Apocalypse X-Men: Apocalypse Box Office Prediction Thread - Part 5

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

Because X-Men is a Fox property and Fox is doing pretty well at the domestic box office; despite some of the gloom & doom you might've read here.

Best thing, worldwide gross is a success, domestic not so much, it's done well enuff to justify a sequel but audiences have made it clear they need a little shake up to stay in the game

Understood, but Fox won't suddenly see X-Men's performance in a different light because it's box office share is number 2 overall...Each film (franchise) is it's own commodity and will be evaluated as such.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Understood, but Fox won't suddenly see X-Men's performance in a different light because it's box office share is number 2 overall...Each film (franchise) is it's own commodity and will be evaluated as such.

Exactly. We shouldn't be praising the success of Alice Through the Looking Glass just because Disney is having a good year as a whole, and neither will the company itself.

How FOX is doing overall is completely irrelevant to a discussion on X-Men specifically.

 

[2kt09]

Another pertinent sentence.

While studios usually trade in top execs in the wake of box-office failures, that isn't the case this time around.

So...time to go back and discuss how Apoc is or isn't a box-office failure.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Another pertinent sentence.

So...time to go back and discuss how Apoc is or isn't a box-office failure.

It is most certainly a failure.

 

[RLAAMJR.]

what's the worldwide figure?

 

[Flint Marko]

Another pertinent sentence.

So...time to go back and discuss how Apoc is or isn't a box-office failure.

It is most certainly a failure.

"Failure" might be debatable, but "disappointment" most certainly is not. This, combined with the lukewarm reception, doesn't look good for Fox.

 

[Leo Zelinsky]

It is most certainly a failure.

It pisses me off how badly X-Men failed... It was dead on arrival the moment that Apocalypse photo leaked

 

[superweirdo87]

Understood, but Fox won't suddenly see X-Men's performance in a different light because it's box office share is number 2 overall...Each film (franchise) is it's own commodity and will be evaluated as such.

Actually, the overall picture might influence how Fox sees and evaluates the X-Men performance. It is relevant from the standpoint of one question: What does Fox need from the franchise? How important is it for X-Men to be a big monster that covers other movies with middling performance on the balance sheet? Or, does Fox need a safe slot that does not lose tons of money? Obviously, Fox wants big numbers. But, how much effort is it worth to try and get them if they are okay otherwise?

That question depends on how other things perform.

A lot of Hollywood financial analysts argued that Sony needed more franchises. That surely factored into why they opted to team with Marvel on Spider-Man. Spider Man was their biggest franchise. Not having others intensified their need for it perform giant numbers.

http://variety.com/2014/film/news/a...lease-more-release-more-tentpoles-1201118909/

 

[superweirdo87]

It pisses me off how badly X-Men failed... It was dead on arrival the moment that Apocalypse photo leaked

This seems to belie the fundamental way movies work. Economists find that movies seem to have the pattern of a cascade of information after they open. As one economist put it, "The audience makes a hit, and no amount of marketing hype can alter that."

The initial photo might have hurt, but the critical thing was the movie itself. The story construction was really bad and it was more of the same when audiences respond best to a mix of novelty and familiar elements.

 

[Frankeh]

It just kills me that this movie's doing so poorly (we're even debating it won't reach 600m?). I love this franchise and have defended it ad-nauseaum but it's falling behind and it's as clear as day, we need someone to chime in and bring it back to relevance.

 

[superweirdo87]

It just kills me that this movie's doing so poorly (we're even debating it won't reach 600m?). I love this franchise and have defended it ad-nauseaum but it's falling behind and it's as clear as day, we need someone to chime in and bring it back to relevance.

Are you a producer? Do you work at Fox? Why does it matter how a movie performs to you? There is something strange about fans where they basically look at stuff like box office and RT scores and invest in it because they want validation for the stuff they love, or want it to be big or a cultural event. In the end, movies are subjective and personal. The person who counts most in the world of your own personal taste is you. And looking for validation from external indicators is misguided.

Finally, no movie is entitled to a certain gross. Money is a powerful thing and people have a right to spend it the way they want to. A franchise can have informed expectations, but just because you have a brand, does not mean you're meant to hit some huge number or entitled to it. Execution, cultural zeitgeist, and pitch all matter and they should. Luck matters too.

"We need someone to chime in and bring it back to relevance." It's worth remembering the X-Men are about misfits, people in the fringes of society trying to fit in. They are not really a natural fit to be the "cool" thing that everybody is talking about. It is worth trying to tell good stories, go in new directions, and take risks to surprise and intrigue the audience. But, aiming to make 800M or 1B may only set the franchise up to fall short of expectations. If the movies are doing decent business, telling good stories, bringing escapism to casual moviegoers and letting fans get their fix, then why does it have to reach a certain number?

 

[2kt09]

what's the worldwide figure?

$484,664,146

supposedly, $65,335,854 more to break even

 

[superweirdo87]

$484,664,146

supposedly, $65,335,854 more to break even

Based on?

 

[iacobusleo]

Sometimes I feel like we take these things too seriously.

This movie is a disappointment yes, but by no means a failure. We are going to get more X movies down the line. Even in the worst case scenario (this whole franchise bombs and the rights go back to Marvel), we will get more X-Men in some shape or form. A retooled X-Men is not a bad thing.

And honestly it's only being called a failure by certain fans. When I tell my friends that this movie was a disappointment, they were shocked. The movie was not a failure at all to them.

Also, and I'm being legitimately curious, why is the US the most important Hollywood market in the world? Is it the exchange rate? I'm a little baffled that it's being called a failure when it's only underperforming domestically, but since I am not actually American and I don't think that America is the center of the world I may be lacking some knowledge or context.

