• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Rottenwatch: The Marvels (2023)

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
The movie got $55M (US) subsidy from UK government.

Never the less, the budget is about $220M production costs, excluding marketing. The article says it'll need $440M to breakeven.

(Edit: I'm going to assume the writer in the article saying $220M is all-in costs. Hence the 50/50 split with theatres. But if her calculation was off and the $220M net costs EXCLUDES marketing on top of it, the cost of the movie just zoomed up the charts needing even higher theatre revenue to break even.

That $220M net cost might be $300M+ if marketing was excluded.)


They show that over the two-year period from the incorporation of the company to September 30, 2022, it spent $274.8 million (£221.8 million) and banked a $55 million (£44.4 million) subsidy from the government of the United Kingdom where the movie was made. This brought its net spending down to $219.8 million meaning that the movie will have to gross at least $439.6 million at the box office to break even as studios get around half of theater takings. Passing this threshold might not be child's play.
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Numbers.com says it's made about $161M globally as of today. So perhaps it tops out at about $200M and is done. Daily sales are falling fast.

So excluding any other money making avenues (merch etc...). This movie will likely lose over $200M.

 
Last edited:

FunkMiller

Gold Member
Never the less, the budget is about $220M production costs, excluding marketing. The article says it'll need $440M to breakeven.

It's not even going to reach 200 million. They'll likely take a 250 million dollar bath on this film. At minimum.

Clown Pain GIF by Sarah Squirm
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Cost to make the movie probably around $300M.


The Marvels reportedly cost $200 million to make, an additional $100 million to promote, putting the sequel in a deep hole financially. “This is an unprecedented Marvel box office collapse,” David A. Gross, of movie consulting firm Franchise Entertainment Research told Variety. “Since the pandemic, superhero films have endured simultaneous streaming, unimaginative and bad movies [and] saturation on TV.”
 
Really looking forward to the The Marvels's 2nd weekend gross.









My God

From packed cinemas in Avengers EndGame to this. In EndGame there were people happy to sit on the floors down the aisles and all the way in front of the theatre and this was on both occasions I went to watch the movie. The first time on opening night and a week and a half later it was the same story. People sitting on the floor because the screenings were booked out everywhere.

How the mighty have fallen.
 
Last edited:

Big Baller

Al Pachinko, Konami President
No they made a woke fairy tale. The main character is a Hispanic girl trying to kill the evil white man God (who's based on Trump). It's also just a boring Easter Egg hunt that references other Disney movies and being trashed in reviews. It could bomb bigger than Strange World did.

Jack Nicholson Lol GIF
 

kruis

Exposing the sinister cartel of retailers who allow companies to pay for advertising space.
UK government should probably spend its money more wisely

UK tax payers have been throwing hundreds of millions of dollars at Disney, since just about every recent Disney/Marvel/Lucasfilm movie has been partially or completely shot in the UK: Snow White, The Marvels, Deadpool 3, Secret Invasion, Peter Pan, Andor, Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania, Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny, Moon Knight, etc etc. Thanks to extremely generous subsidies Disney has made making movies in the UK a priority, because the UK is dumb enough to pay for 25% of the budget.



 

Saber

Gold Member
Even with some numbers its not strange to assume the costs are way bigger than anyone assumes. Their movies are usually heavy budgets and the money mostly comes from sustaining costy actors.

That really seems like not even a judgment of the quality of the movie but just total disinterest in it altogether.

The premise is not interesting nor attractive enought. Trailers clearly show the idea that this is nothing more than "its girls heroines(and villain) time".
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
UK government should probably spend its money more wisely
UK tax payers have been throwing hundreds of millions of dollars at Disney, since just about every recent Disney/Marvel/Lucasfilm movie has been partially or completely shot in the UK: Snow White, The Marvels, Deadpool 3, Secret Invasion, Peter Pan, Andor, Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania, Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny, Moon Knight, etc etc. Thanks to extremely generous subsidies Disney has made making movies in the UK a priority, because the UK is dumb enough to pay for 25% of the budget.



When it comes to big subsidies in media (no different than when gov dishes out big money for sports stadiums or hosting tournaments), I'd like to know the ROI on this shit.

