-
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.
Sony Pictures says Uncharted Movie is a "New Hit Movie Franchise"
- Thread starter kyliethicc
- Start date
- News
thismeinteil
Member
There are far more sources reporting the $120M number. Also, any talks about it's performance at this point is PR. The producer is trying to make the film out to be a big blockbuster, which then makes others wish to see it. Simple psychology. Not saying it can't turn out to be one, but if the film completely collapses in its second week or third week, would it still be considered a hit? Nope.Ridiculous for you to doubt the producer of the film considering they are the ONLY people who actually know what the film cost to make, marketing costs and what it truly makes in box office.
I keep hearing 120 million production budget yet other sites say 90 million. Isn't that enough not take anyone seriously including you posters?
Only Sony knows the figures.
China Has Turned Its Back on Hollywood. What Does That Mean for ‘Uncharted’ and Other New Movies?
With the relationship between Hollywood and China under strain, can 'Uncharted' be a rare success at China's box office?variety.com
The PG-13 “Uncharted” cost $90 million to produce and several millions more to market to global audiences, which is a hefty total but not enough to require “Spider-Man: No Way Home”-level revenues to make money. (“Spider-Man: No Way Home,” another Holland-led tentpole, grossed a mammoth $1.83 billion globally.) However, ticket sales in China could be the difference between simply breaking even and making the kind of bank that leads to sequels and spinoffs.
Muddy
Member
Like I said earlier, until Sony confirms what the actual figures are it is all hearsay.
Only Sony knows the numbers and only Sony can be taken seriously because of it.
It's really that simple.
thismeinteil
Member
Anyone trusting Rotten Tomatoes at this point needs their head examined. Movie studios have stripped that site of what it used to be to the point it isn't remotely accurate. From delaying negative ratings and taking away the pre-release hype rating. They don't even do something critical, like calculate the average score of the reviewers anymore, whether critics or average movie goers. Those people could all be giving it 6s, which seems to be the average score on other review sites. So, a slightly above average film looks like it's beloved on something like RT.
Vaelka
Member
OMGE`FG TOM HOLLENMD IUS IN MOVIE I HJAEV TO WATCH NOW BAAAAAAA.
Lognor
Banned
When you're providing no name websites all I can do is laugh.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Not to a person that knows how to read Rotten Tomatoes.
ethomaz
Banned
Or the movie is good…
assurdum
Banned
Even Tom Holland said to not to be proud to have participated to it, make your count. Though I seen some review on YouTube in trustful channels imo and it's far from good from their perspective.
Last edited:
ethomaz
Banned
I watched yesterday.
It is a good action with a bit of comedy movie… it is better than what I though with the comments here.
Which action movie is better? Because I don’t remember having watching anything better in the last decade but I missed a lot of movies too.
BTW everything is fiel to the games… same vibe, atmosphere, theme, etc… except with a younger Nate… and of course young Sully is really Sully.
Anybody else watched it here?
Last edited:
SLB1904
Banned
SLB1904
Banned
i knew you would post that, which was debunked already.
here is the original interview
Tom Holland on his darkest role yet, and why No Way Home could be his last Spider-Man film
Whether as Marvel’s Spider-Man or heroin addict Cherry in his game-changing new role with the Russo brothers, Britain’s most valuable ‘Hollywood asset’ has been on one high or another since the age of 19. Now, as the business of moviemaking rewrites the rules of topline renown, we ask the face...
assurdum
Banned
Well the only thing I can say and what people tell me about the movie in short is that: Tom not seems Nate as the Sully actor neither (and I'm not talking just of their look). The first part was incredibly slow and pointless, the second half improve but still at the end of the movie you don't understand why it's named Uncharted when outside some scene inspired to the games and the characters name, there is very little about Uncharted.
Last edited:
assurdum
Banned
Short story: he admitted to have played awkwardly the role of Nate. So we have a mediocre movie where even the protagonist said to not to be happy about his performance. Now you can like it but doesn't means the movie is good imo.i knew you would post that, which was debunked already.
here is the original interview
Tom Holland on his darkest role yet, and why No Way Home could be his last Spider-Man film
Whether as Marvel’s Spider-Man or heroin addict Cherry in his game-changing new role with the Russo brothers, Britain’s most valuable ‘Hollywood asset’ has been on one high or another since the age of 19. Now, as the business of moviemaking rewrites the rules of topline renown, we ask the face...www.gq-magazine.co.uk
Last edited:
SLB1904
Banned
doesnt mean is bad either lol
assurdum
Banned
Depends what you mean for bad. If I want to look an Uncharted movie I'm expected it remind me Uncharted in everything. I wouldn't care if it has some good action scene if in the end this movie doesn't remind me the characters and story of the Uncharted game but just use the brand in purpose to grab the fans money. That's bad for me.
