Universal and Fox pull out of HALO Movie

[GoldenAgeHero]

Oh yeah, and then we've got the film faries who take an additional 43% of that, with the snugglepoof flopsickles who zip around vaccuming up a 90% of that, with the rest going towards paying X-men 3 for stealing it's director.

I love when people are talking about the film profits of all non-Superman movies, they don't bring up any of this ****, but then Superman comes up and they need to talk about the studio janitor's hourly pay as if I give a **** about it.
Jesus, you guys could make it sound like Titanic went broke if you wanted to, give it a goddamn rest.

Difference between X3 and SR is that X3 broke its budget and made the studio profit, SR has done neither. your the one thats *****ing and moaning. i was just correcting your crazy mad dope math skills ie(actually subtracting the budget from the gross,thus studio made profit)......

[luthor]WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![luthor]

 

[WhatsHisFace]

Oh, okay then.

 

[Horrorfan]

Difference between X3 and SR is that X3 broke its budget and made the studio profit, SR has done neither. your the one thats *****ing and moaning. i was just correcting your crazy mad dope math skills ie(actually subtracting the budget from the gross,thus studio made profit)......

[luthor]WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![luthor]

lol whf I love ya buddy, but you got owned (and it hurts to say that from a guy who said Bully was racist)...

But I can understand whf hating X3, he is a shameless fanboy of superman who is obviously, tragically devestated and bitter that X3 trounced it and is due for about three or four spin offs which could become franchises in their own right, but anyone else who thinks x3 sucked is talking crap.


And superman returns actually made LESS of a profit than Hulk, in terms of budget and profit relations. You just can't admit it bombed. why do you think the only one who wanted to talk about a sequel was singer? why do you think that talk even has basically died? Please, whf, I love you and all, but you need to face reality when it comes to superman bombing. those numbers are NOT good at all. They are highly mediocre worldwide profits for such a big movie AT BEST.

 

[블라스]

Casablanca was a box office failure.

 

[Horrorfan]

Casablanca was a box office failure.

I LOL'ed at the comparison of casablanca and SR

 

[블라스]

That....was not the point

Just that some amazing and beautiful movies have been horrible box office failures, and some incredibly bad and horrible movies have been box office smash hits.

That's all I'm saying

 

[Horrorfan]

That....was not the point

Just that some amazing and beautiful movies have been horrible box office failures, and some incredibly bad and horrible movies have been box office smash hits.

That's all I'm saying

I got the point, it was just a really funny comparison

 

[블라스]

Well, there is no touching Casablanca, so yeah

 

[Fenrir]

If you thought X3 was crap, you don't like movies. Pure and simple.

No, I love movies. But X3 was still a pile of horse manure.

 

[Fenrir]

Oh and can anyone else grasp the absurdity of fanboys pretending to be happy because their film made the most profit and box-office numbers despite the fact that the only ones who actually benefited from such an outcome were the suits at the studio?

OmFG BoxOFfice-Man made a bilion $$$!1!!!1!

Pity I'll never know what I got out of it if when the film was itself was garbage.

 

[WhatsHisFace]

Oh and can anyone else grasp the absurdity of fanboys pretending to be happy because their film made the most profit and box-office numbers despite the fact that the only ones who actually benefited from such an outcome were the suits at the studio?

OmFG BoxOFfice-Man made a bilion $$$!1!!!1!

Pity I'll never know what I got out of it if when the film was itself was garbage.

Very good point...

 

[Horrorfan]

No, I love movies. But X3 was still a pile of horse manure.

You don't love movies, clearly. Im sorry to be the one to tell you


And I honestly thought fans being happy with box office would be obvious, to ANYONE, but I guess not.


good box office = sequels. sequels = further adventures of characters we love.


Simple. Hope this helps explain this strange phenomena

 

[WhatsHisFace]

I would have rather not had a sequel to X-men 2. X-men 3 really just screwed it up.

 

[Horrorfan]

Thanks to X3's spectacular box office, I will be getting a wolverine spin off in just over a year, and possible movies on magneto and young x men, any of which could be franchises in their own right. I cannot wait, wolverine sounds so bad ass!

 

[WhatsHisFace]

Wolverine was in the works before Suck-Men 3 ever released. Magneto too.

 

[Horrorfan]

Wolverine was in the works before Suck-Men 3 ever released. Magneto too.

If X3 bombed, you can't honestly tell me you believe they would have got the green light.

