Apocalypse X-Men: Apocalypse Box Office Prediction Thread - Part 6

[metaphysician]

Its worth noting that, while yes, not all movies are expected to turn profit in theaters? Tentpoles *are*, because the whole point of a tentpole is to have a big, safe, profitable movie whose revenue funds all the riskier projects at the studio.

 

[superweirdo87]

Its worth noting that, while yes, not all movies are expected to turn profit in theaters? Tentpoles *are*, because the whole point of a tentpole is to have a big, safe, profitable movie whose revenue funds all the riskier projects at the studio.

Not all of them. Movies that make a profit in theaters are like rarities, the biggest hits and midsize and microsize fare where numbers outstrip costs. It's surprising until you dig into actual studio profits and expenses. The ancillary market and licensing is where the profit margins for many movies are, even some tentpoles. Note that the piece I cited expected Spectre to be one of the "few." And it actually was not.

http://deadline.com/2016/06/millennials-box-office-bad-moms-1201776411/

Sony made 98M off that movie. And the TV rights were 90 overseas and 24 stateside. Its profit came from the ancillary market.

Movies, even a number of tentpoles, make it into the black with the ancillary market.
"It is true that Harry Potter and The Order Of The Phoenix lost money on its theatrical run, but so do almost all Hollywood movies."

http://www.mhpbooks.com/guess-what-harry-potter-movies-do-make-money/

 

[Flint Marko]

Movies that make a profit in theaters are like rarities

Is this really true? It's "rare" for a movie to turn a profit while in theaters? I've been casually observing box office numbers for a few years now and I've never had that before.

 

[metaphysician]

Perhaps I used the wrong words. Tentpoles aren't expected to make money in the sense that they always do; they are expected to make money, because the studios *need* them to make money. The whole system requires that tentpoles make money, because that's how everything else gets financed.

 

[superweirdo87]

Perhaps I used the wrong words. Tentpoles aren't expected to make money in the sense that they always do; they are expected to make money, because the studios *need* them to make money. The whole system requires that tentpoles make money, because that's how everything else gets financed.

Well, the system is something of a mess, now. But, tentpoles make profits, it's just that a lot of them get there through the ancillary market. It's not a crutch for marginal movies. It's what makes moviemaking a viable business.

 

[superweirdo87]

Is this really true? It's "rare" for a movie to turn a profit while in theaters? I've been casually observing box office numbers for a few years now and I've never had that before.

Well, if you dig into the numbers at Deadline, it becomes pretty clear that TV rights, home entertainment, and VOD are what get you across the finish line. And these people confirm that in the write-ups.

Star Wars, Jurassic World, The Avengers, Deadpool and Zootopia make money with theater tickets alone. But like a movie with a 150M to 200M budget and say 600-800M WW is making a healthy profit because of the ancillary market.

Many hits and more marginal movies are also getting across the finish line because of the ancillary market.

 

[Sithborg]

Is this really true? It's "rare" for a movie to turn a profit while in theaters? I've been casually observing box office numbers for a few years now and I've never had that before.

It depends on if the studio wants it to or not. Even in regular accounting, you can shift things around to make things look better or worse. Movie accounting sounds like it is a bit more opaque than that. It doesn't help that studios are part of huge conglomerates, so you don't get financial statements about each individual movie.

 

[TheNewSlayer]

I saw worse movies flopping at the box office and still getting sequels. I'm 100% sure Fox will not cancel the sequel for this movie just because it fail at the box office this year.

 

[DACrowe]

Its already been established that these are the younger version and we already saw the older Jean, Cyclops and Storm in the new future.

Then I don't see what good it would do by ignoring the new future shown in DOFP, just because to do more of with these new cast members just because they are "likable" especially when their likability that doesn't even translate to $$$. And I don't care if Storm, Cyclops and Jean are in their 50s... another reason why I want the OT cast and the films to be in the present, is so they can do more stuff with Rogue, iceman, Colossus, Kitty then eventually introduce members when its time for Famke, Halle, James to retire their role.

I hate being the one to tell you this, but they did retire. Days of Future Past was their swan song. Other than any cameos for Jackman and Stewart to play with in Wolverine 3, that's it.

I think the sky is the limit now that they have a well cast young group of actors that they can do almost anything with. DOFP erased continuity for the most part, so go crazy with it! If you make something wildly new and different folks will come. If you try to ride on nostalgia forever, you get weird hybrids like Apocalypse in the end where it looks kind of different yet is strangely the same.

 

[psylockolussus]

You said thing when DOFP was just released and 1 year later, Stewart was announced to return in Wolverine 3 and Cudmore was offered the Deadpool role. Yeah so much "retirement".

