjusted for inflation

Avengers - 6 movies 3.3b
Batman - 5 movies - 2.6b not including TDKR or B66)
Spidey - 3 movies - 2.5b (not including ASM)
X-Men - 5 movie 1.9b
Superman 5 - 1.3b

 

[spider-neil]

Of course not, but none of these three CBMs are anywhere near Spider-Man 3 or the Transformers films. All are in the good or great category, but TDKR and Avengers are still "beating" TAS-M financially and critically.



A "bashing"? I wouldn't say that now.



X-Men was good, X2 was great, X3 destroyed the trilogy.

Spider-Man was good, Spider-Man 2 was great, Spider-Man 3 destroyed the trilogy.

Batman was great, Batman Returns was pretty damn good, Batman Forever destroyed the trilogy.

Superman was phenomenal, Superman II was amazing, Superman III destroyed the trilogy.

Blade was great, Blade II was great, Blade: Trinity destroyed the trilogy.

Not superstitious at all.

I hate Batman Returns with a passion.

 

[Anno_Domini]

I hate Batman Returns with a passion.

Batman Returns is quite like Watchmen. You hate it or love it

 

[JKKS085]

The figures are different for different movies
Some movies do well at the box office but not on Home Video and others vice versa

Those are average rates on the 2010 financial year.
That's what you use when you make projections and statistics they're not fully accurate but it gives you a general idea no how movies are expected to perform beyond their theatrical run. And how Hollywood actually makes its money.

 

[spider-neil]

Batman Returns is quite like Watchmen. You hate it or love it

I still don't think Batman has been done 'right'. I say bring on the reboot that gives him a suit so he can show off his martial arts prowess (one of the foremost martial artists on the planet) and give him detective smarts so he earns the title of 'world's greatest detective'.

B89/BR - too gothic
BF/B&R - too campy
BB/TDK/TDKR - too realistic (but fantastic 'movies')

 

[Anno_Domini]

I still don't think Batman has been done 'right'. I say bring on the reboot that gives him a suit so he can show off his martial arts prowess (one of the foremost martial artists on the planet) and give him detective smarts so he earns the title of 'world's greatest detective'.

B89/BR - too gothic
BF/B&R - too campy
BB/TDK/TDKR - too realistic (but fantastic 'movies')

That's probably the best way to describe the films.

I think Nolan was on the right track in Batman Begins with giving Batman skills in the martial arts but that was taken out of the equation in the following sequels. And while trying to show some detective skills, it wasn't very true to the hero, and the Arkham games showed that aspect better.

Imo, I think the reboot should not use the character of Lucius Fox as that is Wayne's reliance with everything in Nolan's trilogy.

 

[JKKS085]

No
So its 15% from China BEFORE including expenses?
So whats the figure in China after expenses? 1%?

I don't know the chinese market specifically but it's known for being a market in wich studios don't make a lot of money on theatrical releases (especially because they have to pick a local distributor but that also means sharing some of the expenses). But the side revenues are always huge anyways.

Just to put an end to this debate, I'll let you do the math yourself but here's the detail of how much WB got back from TDK's overseas theatrical run and how much they had to spend to release the movie on foreign markets. These numbers come from my personnal files (I was a business analyst over at Warner Bros Pictures France until 2010). I've rounded the values to the whole number and I've slightly changed some of them since I don't have the right to disclose exact figures:

Its reported "overseas gross" is $468,576,467. WB got around $190,000,00 of that sum and of that they had to pay around $125,000,000 in expenses.

This includes (roughly):

- Overseas Advertising Campaigns: $81,000,000
- Taxes: $17,000,000
- Prints: $14,000,000
- Foreign Versions (Dubbing & Subtitling): $4,000,000
- Insurance: $4,000,000
- Currency Conversion: $2,000,000
- Shipping : $2,000,000
- Trade Dues: $1,000,000

WB revenue after expenses:
$65,000,000 (just a little more than that actually).

Hope that helps.