What was the most profitable Marvel movie of 2014?

[CaptainWagner]

Since First Class, the XMen franchise has been rebounding upwards. I have no doubts that Apocolypse will be a major success.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I do think Apocalypse will do better than DOFP, but is it going to do $200 million better or $20 million better? That I don't know. I already made the mistake of overpredicting DOFP.

 

[BMM]

I was wrong it's actually even less.

http://io9.com/5747305/how-much-money-does-a-movie-need-to-make-to-be-profitable

If anything, you're wrong because you're confusing revenue with revenue less expenses. The author states, in your own quote, that studios take in 40% of overseas revenue. Of course that number is going to be reduced once studios start deducting additional expenses. What revenue isn't? Also, if you continue reading, the article states that, "overseas box office does matter, more and more," so I'm not exactly sure how this is supposed to refute my point that overseas markets matter.

I could easily look at Sony's cut and say "well if they only spent less on marketing they would've made 170 million". Both companies profit is comparable, no two ways about it.

Anyways, we are straying from my original point, which is that domestic dollars get into studio pockets far easier than international ones. That is an undeniable fact. And if Fox can't stop the decline domestically then we could be seeing the end of the X-franchise sooner rather than later. I never said the international market did not matter, but it's clear to anyone willing to look that studios get most of their money stateside, so they better rejuvenate interest. The fact that DOFP grossed less than TLS, even with inflation and higher ticket prices, is not a great sign.

And let's not kid ourselves, the X-men movies aren't Transformers, so trying to compare the two is a bit disingenuous.

It has nothing to do with comparing the X-Men to Transformers and everything to do with noting that increased overseas markets can't be ignored by trying to dismiss them as little more than "fractions" of a dollar. Those fractions add up. Clearly.

No X-men movie will ever come close to making that much money, so it's lifespan is limited compared to that franchise.

The X-Men franchise is 15 years old. Transformers is 8. Moreover, unlike Transformers, the X-Men franchise has proven it can survive on lower budget, modest successes, so I don't know where this idea is coming from that the X-Men franchise's lifespan is more limited than that of Transformers.

And what difference will that five years make? Only real difference is the staggering growth of the international market which, as we have already discussed, studios can only rely on so much to keep their properties going. 2011 was also the last time an X-men movie came out without the original cast, and look how that fared at the domestic box office.

No, the only difference between First Class and Apocalypse is not the foreign market. The differences also include the increased star power of the First Class cast. The most likely return of the franchise's biggest star, Hugh Jackman. The return of characters, like Cyclops, Jean, Storm, and Nightcrawler, who insight more audience interest that characters like Angel, Azazel, and Banshee. A better villain. A better release date. And a franchise that is in altogether better standing now than it was following The Last Stand and X-Men Origins.

I see you're conveniently ignoring the sequel to a billion dollar movie being released on the same day.

I don't think domestic audiences are going to be as kind to Through the Looking Glass as they were to Alice. This isn't March, and US audiences aren't as impressed by 3D as they were in 2010 post Avatar. The Burton/Depp factor is gone. Depp isn't as bankable as he once was. It will have been six years since the last film, and I don't think anyone is desperate for a sequel. Plus, I think Through the Looking Glass has just as much chance to suffer audience fatigue as Apocalypse, given that its the third live action fable/fairytale adaptation scheduled within a 2 month span, following The Jungle Book and The Huntsman, assuming those dates hold. Could I be wrong? Yes. But I don't think it's going to be an unstoppable juggernaut. As for the foreign box office, I think the overseas market will accommodate both films just fine.

That's because Age of Extinction grossed $320 million more worldwide than Guardians of the Galaxy did.

Yes, because of the overseas market. Hence, my point. Overseas markets matter. I never said domestic box office doesn't matter. Or that overseas box office matters more. I do, however, think it is becoming increasingly obvious that ever-expanding international territories are proving beneficial, picking up slack where domestic interest may be waning. And I think the people downplaying that fact are being willfully ignorant.

If Apocalypse grosses $1.1 billion like Age of Extinction did, then you won't see anybody doubting its success.