 

[WhatsHisFace]

If X-3 bombed, it would have been because Brett Ratner made it suck and not because the characters are unwanted.

 

[Horrorfan]

If X-3 bombed, it would have been because Brett Ratner made it suck and not because the characters are unwanted.

So it didn't bomb because Rattner didn't make it suck?


Yeah, I know you're bitter about Supes bombing and all, but you really think studio excs would have thought about a difference between it bombing cause of a director and characters not being wanted?

Come on man, even you can't believe that....you're just going to silly lengths of hatred and by passing common sense because of it.

 

[WhatsHisFace]

No, it didn't bomb because X-men 1 and 2 ruled.

If X-men 1 was the quality of X-men 3, it would have bombed.

 

[WhatsHisFace]

No, it didn't bomb because X-men 1 and 2 ruled.

If X-men 1 was the quality of X-men 3, it would have bombed.

 

[hippie_hunter]

You know a movie bombs when the director talks desperatly about a possible sequel, which is met with stony silence by the studio who lost money on the first movie.

Alan Horn and Warner Bros have confirmed that a sequel is getting made and is expected for a summer 2009 release.

Of course the superman budget reports come with those movies. It's because it IS that movie, dude. Nic Cage and Tim Burton signed on, and had pay or play deals, as did McG. That's about 30 million at least wasted.

That was over $30 million wasted on nothing. Warner Bros. payed dearly for that.

It's the same project, different name.

No they're all different projects. Very different projects.

You know it bombed. You know it. You're so desperate for it not to be a bomb, you are falling back on the old ''dvd will make it profitable''. sure it will. But it does that with all movies. A movies true sucess is measured in theatrical release, and supes dropped the ball.

A $200 million domestic box office is not a bomb. And DVDs always make movies more profitable (Hulk is a perfect example).

The amount of money pumped into the film, by various restarts, pay or play deals, and the huge amount of marketing (which bryan singer tried to blame on the movie bombing) wouldn't make a sequel a worth while investment...or to do so, it would have to take a HUGE budget cut, which is quite embarassing for any studio.

A sequel is definetly not going to get as much money as Superman Returns. There's no need for it. A lot of the money was used on deleted scenes, developing the Genesis camera, etc. I doubt Warner Bros. is going to let Singer cut out a $10 million scene for the sequel. And things are now in place. The next Superman movie will most likely have a budget of around $175 million - $200 million.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=superman06.htm

It's budget was close to 300 million, and BARELY made it back, worldwide gross included.

Production budget:Production Budget: $270 million

worldwide: $389,833,005

Again, the various projects that were dropped cannot be counted against Superman Returns. Superman Returns' actual budget was closer to $220 million - $230 million.

And it had Pirates of the Carribean following it the next week, which took away a significant portion of its potential audience.

That is not a good number. Had it been domestic, sure, it would have been great. But worldwide, for a film so expensive, is a flop.

A movie that has made $390 million is not a flop.

 

[WhatsHisFace]

According to GAH it is because studios take 70%.

 

[Horrorfan]

Alan Horn and Warner Bros have confirmed that a sequel is getting made and is expected for a summer 2009 release.

We will see, won't we? They SURE took a lot of time to announce it though, don't you think? And if it does, it will take a HUGE budget cut , ala the Hulk movie (but at least that is being made by marvel independently,f or a huge studio like WB a huge budget cut is very humiliating for a franchise they pinned so much one).

A film that cost $300 million, more or less, making a $100 million profit worldwide is NOT great. How can you not see that??? It's like spending five bucks to make six.

And FYI, Box Office Mojo have the most reliable projections of budgets and marketing, so it's not a figure they pulled out of their ass.

 

[terry78]

The budget may not be cut, but we will see Superman physically fighting a vilain from the books this time, I think that's pretty much a go.

 

[WhatsHisFace]

We will see, won't we? They SURE took a lot of time to announce it though, don't you think? And if it does, it will take a HUGE budget cut , ala the Hulk movie (but at least that is being made by marvel independently,f or a huge studio like WB a huge budget cut is very humiliating for a franchise they pinned so much one).

A film that cost $300 million, more or less, making a $100 million profit worldwide is NOT great. How can you not see that??? It's like spending five bucks to make six.

And FYI, Box Office Mojo have the most reliable projections of budgets and marketing, so it's not a figure they pulled out of their ass.

What's the matter with a budget cut? They're going to have a lot of leftover stuff from the first one that they won't have to redo again.