Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 Posted:   May 9, 2014 - 11:49 AM   
 By:   Sirusjr   (Member)

To me Guardians of the Galaxy seems like it is going the John Carter route. It seems to be assuming that people know what it is while not really explaining it that much. I am not particularly excited for it from what I have seen so far. Most of the people I know who are excited did some research on the series of comics after seeing the trailer but I don't bother with that.

 
 Posted:   May 9, 2014 - 11:53 AM   
 By:   mastadge   (Member)

For what it's worth, boxofficemojo is predicting that it will do respectably, and that audiences will be seeing it more as a more fun alternative to Jupiter Ascending, in the space adventure category, than as yet another superhero flick.

 
 
 Posted:   May 9, 2014 - 12:32 PM   
 By:   Ado   (Member)

Not such a great prediction here.
This scenario would be a $400 million black hole for Disney, around Lone Ranger size bomb.

7. 'Guardians Of The Galaxy'

Release date: August 1
Rating: Not yet rated (likely PG-13)
Comparisons: "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" ($162 million so far), "The Avengers" ($623 million)
Prediction: $200 million-ish
Why: Boy, this is a tricky one. A sci-fi/comedy/superhero film with no well-known heroes and a slightly different tone from their previous films, "Guardians" is a pretty big risk for Marvel, who have yet to release a box office flop. Fans are in the know, and marketing materials have been pointing out connections to previous Marvel hits, but "Guardians" may have a tough time reaching the recent box office highs of "Captain America: The Winter Soldier," let alone "The Avengers'" record-breaking draw. Fans will make a big opening a certainty, but without major stars (Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana and Benicio del Toro lead the familiar-if-not-famous cast), the public at large may not make the trip.

Read more at http://www.hitfix.com/galleries/summer-2014-box-office-

 
 Posted:   May 9, 2014 - 12:55 PM   
 By:   Khan   (Member)

Not such a great prediction here.
This scenario would be a $400 million black hole for Disney, around Lone Ranger size bomb.

7. 'Guardians Of The Galaxy'

Release date: August 1
Rating: Not yet rated (likely PG-13)
Comparisons: "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" ($162 million so far), "The Avengers" ($623 million)
Prediction: $200 million-ish
Why: Boy, this is a tricky one. A sci-fi/comedy/superhero film with no well-known heroes and a slightly different tone from their previous films, "Guardians" is a pretty big risk for Marvel, who have yet to release a box office flop. Fans are in the know, and marketing materials have been pointing out connections to previous Marvel hits, but "Guardians" may have a tough time reaching the recent box office highs of "Captain America: The Winter Soldier," let alone "The Avengers'" record-breaking draw. Fans will make a big opening a certainty, but without major stars (Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana and Benicio del Toro lead the familiar-if-not-famous cast), the public at large may not make the trip.

Read more at http://www.hitfix.com/galleries/summer-2014-box-office-


So if it hits $200,000,000 (note that's a US only number), it'll be a Lone Ranger sized bomb, which didn't even hit $90,000,000 in the US?

roll eyes

 
 
 Posted:   May 9, 2014 - 1:01 PM   
 By:   Ado   (Member)

Khan
Almost all of these movies make more overseas than here in the US.
If they get to profit (IF) it is on the money from overseas auds.

Lone Ranger made $290 global, it had a budget around $200 million similar to GOTG.
So the break even on both of these pictures is about the same.

The forecast above did not specify $200 million US or overseas, but the point is that it has to make about $550 million to breakeven, that is pretty unlikely for this movie, since it looks pretty hard for even Amazing Spiderman 2 to reach that.

 
 Posted:   May 9, 2014 - 2:33 PM   
 By:   mastadge   (Member)

I guess my question is why anyone's setting the bar for success at Avengers or even post-Avengers character movies? Obviously it's not going to do as well as one of the biggest movies of all time or the established characters who are riding its coattails.

 
 Posted:   May 9, 2014 - 2:39 PM   
 By:   Khan   (Member)

Khan
Almost all of these movies make more overseas than here in the US.
If they get to profit (IF) it is on the money from overseas auds.

Lone Ranger made $290 global, it had a budget around $200 million similar to GOTG.
So the break even on both of these pictures is about the same.

The forecast above did not specify $200 million US or overseas, but the point is that it has to make about $550 million to breakeven, that is pretty unlikely for this movie, since it looks pretty hard for even Amazing Spiderman 2 to reach that.


No, your point was that Guardians is going to bomb on a Lone Ranger level based off of a $200 million domestic take (some quick internet sleuthing shows that Hitflix is making domestic projections). You're moving the goalposts.

Furthermore, Amazing Spider-Man 2 is already at $450 million worldwide, so your doom and gloom comment about that movie will quickly be proven wrong.

