Fake
Member
It's a shame this doesn't translate to sales I guess.
‘One Battle After Another’ Projected to Lose $100 Million Theatrically as ‘Smashing Machine’ and Others Struggle Due to Oversized Budgets
- Thread starter Kacho
- Start date
It's a shame this doesn't translate to sales I guess.
March Climber
Member
I have heard of most of these movies, but that's also because I pay a lower price for the ad-tier on my subscription services.
For the person who lives an ad-free life, I don't know how that individual would be aware of anything. They'd have to actively have a friend who watches movies a lot or keep up with movie reviewers on social media.
Edit: Even then there's no guarantee that the reviewer they're watching will get information wrong or worse, slander a movie based on perception and heavy bias.
Last edited:
Kacho
Gold Member
Oh it's a Aronofsky flick? Yeah, I'll check that out.
It certainly highlights a problem with marketing. It's easy to ignore things you've never heard of.
Other than OBAA I can't think of any 'woke' films this year that would have been on my radar.
DKehoe
Member
Sure, it would have been nice to see it do better. But quality and box office results don't always correspond. I was surprised when I read how much the budget was and did think it was going to be a big ask for it to recoup that. I think spending that much on a movie that's just for adults is a big risk these days. Maybe studios don't mind taking a loss on something like this if it's good for their perception, both to potential collaborators in the industry and to the public, for being willing to take a swing at something high quality like this. Maybe it will build up an audience in years to come. Either way, it's not my money. I got a good film out of it so that's what matters to me. Personally, I think people spend way too much time talking about how much a film cost, how much it needs to recoup and what its marketing budget was. But if that's where other people's interest is then fair enough.
Kacho
Gold Member
The same happens with gaming. I'm a hardcore gamer and I find the business side interesting to discuss.
I'm more on the casual side with movies but the box office discussion has always been interesting. Also helps with discovery.
BigBeauford
Member
The idea of "revolutionaries" in 21st century America where people have it better than others at almost any point in history is just absurd.
Saber
Newd Member
I don't think that help either if thats the case.
I remember Gaf saying that Eddington was good(lol I remember people praising Velma). Even though it was very low ass budget, it still failed to make money. Maybe the reason is not because its actually a good movie, but something else.
Last edited:
DKehoe
Member
That's totally fair. I do get that when people are into something they then also get interested in how the sausage gets made. And I am interested in that stuff to a degree. But recently, it seems like when it comes to films the focus on that stuff has been increasing and the number of people willing/able to discuss the film itself is decreasing.
The revolutionaries in the film are intentionally absurd.
It's harder to get people to go and see movies. I mentioned above about people's tastes seemingly getting narrower. But I think people's attention spans are a lot shorter and so sitting somewhere and not checking your phone for a couple hours is a big ask for a lot of people. You also have a bunch of new mediums that have risen up recently and I think film plays a lesser role in people's lives than it did in the past.
Nydius
Member
True, but box office results and projects that are likely to be greenlit in the future usually DO correspond. Especially in the modern streaming era where studios aren't recouping money by home video/disk sales anymore. Used to be if a movie flopped at the box office, you could still make up the ground with DVD/Blu-ray sales. That's no longer the case. A theatrical flop is now a money pit and damning for future projects, especially smaller niche projects, and has made Hollywood increasingly risk-averse.
Matt Damon spoke on this on an episode of Hot Ones years back.
Kacho
Gold Member
I understand. That's why I created a separate thread for this and didn't drop it in the OBAA discussion thread.
Last edited:
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Movies can make 10's of millions in post-theatrical from digital sale and rental. And they get 70+% of that. A lot of films that didn't do great at the BO will top the charts for digital sales/rental from the "I don't go to theaters anymore" crowd.
Last edited:
DKehoe
Member
For sure. In general I obviously want films I like to do well so that those types of films, and the people who make them, can be seen as viable.
And yeh I think Matt Damon's point about how the DVD market disappearing made a huge difference to the industry does make sense for the shift. Maybe it's one of the reasons you see studios focusing more and more on franchise stuff since it's a more guaranteed, immediate return. Whereas something like Caught Stealing, using that as an example since it's been mentioned a few times here, could have been a sleeper hit with word of mouth spreading about it and people picking up the DVD. These days, someone might tell someone in their office about a film they saw over the weekend and really liked. But by the time that coworker finds time to go see it it could have already been yanked from cinemas and I feel like there's still a bit more of a barrier for people to rent a film digitally and, from what I understand, they make fuck all from streaming.
StreetsofBeige
Member
How does this movie have a budget (excl marketing) of about $150M (wiki says 130-170)? As the OP snips say.... about $200M-ish including marketing. Did Leonardo get $100m salary of it? lol
That's media budgets for ya. Dont forget She Hulk. 9 episodes $225M.
That's media budgets for ya. Dont forget She Hulk. 9 episodes $225M.
Last edited:
Reizo Ryuu
Member
people simply need to go watch more movies, instead of talking about how movies are shit while not watching any of them because "it didn't look interesting", or living and dying by the opinion of some reviewer; with how fast movies come out on VOD, there's not much of an excuse to not watch ~2 movies a month.