Are you a producer? Do you work at Fox? Why does it matter how a movie performs to you? There is something strange about fans where they basically look at stuff like box office and RT scores and invest in it because they want validation for the stuff they love, or want it to be big or a cultural event. In the end, movies are subjective and personal. The person who counts most in the world of your own personal taste is you. And looking for validation from external indicators is misguided.

Finally, no movie is entitled to a certain gross. Money is a powerful thing and people have a right to spend it the way they want to. A franchise can have informed expectations, but just because you have a brand, does not mean you're meant to hit some huge number or entitled to it. Execution, cultural zeitgeist, and pitch all matter and they should. Luck matters too.

YES.

 

[2kt09]

Based on?

ImSGirl's (think that was the name) studio profit percentages from domestic and international relative to budget

I did the math based on what he/she provided.

Also, and I'm being legitimately curious, why is the US the most important Hollywood market in the world? Is it the exchange rate? I'm a little baffled that it's being called a failure when it's only underperforming domestically, but since I am not actually American and I don't think that America is the center of the world I may be lacking some knowledge or context.

Just the fact seems to be half of the earnings made in the country that produced the feature go back to the studio, whereas internationally the percentage is much less and the standard varies from nation to nation.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Feels great to talk about the box office in the box office thread.

 

[iacobusleo]

Just the fact seems to be half of the earnings made in the country that produced the feature go back to the studio, whereas internationally the percentage is much less and the standard varies from nation to nation.

Ahhh ok makes sense thanks!

 

[superweirdo87]

ImSGirl's (think that was the name) studio profit percentages from domestic and international relative to budget

I did the math based on what he/she provided.

The movie probably won't break even, but looking at theatrical revenues versus production budget is not without limitations. We don't know much about marketing, interest, and the participation arrangements. That stuff matters a lot. Also, revenues for a movie include home entertainment, VOD, TV rights, PPV, library. These numbers matter. Like few movies break even with their theatrical revenues. It's the home entertainment, licensing, etc. that gets a number of movies in the black.

This is how I see things breaking down:

220 production
135 marketing
60 residuals/overhead/interest/off-the-tops
70 participations
40 home entertainment
-------------------------------------
525 total costs




400 in revenue
190 theaters (exhibitors take 45-50% in North America, 75% in China, and around 61% in the rest of the world)
100 home entertainment
55 foreign tv
40 domestic tv/ppv/vod
5-10 merchandising tie-ins
390-400 total revenues



That is a 125-135 million dollar loss. Multiple independent sources reported a higher budget than 178M. But, tax credits may have come into play. Either way, the 178M figure might entail spin. If it was say 190M and the movie got 20M more in revenue, the loss would be more like 90-100 million dollars.

Deadline has great features with breakdowns of all of this stuff and it can get you closer to the answer.

 

[superweirdo87]

Ahhh ok makes sense thanks!

To be perfectly clear, foreign dollars do make up a greater share of studio profits and revenues. To be perfectly clear, studios get 50-55% of the cut in the US versus 25% in China and 40% in other foreign countries. An equally important or even more important factor is the ancillary market. There is not much of a market for library/TV rights/home entertainment in some markets, and it is most robust in the US. The ancillary market is also strong in Western Europe.

 

[psylockolussus]

uff, these are bad numbers in the united states...whatever! Worldwide it is number 8 in 2016 so far.

It would probably missed the top ten when the year ended.

 

[GuestStar2004]

It pisses me off how badly X-Men failed... It was dead on arrival the moment that Apocalypse photo leaked

Apocalypse photo leak? so you are saying apocalypse design killed it for even casual audiences? Remember fandom is only a small % who likely see it anyway

 

[GuestStar2004]

Understood, but Fox won't suddenly see X-Men's performance in a different light because it's box office share is number 2 overall...Each film (franchise) is it's own commodity and will be evaluated as such.

they won't see it in a different light per say but like all studio decisions they likely have to weigh out the pros and cons to see how much potential they have.

 

[GuestStar2004]

Quality matters. Just because it looks like the comic costume, doesn't mean it was executed well.

And how could it have been? Remembering of course how difficult it is to please anyone these days.

Are people still complaining about the new Spider-Man outfit?

 

[Leo Zelinsky]

Apocalypse photo leak? so you are saying apocalypse design killed it for even casual audiences? Remember fandom is only a small % who likely see it anyway

People stopped taking the movie seriously after that photo and the leaked comic con trailer.

The Ivan Ooze jokes/memes were everywhere that killed all of DoFP good will

 

[Lilbaz]

Apocalypse photo leak? so you are saying apocalypse design killed it for even casual audiences? Remember fandom is only a small % who likely see it anyway

What do you mean by fandom? People who read the comics? I know plenty of people that never read the comics but watched the cartoons as a kid.

It doesn't really matter though if apocalypse was comic or cartoon accurate. What matters is that he looked like a cool bad guy, which he failed miserably at. If you can't take the bad guy seriously then you are not really going to be interested.

 

[GuestStar2004]

It doesn't really matter though if apocalypse was comic or cartoon accurate. What matters is that he looked like a cool bad guy, which he failed miserably at. If you can't take the bad guy seriously then you are not really going to be interested.

What about Ronan the Accuser, truly a god among villains for GOTG, no wonder it made as much as it did

Of course you could argue for apocalypse the villain was the main concept of the X-Men: Apocalypse and that would mean he was the main draw for seeing the movie but there are plenty of people out there who know very little about apocalypse and what he looks like in the comics or cartoons