And Apocalypse didn't suffer with nostalgia with the cast (because there was none)... it was a never ending call backs to the things that happened in the original trilogy and the over-usage of Magneto/Mystique (characters that you enjoyed in the first two First Class films) - I doubt anybody would want more callbacks to the events of the original trilogy in another original cast film.

If the new cast can't sell a film, they must go. Its simple as that. you don't know what to wait until they appeared in a great film and still didn't bank $$$, by then it would have been too late to save the franchise.

And are we still using Deadline's educated guess when it comes to box-office earnings when they couldn't even get TASM2's profit right?

 

[GuestStar2004]

You said thing when DOFP was just released and 1 year later, Stewart was announced to return in Wolverine 3 and Cudmore was offered the Deadpool role. Yeah so much "retirement".

you are really holding onto the cudmore thing ain't you? it wouldn't have made much different if he mo-capped or not because there was gonna be very little of him in the new colossus when it took 3 people to bring this new version to life

 

[psylockolussus]

Not all of them. Movies that make a profit in theaters are like rarities, the biggest hits and midsize and microsize fare where numbers outstrip costs. It's surprising until you dig into actual studio profits and expenses. The ancillary market and licensing is where the profit margins for many movies are, even some tentpoles. Note that the piece I cited expected Spectre to be one of the "few." And it actually was not.

http://deadline.com/2016/06/millennials-box-office-bad-moms-1201776411/

Sony made 98M off that movie. And the TV rights were 90 overseas and 24 stateside. Its profit came from the ancillary market.

When the leaking accident happened in Sony. It turned out that Deadline's TASM2 (made by Sony) profit was wrong. So what makes you think Deadline got it right with Sony's Spectre?

 

[JEM]

Not X-Men related but very interesting.

The THR 100: Hollywood Reporter's Most Powerful People in Entertainment.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lists/thr-100-hollywood-reporters-powerful-904591/item/oprah-winfrey-thr-100-904755

Big Igor, Chairman and CEO, Walt Disney Co is the king and Murdoch family is second. Stacey Snider, Emma Watts, Jim Gianopulos (Fox) and Kevin Feige had good place.
But damn, Jennifer Lawrence is powerful

 

[kevork89]

Not X-Men related but very interesting.

The THR 100: Hollywood Reporter's Most Powerful People in Entertainment.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lists/thr-100-hollywood-reporters-powerful-904591/item/oprah-winfrey-thr-100-904755

Big Igor, Chairman and CEO, Walt Disney Co is the king and Murdoch family is second. Stacey Snider, Emma Watts, Jim Gianopulos (Fox) and Kevin Feige had good place.
But damn, Jennifer Lawrence is powerful

She's that rare beast that will get paid more then her male counterparts. Good on her. Thats what four nominations and one oscar win does at her young age. She's also extremely popular to younger audiences.

 

[X-Maniac]

You said thing when DOFP was just released and 1 year later, Stewart was announced to return in Wolverine 3 and Cudmore was offered the Deadpool role. Yeah so much "retirement".

And Apocalypse didn't suffer with nostalgia with the cast (because there was none)... it was a never ending call backs to the things that happened in the original trilogy and the over-usage of Magneto/Mystique (characters that you enjoyed in the first two First Class films) - I doubt anybody would want more callbacks to the events of the original trilogy in another original cast film.

If the new cast can't sell a film, they must go. Its simple as that. you don't know what to wait until they appeared in a great film and still didn't bank $$$, by then it would have been too late to save the franchise.

And are we still using Deadline's educated guess when it comes to box-office earnings when they couldn't even get TASM2's profit right?

I don't mind which cast they choose to continue with but I like the new young cast a lot, I feel there is great potential to correct the complaints and flaws of the original films, and I don't feel the new cast were given that much chance to shine in X-Men: Apocalypse.

The film did feel nostalgic with all the callbacks and familiar moments but that's Singer's schtick. Seems to me he is stuck in the past, it's the way he looks at life and it translates into his work. Look at Superman Returns for another example. It was a re-tread of what we already saw in the Donner films. He did the same with X-Men: Apocalypse, though the X-Men film managed to be a bit more fresh with the new cast and new villain.

I think the 'fresh' elements of XM:A were not done well enough. The new cast were not at the forefront enough and the villain was not portrayed well enough. The most exciting and new things in the movie (new Jean, Scott, Storm and Kurt, new Angel and Psylocke, iconic villain Apocalypse) were not given enough great moments to shine.

 

[The Endless]

So Deadpool is officially the biggest X film huh. And after all those years of development hell. Fox should give Tim Miller the keys to the castle.

 

[GuestStar2004]

I think the 'fresh' elements of XM:A were not done well enough. The new cast were not at the forefront enough and the villain was not portrayed well enough. The most exciting and new things in the movie (new Jean, Scott, Storm and Kurt, new Angel and Psylocke, iconic villain Apocalypse) were not given enough great moments to shine.