StreetsofBeige
Member
I'd guess people dont spend a lot of money watching these quirky movies or rom coms or dramas so much in theathres anymore because if someone is going to pay good money buying a ticket, buy something splashy like a superhero movie or sci-fi movie or family fun animated movie. Big screen. Big sound.
The lower budget, lower key movies you can just wait till it hits Netflix. Netflix alone has shitloads of low budget movies that go direct to video nobody has heard of. They probably just watch those kinds of movies at home. While long time ago, movies didnt come to video rental for probably a year. And there werent so many high budget splashy movies. So if youre going to spend money, it didnt really matter what you picked at the theatre.
Last edited:
balls of snow
Member
Good I want to watch The Rock and Leo act serious but cant be bothered to go to the cinema for drama movies. The sooner it hits digital the sooner I can watch on my oled tv.
diffusionx
Gold Member
I know people will catastrophize everythhing but movies do bomb. It is interesting it is happening with a Leonardo DiCaprio movie. Looks like the fact that he is now fat and ugly and women are sickened by his dating history has caught up to him.
wouldn't be reddit without some massively updooted cringe
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige
Member
Crazy. I just googled it and MC did have about the same budget. Thats nuts as it must had been made with a ton of graphics guys. Also, Leonardo's salary for One Battle is $20-25M according to sites. So for a movie like that where the hell did the rest of the production budget go?
GateofD
Member
Movies are jumping to digital like 2-3 weeks after release, so unless it's a movie that really takes advantage of a big screen and sound system. There's no point.
One of the reasons why Demon Slayer making 600mil off a 20mil budget. Course anime fans are rabid, but if your a fan and interested, you 100% should have seen on a picture for the eye candy and sound.
Edit: and this with having like one or two screens vs. the other Hollywood films with 5x screens
One of the reasons why Demon Slayer making 600mil off a 20mil budget. Course anime fans are rabid, but if your a fan and interested, you 100% should have seen on a picture for the eye candy and sound.
Edit: and this with having like one or two screens vs. the other Hollywood films with 5x screens
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige
Member
Exactly. And that big screen and sound for a wow factor movie is worth the hassle of sitting with randoms who make noise, block your view or bump your seat.
It's not necessarily even the money part since going to the movies is actually affordable compared to a lot of other things like fancy dinners or going to sports or concerts. But if it's not worth the hassles above, just wait for a digital purchase. Or wait longer to come to NF.
Poppinfresh
Member
How did I not know that Caught Stealing was a Darren Aronofsky film? That's an instant watch now.
Poppinfresh
Member
Hence why I haven't been to the theater in the last decade.
We're well past the time when movies took 6 months or longer to come out on home video. It's generally now a month or less between theater premiere and streaming, and even less than that if you know how to sail the seven seas.
It's a bit of a departure for him, shades of early Guy Ritchie as
DKehoe
mentioned or the Safdie Bros (Good Time, Uncut Gems), but it's a fun one.
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
Huh, never heard of Roofman. It opened last Friday?
I just checked, and it is indeed playing at the theater down the street from me, but only has two showings - both in the evening. I was in the theater last week and don't recall seeing a poster or anything for it.
The hosts of the two movie-related podcasts that I still listen to all more or less found The Smashing Machine boring, and thought that it failed to make whatever point it was trying to make, among other faults, so I am not surprised it failed to catch on with audiences and had a massive second week drop off.
One Battle After Another never stood a chance at being a financial success. Luckily for WB they had a lot of successes this year.
I just checked, and it is indeed playing at the theater down the street from me, but only has two showings - both in the evening. I was in the theater last week and don't recall seeing a poster or anything for it.
The hosts of the two movie-related podcasts that I still listen to all more or less found The Smashing Machine boring, and thought that it failed to make whatever point it was trying to make, among other faults, so I am not surprised it failed to catch on with audiences and had a massive second week drop off.
One Battle After Another never stood a chance at being a financial success. Luckily for WB they had a lot of successes this year.
Kacho
Gold Member
Just read up on Eddington and yeah, that's a big no for me. Flopped with a $25m budget. Good cast and director though.
Joaquin's 5th flop in a row according to this.
Joaquin Phoenix’s Divisive New Movie Is His 5th Flop In a Row
Joaquin Phoenix's divisive new movie with Pedro Pascal is his 5th box office flop in a row.
collider.com
Saber
Newd Member
Just read up on Eddington and yeah, that's a big no for me. Flopped with a $25m budget. Good cast and director though.
Joaquin's 5th flop in a row according to this.
Joaquin Phoenix’s Divisive New Movie Is His 5th Flop In a Row
Joaquin Phoenix's divisive new movie with Pedro Pascal is his 5th box office flop in a row.
And don't get me wrong, Phoenix looks like born for this role, at least in terms of costume.
But yeah...
Kacho
Gold Member
He looks great on the poster. Thought it was Jeff Bridges for a moment. I'll give Hell or High Water another watch instead.
March Climber
Member
I can understand She Hulk's budget, because she's a walking CGI character and that's 20-30 minutes of seeing her per episode.