The gov claim is that it boosts the economy with jobs, and local businesses all involved get a revenue boost.

For The Marvels, I'd look to see how much of a economic boost it was compared to $55M US.
 
Last edited:

DKehoe

Member
UK tax payers have been throwing hundreds of millions of dollars at Disney, since just about every recent Disney/Marvel/Lucasfilm movie has been partially or completely shot in the UK: Snow White, The Marvels, Deadpool 3, Secret Invasion, Peter Pan, Andor, Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania, Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny, Moon Knight, etc etc. Thanks to extremely generous subsidies Disney has made making movies in the UK a priority, because the UK is dumb enough to pay for 25% of the budget.



I read an article the other day about how Barbie being shot in the UK gave the economy an £80 million boost and created 685 jobs. I've no idea how much The Marvels generated for the UK economy but since it was a huge production it might be comparable. The overall industry generates billions every year. There's not some clandestine plot with Disney. The quality of the film or how well it performs at the box office is kind of irrelevant to whether or not the subsidy was worth it.
 
I mean, Marvel's target audience is impossible to figure out lately. By far the most mainstream Marvel films were obviously the Avengers, which in itself was great. This new phase just introduced too many complex stories and people have no idea who these characters are due to not watching the shows and what not. Ultimately it has become too much for the average joe to keep up with, it's not like you can go to the theater and get all you need anymore. Even then, the original Captain Marvel film faced a lot of backlash, so a sequel was like putting a nail in the coffin, obviously marketing did not do their research.

More than anything though, I think Bob Iger needs to go. The man pushed so much IP and now it comes back to bite him. Chapek was bad, but Iger still being CEO is such a huge mistake. The dude only knows how to spend and acquire IPs, and then ruin what makes those IPs so great. Churning out Marvel and Star Wars content like it's nothing was the beginning of the end, there's just too much going on at one time.

I don't get why there can't be a younger CEO or something, and it's also scary to me that there is no one on the board that can find a "worthy" successor to Iger. That's when you know he's been on for too long, it's just ridiculous that this point. There's a lot going wrong at Disney right now, it's kind of amazing how Disney was practically on top of the world in 2019 but fell so dramatically within the past 4 or so years.
 
Last edited:

HoodWinked

Member
super-troopers-mother-of-god.gif


Marvels 2nd week performance is completely insane. Friday 21m ->2.8m, Saturday 15m ->4.4m, Sunday 9m ->3m, we might even seen sub 1m dailies by next week.

PB7aD9M.png


but hey look at the bright side, in 3 months Disney is going to game the numbers and brag about how it's a BIG HIT on Disney+ and it was the plan all along.
 
Last edited:

Billbofet

Member
super-troopers-mother-of-god.gif


Marvels 2nd week performance is completely insane. Friday 21m ->2.8m, Saturday 15m ->4.4m, Sunday 9m ->3m, we might even seen sub 1m dailies by next week.

PB7aD9M.png


but hey look at the bright side, in 3 months Disney is going to game the numbers and brag about how it's a BIG HIT on Disney+ and it was the plan all along.
I think it will be flat to maybe even up in the coming week with the Thanksgiving holiday. I am now interested to see how much Wish tanks. I think it will be quite the one-two punch to end this year of mostly insanely expensive losers.
 

DeafTourette

Perpetually Offended
No they made a woke fairy tale. The main character is a Hispanic girl trying to kill the evil white man God (who's based on Trump). It's also just a boring Easter Egg hunt that references other Disney movies and being trashed in reviews. It could bomb bigger than Strange World did.


That's odd. Doesn't resemble what it's described as...

"It’s set in the magic kingdom of Rosas, a tropical island whose residents lead a life of utopian serenity, though for a reason that’s rather suspect: Every one of them has a wish — the thing they’d want most in the world — but they’ve given their wishes to King Magnifico (voiced by Chris Pine), the devilishly handsome, outwardly benevolent sorcerer who rules the island, and apparently rules their dreams as well. When you give your wish to Magnifico (he collects them in blue glass bubbles that float atop his palatial tower), you don’t have that wish anymore; you’re free of it, and can no longer even remember what it was. One day, Magnifico may or may not grant it to you (probably not, as we learn). But no matter! Living without your wish, your soul is untroubled. Who wouldn’t want that?"

