The Rebooted "Keep Hope Alive" (that the rights can revert back to Marvel) Thread - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 24

[Darkprime]

I like that marvel is trying to keep the same directors on for their trilogies for consistency but at the same time I like the Thor approach with a new take each film.

 

[Fallen]

The big drop for Venom makes a lot of sense to me, and I enjoyed it. I actually wouldn't be at all surprised if A Star is Born is number 1 this weekend.

Updated box office predictions:

Box Office Pro:
#1 - A Star Is Born: $30.2M
#2 - Venom: $30M

Box Office Mojo:
#1 - Venom: $30.5 M
#2 - A Star is Born: $30M

A Star Is Born is a monster .

 

[Fallen]

Oh boy I sincerely hope Marvel gets the full rights to Spidey back this is nightmare fuel.

From what I read it needs about $450M to break even.

 

[EnDz0n3]

The possibilities are endless.

So ready for 2019.

LOL that gif! Get me every time.

 

[rockman1216]

From what I read it needs about $450M to break even.

So how likely is it to fail this needs to fail hard then Disney needs to trade Sony for everything and cut them out of everything.

Into the Spider-Verse one and done or hell Disney can buy Sony's Animation talent
Insomniac's Spider-Man and sequels published by Disney re-release the first one for all platforms and a Disney game streaming service.
Spider-Man rights straight to Feige

Tom Hardy can still be Venom but everything else has got to go.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

$450 million to break even seems really high unless the budget was greatly under-estimated.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

$450 million to break even seems really high unless the budget was greatly under-estimated.

Based on the trailers, I'd be surprised if the budget was over $100 million.

 

[HBarnill]

Tom Hardy can still be Venom but everything else has got to go.

After his Nicolas Cage/Jim Carrey impersonation, I want Hardy far away from this.

 

[WeaponXCII]

Ryan Coogler Signs on to Write and Direct 'Black Panther' Sequel (Exclusive)

If I had to pick one movie, this is probably the one I'm most excited about in terms of the post-Disney-Fox deal MCU, just because of all the potential it holds. They can take it in a lot of exciting directions: the FF... Namor... Ororo and the rest of the X-Men. I'm not sure, but this could be where we first see the fruits of the deal; do we know when they plan on releasing it?

 

[Fallen]

Upcoming MCU movies:

• May 1, 2020 - Untitled Marvel Movie
• July 31, 2020 - Untitled Marvel Movie 2
• November 6, 2020 - Untitled Marvel Movie 3
• February 12, 2021 - Untitled Marvel Movie 4
• May 7, 2021 - Untitled Marvel Movie 5
• November 5, 2021 - Untitled Marvel Movie 6
• February 18, 2022 - Untitled Marvel Movie 7
• May 6, 2022 - Untitled Marvel Movie 8
• July 29, 2022 - Untitled Marvel Movie 9

February 2021 is definitely gonna be Black Panther 2.

 

[BaronZemo]

I hope no storm in bp 2. They are not gonna shaft lupitas very well received character in the sequel because some of you want a forced romance from the comics to take place. I know Feige is smarter than that.

 

[Xeno]

I hope no storm in bp 2. They are not gonna shaft lupitas very well received character in the sequel because some of you want a forced romance from the comics to take place. I know Feige is smarter than that.

I agree. The world Coogler built around T'Challa has rich potential for future character development. There is no need to push aside the Wakandan characters we're just getting to know so quickly in favor of someone who has already had two decades of exposure in another franchise.

 

[ironwez20]

However I still want to see storm in black panther 2 as a cameo or minor character

 

[ironwez20]

It's easy to make movies out of characters who are already well known and popular; it takes real skill to turn a raccoon and a tree, or an Ant-Man into household names.

Tell that to DC

 

[Random490]

Namor needs to be in it. Marvel need something to counter aquaman.

Marvel doesn't need to "answer" anything from DC or any other studio. What makes them strong is that they do follow the trends, they set them.

$450 million to break even seems really high unless the budget was greatly under-estimated.

Generally a lot of money they need to make back is from advertising cost which can be more than more movies' budget.

 

[Spider-Fan]

$450 million to break even seems really high unless the budget was greatly under-estimated.

The production budget of Venom is reported to be around $100 mil. That figure doesn't include marketing expenses. That said, I doubt they spent over $100 mil on marketing. Venom's break even point is probably closer to $300 mil if we guess they spent $50 mil on marketing, which I think is probably closer to the truth. They didn't treat it like they did TASM2, which had an absurd marketing budget.

 

[Nardz937]

Sony can take their Kraven movie and shove it. Make him the villain in BP2.