 
 Posted:   May 9, 2014 - 3:05 PM   
 By:   solium   (Member)

It's pretty crazy these super hero movies only make their budgets domestically- if their lucky. (Avengers excluded) If it wasn't for the foreign markets Hollywood would be falling down a black hole.

 
 
 Posted:   May 9, 2014 - 3:58 PM   
 By:   Joe E.   (Member)

Yeah, but is there a reason they shouldn't count the overseas totals? It's still money, after all. Is other countries' money somehow less desirable to you?

 
 Posted:   May 9, 2014 - 8:45 PM   
 By:   solium   (Member)

Yeah, but is there a reason they shouldn't count the overseas totals? It's still money, after all. Is other countries' money somehow less desirable to you?

Point being if they had to rely just on domestic box office results these films would be colossal failures. So they are making movies for the world market. Good for them. I think the films are extremely dumb down because of it. Do french directors make films for the French market or for the American market? How about the Japanese? Russia? German? Nothing wrong with creating a universally assessable story of course. But American films lack any creative individuality nowadays because of it. The poor domestic box office also shows the American public are tiring of all these generic remakes, sequels, and reboots.

 
 Posted:   May 10, 2014 - 5:58 AM   
 By:   TominAtl   (Member)

Guardians of the Galaxy has the wiff of summer bomb, yeah, that is what I predict.

The first preview that is now showing, which is shown in virtually every theatre known to man it seems, does nothing for me. It's obviously meant not to be taken serious but it does not grab my interest at all.

 
 
 Posted:   May 10, 2014 - 6:10 AM   
 By:   Rick15   (Member)


Point being if they had to rely just on domestic box office results these films would be colossal failures. So they are making movies for the world market. Good for them. I think the films are extremely dumb down because of it. Do french directors make films for the French market or for the American market? How about the Japanese? Russia? German? Nothing wrong with creating a universally assessable story of course. But American films lack any creative individuality nowadays because of it. The poor domestic box office also shows the American public are tiring of all these generic remakes, sequels, and reboots.


Ummm...most of the films you refer to have a universal appeal.

People all over the world read Spiderman comics.
People all over the world read Avengers comics
People all over the world read X-Men comics
People all over the world know who the Lone Ranger is.

So I guess that, yeah, these movies are being made for the world market because the target audience is scattered around the world.

 
 Posted:   May 10, 2014 - 6:40 AM   
 By:   solium   (Member)


Point being if they had to rely just on domestic box office results these films would be colossal failures. So they are making movies for the world market. Good for them. I think the films are extremely dumb down because of it. Do french directors make films for the French market or for the American market? How about the Japanese? Russia? German? Nothing wrong with creating a universally assessable story of course. But American films lack any creative individuality nowadays because of it. The poor domestic box office also shows the American public are tiring of all these generic remakes, sequels, and reboots.


Ummm...most of the films you refer to have a universal appeal.

People all over the world read Spiderman comics.
People all over the world read Avengers comics
People all over the world read X-Men comics
People all over the world know who the Lone Ranger is.

So I guess that, yeah, these movies are being made for the world market because the target audience is scattered around the world.


Interesting you left out Captain America! Don't they have to change his name around the World? Seriously the average Russian or Chinese don't read Marvel comics. Look what they did to Superman, totally nurtured him of any patriotism. Their huge hits because of one common denominator- endless CGI action/violence. Which is universally loved. Characters and stories are flimsy at best.

 
 Posted:   May 10, 2014 - 7:01 AM   
 By:   SBD   (Member)

I just checked The Mummy over at the imdb. It seems Universal want to continue with the sub Indiana Jones version, & the director wanted to go with something darker & creepy. I'm with the director on this one.

Pity. We could've had an epic Fernando Velazquez score.

And why reboot anyway? The 1999 movie was a great popcorn actioner. (The sequels, less so.)

 
 
 Posted:   May 10, 2014 - 7:21 AM   
 By:   Ado   (Member)

Khan
Almost all of these movies make more overseas than here in the US.
If they get to profit (IF) it is on the money from overseas auds.

Lone Ranger made $290 global, it had a budget around $200 million similar to GOTG.
So the break even on both of these pictures is about the same.

The forecast above did not specify $200 million US or overseas, but the point is that it has to make about $550 million to breakeven, that is pretty unlikely for this movie, since it looks pretty hard for even Amazing Spiderman 2 to reach that.


No, your point was that Guardians is going to bomb on a Lone Ranger level based off of a $200 million domestic take (some quick internet sleuthing shows that Hitflix is making domestic projections). You're moving the goalposts.

Furthermore, Amazing Spider-Man 2 is already at $450 million worldwide, so your doom and gloom comment about that movie will quickly be proven wrong.