On the contrary, I have no doubt that, based on some of the comments in this thread, people would still question its success. Days of Future Past just put up the biggest domestic numbers this franchise has seen since 2006, and the biggest international numbers in its 15 year history, for a total of three quarters of a billion dollars, and what did that do? Spur conversation that Fox stop investing in the X-Men franchise because of its "decline." At this rate, I would be surprised if $1.1 billion were considered a modest success.

But generally speaking, domestic is more important because as has been said studios keep a higher percentage of the gross (overseas varies from market to market, studios get a better return in the UK for example than China). If a studio makes a blockbuster that grosses $700 million worldwide it is going to be much more profitable if it made $500 million domestic and $200 million internationally than the other way around.

Yes, I am aware of that, and I agree.

 

[starscream22]

If anything, you're wrong because you're confusing revenue with revenue less expenses. The author states, in your own quote, that studios take in 40% of overseas revenue. Of course that number is going to be reduced once studios start deducting additional expenses. What revenue isn't? Also, if you continue reading, the article states that, "overseas box office does matter, more and more," so I'm not exactly sure how this is supposed to refute my point that overseas markets matter.

For the record no one here said that Foreign numbers weren't important, however my point was that it doesn't turn as much of a profit as most people thinks it does.

So if a film does incredibly well overseas but flops in the U.S., does that make it a hit? As with everything else to do with box office, the answer is "it depends." But generally, domestic revenue seems to be better for studios than overseas revenue, because the studios take a bigger cut of domestic revenue.

As for "refuting your point" why bother? Fox's $77M out of $748M speaks for itself.

You're welcome.

 

[Tony Stark]

Going over memorial day should bode well for Apocalypse, but the big issue is how it holds out in the long run. First Class and DOFP both had terrible legs, although DOFP ended up with a decent 2.5 multiplier.

The cast has been the one thing that has bode well for the success of the X-men films. They struck gold getting these guys before they were known. I said on one of the F4 threads, that if they had to get Jennifer Lawrence now, they couldn't afford her. She's under contract for this one last film and she's made it clear she's not going to sign a new contract ala Jackman.

 

[Marvin]

No, the only difference between First Class and Apocalypse is not the foreign market. The differences also include the increased star power of the First Class cast. The most likely return of the franchise's biggest star, Hugh Jackman. The return of characters, like Cyclops, Jean, Storm, and Nightcrawler, who insight more audience interest that characters like Angel, Azazel, and Banshee. A better villain. A better release date. And a franchise that is in altogether better standing now than it was following The Last Stand and X-Men Origins.

People have implied that the leads of the first class cast will roll out with this trilogy seeing as they signed 3 pictures. Fox is smart in that they are planting seeds of the next era or trilogy with their new Jean/Storm/Cyke castings. Seems pretty obvious really.

What's interesting in the jackman situation, he's the highest selling point actor wise(him and Jlaw in a way) but they can't actually recast him organically they way they can characters that age(Jean) so going forward into the further future, it's either he pulls an old man logan type of presence or they straight up recast him. Third option being they just pull a fox and keep playing around with their continuity.

Anyways I predict like Last Stand, the momentum build up with reflect in the profits of the third film. They are also jumping into the shared universe game and this will surely increase or at least buffer the revenues of all tied films. Selling the novelty of F4 and Xmen meeting would surely be a big novelty sell, one that would have Fiege sneering(considering it's out of his hand) and marvel comic cancelling characters at an even quicker pace.

My one bit of advice to the studio would be to get Matthew Vaughn back in the directors/writers chair. I found it pretty funny that after Kingsman more and more people were requesting he do a more established cbm(an mcu one even) only to forget that Xmen actually had this golden goose in their laps. If only more people felt as they do about him now during the First Class lead up.
Still, I'd love to see him back on Xmen. Apocalypse would be far higher on my list than it is currently with Singer. Who surprisingly did great with what he inherited from First Class. The action though...
Vaughn with Wolverine...

Long story short, I think they are setting up another trilogy with the new young (and some of the older cast) and depending on the taste left in people's mouths after this next one as well as all the fox universe sharing as well as Kinberg, they could really compete. Between Cap 1 and Cap 2, rather Thor 1 and Thor 2, Fox rebooted Xmen and are competing.