From Variety...
 
Songbirds is performing near expectations and will easily turn a profit. The Marvels will be on the list of biggest bombs in Hollywood history.
With a production budget of $100M and a worldwide opening of less than $100M, it won’t turn a profit - at least not from the boxoffice. So bomba.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
The movie got $55M (US) subsidy from UK government.

Never the less, the budget is about $220M production costs, excluding marketing. The article says it'll need $440M to breakeven.

(Edit: I'm going to assume the writer in the article saying $220M is all-in costs. Hence the 50/50 split with theatres. But if her calculation was off and the $220M net costs EXCLUDES marketing on top of it, the cost of the movie just zoomed up the charts needing even higher theatre revenue to break even.

That $220M net cost might be $300M+ if marketing was excluded.)


They show that over the two-year period from the incorporation of the company to September 30, 2022, it spent $274.8 million (£221.8 million) and banked a $55 million (£44.4 million) subsidy from the government of the United Kingdom where the movie was made. This brought its net spending down to $219.8 million meaning that the movie will have to gross at least $439.6 million at the box office to break even as studios get around half of theater takings. Passing this threshold might not be child's play.
People can barely afford to heat their homes, and UK out here spending taxpayer money on net loss turds.
 

ManaByte

Banned
That's odd. Doesn't resemble what it's described as...

"It’s set in the magic kingdom of Rosas, a tropical island whose residents lead a life of utopian serenity, though for a reason that’s rather suspect: Every one of them has a wish — the thing they’d want most in the world — but they’ve given their wishes to King Magnifico (voiced by Chris Pine), the devilishly handsome, outwardly benevolent sorcerer who rules the island, and apparently rules their dreams as well. When you give your wish to Magnifico (he collects them in blue glass bubbles that float atop his palatial tower), you don’t have that wish anymore; you’re free of it, and can no longer even remember what it was. One day, Magnifico may or may not grant it to you (probably not, as we learn). But no matter! Living without your wish, your soul is untroubled. Who wouldn’t want that?"

From Variety...
They’re omitting details
 

DeafTourette

Perpetually Offended
I didn't watch the movie. I just took a look at my local cinema's homepage and saw how The Marvels got the biggest screening room for these 15 showings, but practically nobody wants to watch the movie.

It was marketed terribly, no star presence on the talk/radio shows/podcasts, the trailers didn't simplify WHAT was going on because of the actor strikes, etc.

It had a lot against it. I'm still going to see it when I can. But Marvel screwed the pooch on this. They spent too much and didn't have the money for (smart) advertising. They had one job (entice the public) ... Even bad movies get big box office. But... Oh well.
 

NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt

Biggest Trails Stan
It was marketed terribly, no star presence on the talk/radio shows/podcasts, the trailers didn't simplify WHAT was going on because of the actor strikes, etc.

It had a lot against it. I'm still going to see it when I can. But Marvel screwed the pooch on this. They spent too much and didn't have the money for (smart) advertising. They had one job (entice the public) ... Even bad movies get big box office. But... Oh well.

I would argue its more than that too
 

FunkMiller

Gold Member
It was marketed terribly, no star presence on the talk/radio shows/podcasts, the trailers didn't simplify WHAT was going on because of the actor strikes, etc.

It had a lot against it. I'm still going to see it when I can. But Marvel screwed the pooch on this. They spent too much and didn't have the money for (smart) advertising. They had one job (entice the public) ... Even bad movies get big box office. But... Oh well.

Interestingly, the audience breakdown for the movie was 65% male.

So the target audience for this (as far as Disney wants) didn’t bother to turn out for it.

They need a definite course correct back to the kinds of stories and characters that filled phases 1 to 3.
 
Last edited:

Elfstar

Member
Interestingly, the audience breakdown for the movie was 65% male.

So the target audience for this (as far as Disney wants) didn’t bother to turn out for it.

They need a definite course correct back to the kinds of stories and characters that filled phases 1 to 3.
The idea that women would show up to watch a movie just because they are featured in it has always been moronic, especially with Disney's terrible girlboss formula.
No mainstream female audience is going to care about stiff, emotionless, sexless, flawless, romance-less cardboard cut outs wearing drab, unstylish, horribly looking spandex costumes, with no shirtless hot men anywhere to be seen.
They're making these movies for an heavily idealized audience that doesn't actually exists, and in the end they only appeal to dumbass male feminists.
 