Khan, as you often do you are making this way more complicated than it needs to be.

Lone Ranger was a bomb that cost about $200 million to make, the comparison was Guardians of the Galaxy with a similar budget, even we assume the high end of the entire world like
Boxoffice Mojo it still only $430 and it still in the red. Spiderman might might a profit, still a really long way from that though, and it is a more marketable product than GOTG.

 
 Posted:   May 10, 2014 - 8:40 AM   
 By:   mastadge   (Member)

Khan, as you often do you are making this way more complicated than it needs to be.

Lone Ranger was a bomb that cost about $200 million to make, the comparison was Guardians of the Galaxy with a similar budget, even we assume the high end of the entire world like
Boxoffice Mojo it still only $430 and it still in the red. Spiderman might might a profit, still a really long way from that though, and it is a more marketable product than GOTG.


John Carter had a $250 million dollar budget, made $73 million domestically and $284 million worldwide, and its situation is nothing like Guardians of the Galaxy's.

Guardians probably has a budget somewhere in the range of $150-200 million, so already 20-40% less than John Carter, and if we accept that the bar for success is twice its budget it only has to make $300-400 million to get there. Now there's certainly no guarantee, but the movie does have a much bigger marketing push than John Carter had, plus a certain degree -- it remains to be seen how much -- of Marvel brand recognition. Even if the movie doesn't perform to Marvel's hopes, there's very little chance it won't at least break even. Plus given that Marvel has made a bazillion dollars on its other properties it can afford to take a little bit of a chance on other things.

Spider-Man is a completely different situation from all of the above. Spider-Man is certainly a huge international seller, but after five films and a reboot of questionable necessity it's definitely showing signs of "franchise fatigue." But even with that working against it, the first Amazing Spider-Man picture more than tripled its budget of $230 million and its sequel, one week into its US release, has already passed the $450 million dollar threshold worldwide. Despite your assertions that it's "a really long way from a making a profit," even with its modest performance compared to previous Spidey films it's doing well enough that Sony is continuing their plans to build a huge "Spidey-verse", and it's still performing way better than the X-Men films, which themselves are still doing well enough, even with diminishing returns, that Fox finds it preferable to keep making them than the alternative.

 
 
 Posted:   May 10, 2014 - 9:11 AM   
 By:   Ado   (Member)

mastadge

AS2 is about a $250 million investment for Sony. It needs to make about $600 million to hit profit, yeah, they are a long way from that, because the numbers are dropping every week for it, and the audience is moving on to other movies. Yeah, the dichotomy here is that with these costs you can appear to make lots of money from your global box office and still come out broke, or barely make a profit at all.

Sony, like other studios are totally willing to take a few on the chin to build up a brand over years, the way that Disney blew off the Lone Ranger losses. But it is not really a good thing for movies, or for movie lovers.

I would say that the chances are really high that GOTG is not going to make $500 million dollars, I would day that chances are better that it will not.

 
 Posted:   May 10, 2014 - 9:50 AM   
 By:   solium   (Member)

I've said this before. There's more to this than recouping your investment or making a small profit after world wide release. They want a domestic hit. They want a successful toy franchise. (A successful merchandising franchise in general.) A poor outing domestically is a great loss when it comes to the revenues they intended to make from the property.

 
 Posted:   May 10, 2014 - 10:00 AM   
 By:   mastadge   (Member)

Yes, I have understood since Spaceballs that merchandising is a huge part of the equation! big grin But I still can't fathom why we're setting the profit bar for a movie with a budget probably around or under $200 million at $500 million. $500 million box office is getting into box office smash range. Sure, the goalposts are shifting a bit with inflated ticket prices thanks to more 3D and IMAX sales, but for the past 5 years it's been 8-13 movies a year that makes >$500 million worldwide. Not every movie, not even every big summer spectacle movie, has to be shooting for that lofty target. And solium, I know they want a smash hit so they can sell lots of toys, games, etc -- but the inverse is also in play: if a movie slightly underperforms but moves tons of merchandise, it's a net win. And no one's terribly good at predicting how these things'll play out.

That said, clearly this movie is testing and tracking well enough, and Marvel has enough confidence in it, that they've already greenlit the sequel. Possibly they're in for a surprise flop, but it seems pretty unlikely. Again, this may not end up being a smash hit -- and it probably won't be. But it should at least double its budget without too much trouble.

 
 Posted:   May 10, 2014 - 10:17 AM   
 By:   solium   (Member)

Yes, I have understood since Spaceballs that merchandising is a huge part of the equation! big grin

Too true! big grin Also add on promotional costs on top of production costs. Ten years ago that was another hundred million. Who knows what they spend on promotion/advertising today. That money needs to be recouped as well.

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2014 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.