When it comes to moments to shine i think its more that it felt watered down rather then them not giving enough great moments, like obviously archangel has his blade attack thing and he did it like one time in the final battle, it was just like there was more promise there then what singer delivered.

And the new cast didn't need to be that much in the forefront, cyclops,jean and nightcrawler were given pretty good roles in the story, its just there was always alot going on.

 

[GuestStar2004]

So Deadpool is officially the biggest X film huh. And after all those years of development hell. Fox should give Tim Miller the keys to the castle.

But is it the director that made it a success or deadpool? i am pretty certain its all on the characters shoulders since if you had the deadpool director direct wolverine 3 you think its gonna make the same amount as deadpool? doubt it, you think if they switched directors for deadpool 2 it would make less? no people are still gonna see deadpool because they like that he is a superhero thats an almost alternative dick version of spider-man

And i doubt even singer was offered the keys to the castle even after DOFP, heck even marvel put Whedon on a leash even after the avengers.

 

[JEM]

She's that rare beast that will get paid more then her male counterparts. Good on her. Thats what four nominations and one oscar win does at her young age. She's also extremely popular to younger audiences.

Yeah, she is a queen right now.

Kinberg and Donner have the keys to the castle and maybe Emma Watts.
They were producer on Deadpool and every X Men film. I don't get the Tim Miller VS Singer/Kinberg/Donner. They are in the same team.
In the end, great movie is good for X Men Universe.

 

[Sithborg]

So Deadpool is officially the biggest X film huh. And after all those years of development hell. Fox should give Tim Miller the keys to the castle.

Let's give him a few more movies before just handing him the reigns. He isn't exactly a proven director at this point. Because I remember how well another movie did when they gave the keys to the castle to a director of one well received movie...

 

[JEM]

I think Miller will have Deadpool/X-Force, Josh Bonne New Mutant and other director for X-Men movie. Kinberg/Donner will drive the universe and Singer, nobody know.

 

[Smilodon]

That's frankly what they need to do. Fox needs to find their Gunn and Russo Bros, not try and rely on Singer forever. That's what makes a universe stale. Try and build up their bullpen. Miller/Wernick/Reese are an incredible group to bring into the Fox fold and hopefully Mangold can deliver something incredible now (something as well made as Girl Interrupted, 3:10 or Walk the Line) that he will no longer be constricted by anything. Boone seems to have a good head on his shoulder so I hope he does Revival well so he won't screw up New Mutants.

Snider hasn't really accomplished much judging by those articles that covered her recent ascension, stating how she kinda moved into a well oiled machine. If she helps gets more X-films going, good for her and all of us I suppose.

 

[X-Maniac]

But is it the director that made it a success or deadpool? i am pretty certain its all on the characters shoulders since if you had the deadpool director direct wolverine 3 you think its gonna make the same amount as deadpool? doubt it, you think if they switched directors for deadpool 2 it would make less? no people are still gonna see deadpool because they like that he is a superhero thats an almost alternative dick version of spider-man

And i doubt even singer was offered the keys to the castle even after DOFP, heck even marvel put Whedon on a leash even after the avengers.

A lot of that success is definitely down to the director, who recognised what made the character popular in the comics and didn't tinker with that too much.

Another director might have done it differently, playing down the fourth wall stuff, changing the costume because they felt it didn't work, or other changes.

 

[Smilodon]

But is it the director that made it a success or deadpool? i am pretty certain its all on the characters shoulders since if you had the deadpool director direct wolverine 3 you think its gonna make the same amount as deadpool? doubt it, you think if they switched directors for deadpool 2 it would make less? no people are still gonna see deadpool because they like that he is a superhero thats an almost alternative dick version of spider-man

And i doubt even singer was offered the keys to the castle even after DOFP, heck even marvel put Whedon on a leash even after the avengers.

Of course it's the director. Ryan, Miller, Wernick and Reese were dedicated to bringing Deadpool faithfully onto the screen. Changing what makes the character works would've given us an entirely different and less successful product. Miller isn't just a guy who understands Deadpool really well, he's a big comic book fan in general who cares about adapting the source material faithfully.

Does he benefit from an incredibly well made script? Yeah. Does he benefit from having an incredibly unique character that has a really wide-ranging appeal like Deadpool with an incredibly innovative marketing campaign? Yeah. But I'd argue if he made a Wolverine or Gambit or New Mutants or X-Factor or Justice League or Batman he would have delivered something equally true to the spirit of the comics that would no doubt lead to an increase in quality, even if it may not be a 700 million dollar movie.

 

[Frankeh]

At this point it shouldn't be a debate that comic accuracy leads to better box office returns.

Yes the character, yes the humor... but that all comes down to Deadpool in the comics, which they decided to faithfully adapt. They didn't just make him up.