 

[Spiderine]

I don't know what the future holds for Xmen but like I said Apocalypse results will tell us all we need to know about where the franchise is going. No matter what I still see them being 3rd behind the current MCU and the upcoming DCCU in terms of major success and dominance.

 

[CyclopsWasRight]

Worldwide they rank as:

1. Guardians of the Galaxy
2. X-Men Days of Future Past
3. Captain America: Winter Soldier
4. Amazing Spider-Man 2

Whoda thunk Rocket Racoon would outperform Spider-Man and the X-Men COMBINED?!

Combined ASM2 and X-Men Days of Future Past made a total of $1.475 billion against Guardians $774 Million.

Combined it didn't outperform them but it outperformed each individually, domestically that is, which is a massive achievement really.

I'm just curious what the point of all this box office dick measuring. All I care about is whether a potential franchise I liked made enough to get sequels. Heck, Godzilla did well enough for Toho to start making Godzilla movies again.

Its pretty much movie is better than your movie

The X-Men franchise is 15 years old...

Yep. Longest running Marvel franchise and longest running comic book movie franchise using the same canon. And thank to the time-travel reboot method it maintains that canon while cleaning things up from DOFP onwards.

X-Men fatigue? Ha!

After X3 when they basically did a new movie with none of the previous cast things dipped which was expected given the movies change-up but since that well received movie it's been on the upswing.

On the contrary, I have no doubt that, based on some of the comments in this thread, people would still question its success. Days of Future Past just put up the biggest domestic numbers this franchise has seen since 2006, and the biggest international numbers in its 15 year history, for a total of three quarters of a billion dollars, and what did that do? Spur conversation that Fox stop investing in the X-Men franchise because of its "decline." At this rate, I would be surprised if $1.1 billion were considered a modest success.

No doubt.

X-Men Days of Future Past killed it plain and simple.

It did very well and that's a fact. Hopefully the franchises continues to be of similiar quality and earn enough to continue onwards.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Worldwide they rank as:

1. Guardians of the Galaxy
2. X-Men Days of Future Past
3. Captain America: Winter Soldier
4. Amazing Spider-Man 2

This thread is about profitability not gross. Winter Soldier was considerably more profitable than DOFP thanks to its cheaper price tag and better domestic gross.

 

[Flint Marko]

Worldwide they rank as:

1. Guardians of the Galaxy
2. X-Men Days of Future Past
3. Captain America: Winter Soldier
4. Amazing Spider-Man 2



Combines ASM2 and X-Men Days of Future Past made a total of $1.475 billion against Guardians $774 Million.

Combined it didn't outperform them but it outperformed each individually

He is very clearly talking about how much money each film actually made their respective studios in profit, in which case yes, as you can see from the results in this thread, Guardians and Captain America TWS both individually made Marvel more money than both ASM 2 and DOFP made combined. Not sure how you missed that.

X-Men didn't stupidly splurge on the marketing as much as ASM2 did nor did ASM2 flop as hard as people thought

Well Fox didn't do something right apparently, only 77 million in profit on a $750 million dollar gross? That isn't good.
And if ASM 2 didn't flop as hard as we think, why is Sony teaming up with Marvel? That movie was a failure, and Fox only made 7 million more off their latest installment. Interesting.

X-Men fatigue? Ha!

X-men franchise domestic box office grosses:

X-men: $157,299,717
X2: $214,949,694
X3: $234,362,462
X-men Origins: Wolverine: $179,883,157
First Class: $146,408,305
The Wolverine: $132,556,852
Days of Future Past: $233,921,534

Note the decline from TLS. And how even with raised ticket prices, as well as 3D, DOFP couldn't get past the franchise's peak with TLS. If that is not fatigue of some sort, I don't know what is.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

If Sony was happy with TASM2, they wouldn't be rebooting and signing deals with Marvel.

 

[Flint Marko]

If Sony was happy with TASM2, they wouldn't be rebooting and signing deals with Marvel.

Come on Kahran, don't let facts get in the way of a good story.

 

[Samuel Scott]

I'm really surprised to see "X-Men: Days Of Future Past" earning, this was one of the best movie of X-Men series.