The idea that women would show up to watch a movie just because they are featured in it has always been moronic, especially with Disney's terrible girlboss formula.
No mainstream female audience is going to care about stiff, emotionless, sexless, flawless, romance-less cardboard cut outs wearing drab, unstylish, horribly looking spandex costumes, with no shirtless hot men anywhere to be seen.
They're making these movies for an heavily idealized audience that doesn't actually exists, and in the end they only appeal to dumbass male feminists.
They made the perfect movie for Resetera but failed to account for the fact that there's maybe at most 4000 active accounts on that forum. Hard to make back a $300+ million budget with only 4000 guaranteed ticket sales
 

FunkMiller

Gold Member
They made the perfect movie for Resetera but failed to account for the fact that there's maybe at most 4000 active accounts on that forum. Hard to make back a $300+ million budget with only 4000 guaranteed ticket sales

Disney's biggest error has been to care about what's being said on social media. If you believe what's being said on the internet, then the superhero genre is as popular with women as it is with men, and that you can easily make lots of money by making movies that FINALLY appeal to that underserved female market for comic book movies.

The truth is of course that women don't much like superhero movies. And the ones they do like are the ones the men like too.
 
Last edited:

Bitmap Frogs

Mr. Community
The idea that women would show up to watch a movie just because they are featured in it has always been moronic, especially with Disney's terrible girlboss formula.
No mainstream female audience is going to care about stiff, emotionless, sexless, flawless, romance-less cardboard cut outs wearing drab, unstylish, horribly looking spandex costumes, with no shirtless hot men anywhere to be seen.
They're making these movies for an heavily idealized audience that doesn't actually exists, and in the end they only appeal to dumbass male feminists.

The shirtless hot men effect is real and the fact Disney is unaware of it baffles me. Back when I went to see endgame when Thor showed up with a potbelly every single woman in the theater groaned.
 

OmegaSupreme

advanced basic bitch
The shirtless hot men effect is real and the fact Disney is unaware of it baffles me. Back when I went to see endgame when Thor showed up with a potbelly every single woman in the theater groaned.
Look at Aquamnan. You can't tell me that a big percentage of that movie's gross wasn't because of Jason Mamoa thirst. The same thing with Ryan Gosling in Barbie. Look at Twilight. Those movies are objectively awful but it pandered to lonely housewives and teenage girls because of the hot vampire dudes in it. Sex sells.
 
Last edited:

FunkMiller

Gold Member
Look at Aquamnan. You can't tell me that a big percentage of that movie's gross wasn't because of Jason Mamoa thirst. The same thing with Ryan Gosling in Barbie. Look at Twilight. Those movies are objectively awful but it pandered to lonely housewives and teenage girls because of the hot vampire dudes in it. Sex sells.

You actual NAZI.
 

winjer

Gold Member
The shirtless hot men effect is real and the fact Disney is unaware of it baffles me. Back when I went to see endgame when Thor showed up with a potbelly every single woman in the theater groaned.

The issue is that Disney and these SJWs, don't understand that humans are sexually driven, by nature. If we weren't, we would go extinct.
Most companies have used attractive men and women, throughout many decades, to attract attention from consumers.
But for some stupid reason, companies like Disney now think we live in an asexual society.
 

Trunx81

Gold Member
Superheroes were conceived as male power fantasies. Female audience has never been too strong about it, although they adapted increasingly in the past years.
Ms Marvel is Disney+ weakest show in terms of viewership. And you have to watch 3 shows (WandaVision, MsMarvel, Secret Invasion) to properly understand every aspect of a movie, it´s difficult to believe that you can regain 300 millions spent.

I would compare Marvels situation with Nintendo during the GameCube era: Nintendo was considered "kiddy content creator", in the end harming the pickup rate of the GC in favor of the more mature consoles. Marvel, even in a shorter time frame, got the "everything is woke and female and LGBTQ" label and that they favor "The Message" more than good screenplays. Twerking SheHulk stands in for all of that.
 
Top Bottom