On the other hand what I didn't get was why the budget for Secret Invasion was so equally high.
Who thought Joaquin Phoenix of all actors would be a blockbuster star? He's a quirky character actor at heart, if the film he is in does gangbusters its purely coincidence. He can't manufacture mass appeal.Just read up on Eddington and yeah, that's a big no for me. Flopped with a $25m budget. Good cast and director though.
Joaquin's 5th flop in a row according to this.
Joaquin Phoenix’s Divisive New Movie Is His 5th Flop In a Row
Joaquin Phoenix's divisive new movie with Pedro Pascal is his 5th box office flop in a row.
Kacho
Gold Member
It was filmed in California so that might be why
Poppinfresh
Member
StreetsofBeige
Member
Agreed.
Most of his movies are nobody films. He either chooses to do those or simply no studio offers him big money to be a leading man.
I bet for most people (like me), his biggest known film is Gladiator. And they dont know or remember most of his films. His wiki shows he's actually been in a ton of movies. Most I've never heard of before.
Last edited:
Kacho
Gold Member
His early career was pretty good but he's always been great as a supporting actor. Around 2010 when he did that rapper social experiment he started doing a lot of smaller indie stuff. Recently he's been doing more big movies but the consistency has been lacking.
Edit: he's an outstanding actor so it's a shame.
Last edited:
touchfuzzy
Member
Gladiator, Walk the Line, and Joker -- those would be the hits, and he's great in all of those.
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
They almost certainly didn't think that it would. These studios make money long term and care about stuff like Oscar's attention or just getting talent to work with them for longer term goals.
Angry_Megalodon
Member
I remember Joakim Phoenix in a very early role, alongside Nicholas Cage, a very good movie about the gore snuff industry.
I prefer watching movies in the theaters, nothing can replace that excitement. The problem is that there are very few exciting movies, the kind that make an impression on you. I will never forget going to the premiere of T2 and Matrix. No 88 inch screen at home compares to that.
I prefer watching movies in the theaters, nothing can replace that excitement. The problem is that there are very few exciting movies, the kind that make an impression on you. I will never forget going to the premiere of T2 and Matrix. No 88 inch screen at home compares to that.
Last edited:
GateofD
Member
Tuesday's is $5 special for me. So I try to hit one movie each week or other week. I like that I can't pause the movie and that makes me actually watch and pay attention instead of checking a YouTube video, a GAF post or phone every 5 minutes.
Usually hit the dollar store nearby for the candies and soda. Popcorn, if I feel thrifty, I grab an empty bucket out of the trash and get a free refill.
Last edited:
Soltype
Member
It's not cheap and to be honest , these movies that they're pumping out just aren't doing it. In the last month, I've seen Spider-Man 1/2 and From Dusk till Dawn, it's easily the most fun I've had in theaters in years.
From Dusk Till dawn was LEGENDARY in theater, and basically sealed my fate to marry a busty Latina
EverydayBeast
ChatGPT 0.001
You can thank them introducing $13+ for a movie ticket and than an arm and a leg for popcorn.
These are crazy budges WITH tax cuts where they film. Definitely something going on with their accounting too. Mind you actors are way over paid and so is pretty much everyone involved in a production, which is massive now. They hire friends and people who do nothing on movie sets. Not to mention all the insane 'free' stuff they get in show bags Lavish spending is crazy. It's not the real world that most of us live in.
I don't go much to the cinemas , I've seen 3 movies this year. Each one with a group of friends was near $100 for 3 people! Never mind any extra food or drinks.
Look at prices for things like WWE and prices of Stadium food. The world has gone nuts. $20 burgers, $15 hot dogs, $10 slices of pizza. Insane town.
Tarantino was spot on, movies used to be a cheap affordable thing for people to do. Now it's way too expensive.
I don't go much to the cinemas , I've seen 3 movies this year. Each one with a group of friends was near $100 for 3 people! Never mind any extra food or drinks.
Look at prices for things like WWE and prices of Stadium food. The world has gone nuts. $20 burgers, $15 hot dogs, $10 slices of pizza. Insane town.
Tarantino was spot on, movies used to be a cheap affordable thing for people to do. Now it's way too expensive.
RCX
Member
its takes something pretty special to lure me away from my home setup (which is big-ass 4k tv + solid sound system + comfy couch + fridge with beer in it) to a cinema which is often lacking in every department. Last film I absolutely "needed" to see day one was Prometheus, and we all know how that went. 
Last edited:
Unknown Soldier
Member
One of these days Hollywood might actually try not spending a minimum of $300 million on every shitty film
But today is not that day!
But today is not that day!
Unknown Soldier
Member
Today's reminder Quentin Tarantino wrote a film script and then cast himself in the film so he could have Salma Hayek pour wine down her leg and have it run over her foot into his mouthFrom Dusk Till dawn was LEGENDARY in theater, and basically sealed my fate to marry a busty Latina
Most legendary Hollywood filmmaker of all time
Ar¢tos
Member
Same here, it has been 13 years since I went to a cinema and I don't miss it at all.
I also don't like American movies/TV shows, the plots are shallower than a puddle and there is this weird obsession of having always a good/evil contrast.