 

[Art Freak]

Yes but studios don’t get to pocket all that box office. Theater owners get a good chunk. Studios get more from domestic than foreign in general and the domestic take goes down with each week. Theater owners get more the longer it stays in theaters. That’s why studios kinda want it front-loaded.

A general rule of thumb is that a movie needs to make three times their money spent in total worldwide box office in order to break even. So if production budget is $100 mil and advertising $50 then $450 would be needed worldwide to break even. Rough estimates. Of course, home video sales and other tie ins later play a part in recouping budget.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Yes but studios don’t get to pocket all that box office. Theater owners get a good chunk. Studios get more from domestic than foreign in general and the domestic take goes down with each week. Theater owners get more the longer it stays in theaters. That’s why studios kinda want it front-loaded.

A general rule of thumb is that a movie needs to make three times their money spent in total worldwide box office in order to break even. So if production budget is $100 mil and advertising $50 then $450 would be needed worldwide to break even. Rough estimates. Of course, home video sales and other tie ins later play a part in recouping budget.

Usually the rule of thumb I see if twice what it cost, not three times. Hence my figure of 300 mil. The 450 figure makes sense if you're using 3x as a baseline, but usually I see it said it has to make twice the total cost.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Usually the rule of thumb I see if twice what it cost, not three times. Hence my figure of 300 mil. The 450 figure makes sense if you're using 3x as a baseline, but usually I see it said it has to make twice the total cost.

Yeah, I remember when Fant4stic came out, I was curious how much they were losing on it, so I did some research, From what I saw, the amount the studio gets ranges from about 45% to 55% depending on many variables (studios get more for better performing films and less for poorer performing films, and they get more for domestic than foreign box office receipts as a couple examples of the variables). So, assuming 50% should be pretty close in most cases.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

NOW, here's how you're both kind of right:

Films typically spend about half of their production budget on marketing. So in this case, if the film cost $100 million, they'd spend roughly $50 million promoting it.

With that in mind, Venom would need to make $300 million to break even (or the total amount spent X 2).

But with that concept in mind, mathematically, you can use just the production budget and a rule of thumb of X 3. The film would need to make three times its production budget (still $300 million).

But the key point is, there is a rule of thumb of X 2 based on total budget, but a rule of thumb of X 3 for production budget.

 

[Spider-Fan]

NOW, here's how you're both kind of right:

Films typically spend about half of their production budget on marketing. So in this case, if the film cost $100 million, they'd spend roughly $50 million promoting it.

With that in mind, Venom would need to make $300 million to break even (or the total amount spent X 2).

But with that concept in mind, mathematically, you can use just the production budget and a rule of thumb of X 3. The film would need to make three times its production budget (still $300 million).

But the key point is, there is a rule of thumb of X 2 based on total budget, but a rule of thumb of X 3 for production budget.

That makes sense

 

[wobbly]

Venom will turn Sony a profit unless they spent silly money on marketing (they have done that in the past but probably not with Venom).

Not the slam dunk bang for buck money something like Deadpool got but enough to see them into the black.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

Venom will turn Sony a profit unless they spent silly money on marketing (they have done that in the past but probably not with Venom).

Not the slam dunk bang for buck money something like Deadpool got but enough to see them into the black.

This could become a key point. Venom was their best (non-Spider-Man) chance. Morbius, Kraven etc. don't have anywhere near the potential of Venom in terms of name recognition, interesting story-telling potential, recognizably (Hey! I've seen that black guy with the teeth and tongue.) etc.

If Venom had knocked it out of the park, they might really have something they could build on. If it makes money, but not crazy money, they may want to rethink if/how they move forward. They also can't bolster lack-luster box office results with merchandising revenue.

And as we've been discussing, I don't know if that means they'll bring Spider-man in sooner, or they'll realize they need to work with Marvel.

I think Venom's results should at least be making some at Sony wonder how viable their strategy may be.

 

[Spider-Fan]

... of course then to really understand how profitable a film is, you also have to consider home video, merchandising etc.


This could become a key point. Venom was their best (non-Spider-Man) chance. Morbius, Kraven etc. don't have anywhere near the potential of Venom in terms of name recognition, interesting story-telling potential, recognizably (Hey! I've seen that black guy with the teeth and tongue.) etc.

If Venom had knocked it out of the park, they might really have something they could build on. If it makes money, but not crazy money, they may want to rethink if/how they move forward. They also can't bolster lack-luster box office results with merchandising revenue.

And as we've been discussing, I don't know if that means they'll bring Spider-man in sooner, or they'll realize they need to work with Marvel.

I think Venom's results should at least be making some at Sony wonder how viable their strategy may be.

Eh, all that means is they will keep budgets in line and make moderate blockbusters. They won't spend like 150 or 200 mil on a single movie probably is all that means.