Hashmal_Bringer_of_Order
Member
I'm going to quote myself:
Oh i didn't mean it was a success, just that it wasn't in the "bomba" tier of complete failure either.
I'm going to quote myself:
Oh i didn't mean it was a success, just that it wasn't in the "bomba" tier of complete failure either.
I'm going to quote myself:
This should be stressed: Although I posted the $158 figure, I was under no illusions that 2049 was anywhere close to breaking even.
According to this Forbes article, the film would need to make "around $400m worldwide to merely even think about breaking even/making money down the line," so that's not going to happen.
I think that 400m figure comes from an earlier article which said that's the amount required for it to be worthwhile (or some other such vague benchmark) with no discussion of break even.
Everyone better buy the Blu Ray.
Like it has been said here, at leas it existed but I really, really wanted a sequel with the whole crew intact, though. Dennis. Roger, Hampton Fancher Michael Green, Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch... but oh well I can see 2049 infinite times.
I think that 400m figure comes from an earlier article which said that's the amount required for it to be worthwhile (or some other such vague benchmark) with no discussion of break even.
Wow, did not expect to spark that much conversation. This thread title was originally about why it's a box office disaster and I, as someone who initially wanted to see that movie and then after reading thinkpieces, decided not to help box office sales, posted why I personally have no desire now to support it.
Still not going see it. I'm sure it's beautifully shot, and it would have been prettier in theaters, but I'm voting with my wallet.
After reading some of the posts here, I'm still unconvinced that what I've heard initially regarding a critical view of the movie is wrong. Even the article I've read defending the movie re: feminism isn't actually doing it for me. I mean, the whole giving birth thing is just so weird, especially since women today are socially penalized for choosing not to have kids. As for the Oriental thing, yeah that's just my opinion about the erasure and marginalization of Asian representation in Hollywood media.
Whoops, that's a very good point and a huge oversight on my part. So for the studios to cover just the production costs, it would have to gross in excess of something like $300 million?
Mostly sad for Alcon, who had backed Denis previously and helped pay for this $150m art piece. Denis proved he can handle a big budget and deliver something special. I think he'll be on to greater things. Alcon might be toast.
Break even is probably 2x the budget or thereabouts, not counting blu ray sales. It won't be a complete bloodbath but I doubt they make a net dime.
The movie doesn't frame it as pregnancy making you a real person, the movie puts forward the idea that being born makes you human, as it's the only notable difference between humans and replicants. The mother isn't important. It's the child. And it all frames it in a way that the idea that being born makes you more human is a foolish notion. The movie argues the exact opposite of what a few people are blaming it for.Wow, did not expect to spark that much conversation. This thread title was originally about why it's a box office disaster and I, as someone who initially wanted to see that movie and then after reading thinkpieces, decided not to help box office sales, posted why I personally have no desire now to support it.
Still not going see it. I'm sure it's beautifully shot, and it would have been prettier in theaters, but I'm voting with my wallet.
After reading some of the posts here, I'm still unconvinced that what I've heard initially regarding a critical view of the movie is wrong. Even the article I've read defending the movie re: feminism isn't actually doing it for me. I mean, the whole giving birth thing is just so weird, especially since women today are socially penalized for choosing not to have kids. As for the Oriental thing, yeah that's just my opinion about the erasure and marginalization of Asian representation in Hollywood media.
Everyone better buy the Blu Ray.
Everyone better buy the Blu Ray.
Already preordered.Everyone better buy the Blu Ray.
The $150 mil figure is with the tax credits.the prevalence of regional tax credits softens the blow a bit
please, for my sanity. Never link Mendelson articles, the man is a hack.According to this Forbes article, the film would need to make "around $400m worldwide to merely even think about breaking even/making money down the line," so that's not going to happen.
Break even is near $400 million WW when you take P&A into account. But it is slightly more complicated since it is a co-pro between Sony & Alcon, and how revenue is distributed between the two.I think that 400m figure comes from an earlier article which said that's the amount required for it to be worthwhile (or some other such vague benchmark) with no discussion of break even.
This is basically where I'm at.400M is the figure some insiders put it at.
The box office intake for this movie is split. Alcon and Sony each put 90M (before tax rebates) on the movie. Alcon gets the domestic box office (with WB taking a share for distributing), and Sony gets the international gross. Alcon also reportedly spent like 100M+ on advertising.
Alcon is probably totally screwed. Sony might be less screwed.