Last edited:
ethomaz
Banned
Well.. it is the opposite imo.
Everything feels Uncharted.
And I did like the characters... both Nate and Sully.
It is very loyal to the games.
Last edited:
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
You should watch The Ox Bow incident and figure out which character you are.
Kerotan
Member
Yes. It's a very fun movie to watch. I'd low expectations going in.
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
Tom Holland is Sony property by now
ethomaz
Banned
Yeap.
I won't say it is the best action movie I ever watched? No... it is not.
But it is not bad either.
It is good and fun to watch.
Most GAFers here are giving the wrong impression of the movie (I wonder if they watched it?).
PS. I don't thing the guys doing Nate and Sully are really bad for a young version of both... it fits.
Last edited:
Kerotan
Member
Most people shitting on it have said they didn't even watch it. They want it to fail and they're sad it's a smash hit.
This movie was making me smile from start to end.
Tom H. really captures the heart of what makes Drake, Drake. And I can easily see him age into the role. Excited to see this happen.
Mark Wahlberg was obviously a miscast. It was the most Mark Mark has ever done.
Love how at times, the movie can capture the experience of the games. From jumping to one side of the wall to the other, to some of the very QTE moments, it was all so fun to see in live action.
I doubted this movie. But this has a solid 8/10 for me and can't wait to see more!
Tom H. really captures the heart of what makes Drake, Drake. And I can easily see him age into the role. Excited to see this happen.
Mark Wahlberg was obviously a miscast. It was the most Mark Mark has ever done.
Love how at times, the movie can capture the experience of the games. From jumping to one side of the wall to the other, to some of the very QTE moments, it was all so fun to see in live action.
I doubted this movie. But this has a solid 8/10 for me and can't wait to see more!
Last edited:
demigod
Member
So you’re in this thread arguing with people about the movie being garbage when you haven’t watched it yourself? What are you trying to achieve, changing peoples minds?
Also Venom was good, you can suck it.
Saw the movie last night and I thought it was kinda meh. Like i'd consider it a good netflix movie for the most part. The characters didn't really have much chemistry and the movie just seems off in the way it moves along. I still don't like Tom Holland as Nathan and of course Mark was terrible as Sully. I do have mixed feelings on it since I would probably would be just a little more forgiving if it didn't have the name Uncharted attached to it. If this had been Nathan as a teenager then I could understand this working and then they could move further into the future for a different Nathan but that ain't happening. Oh yeah, was something wrong with Tom's mouth since it seemed swollen in parts of the movie. Indiana Jones and Tomb Raider were better or more fun movies in my opinion. I think even National Treasure was better. I'd give it a rating of either C+ or B-.
Papacheeks
Banned
I saw the movie last weekend. It's fun.
It has the spirit of the games. It's bombastic, and there are some things that felt ham fisted. But the core of the movie which is Nate and his relationships with Chloe Frazier, Sully meeting for the first time and having impacts on him and him having impact on them. It's good.
Worth taking your kids to see. It's Sony's National Treasure, I see this having multiple films.
Tiago Rodrigues
Member
If latest data is to be trusted, Uncharted costed around $90M in terms of production. That's $20M short of being enough to produce 3 James Bond movies. Marketing for Uncharted was also a lot more conservative. Let's not forget 007 had to go through re-shoots, at least 2 or 3 different marketing campaigns since it had all those delays due to covid, etc. In marketing alone 007 must've been astronomical.
In the great scheme of things, Uncharted doing $400M at the box office would a much bigger hit for the studio than 007 doing $800M when all things considered.
Uncharted is surpassing $100M at the domestic BO next week. The movie might do more than 120M in the end with domestic numbers alone. For a $90M production and not counting all the other markets that's already a great number.
Lognor
Banned
Where are you getting $90M in production costs? All signs point to it being $120M so curious where you read it's much less than that. Multiple sources say $120M but I can't find a single one that says $90M...
And compared to No Time To Die, yes, marketing for Uncharted was more conservative. But it was still a significant expense. Check out this website to see the extent of the Uncharted marketing: https://cinematicslant.com/2022/02/18/uncharted-marketing-recap/
Super Bowl commercials, promotions with the NBA, Hyundai, a fucking app for your phone, etc. So yeah, still pretty extensive, even though it's not in the same league as 007.
And let's not forget, Uncharted was delayed several times as well. This effects their marketing expenses too.
Tiago Rodrigues
Member
Variety of all sources has an article from 2 days ago stating that:
They usually know what they are talking about.
About the delays for Uncharted...the movie started shooting during Covid already. The delays were nothing like 007 which happened a month before its premiere, after most of the marketing push had been done already. I mean...No Time To Die had its premiere delayed in march 2020 and it went from April 2020 (at this point we had multiple trailers, the theme song out and getting promoted everywhere) to November 2020...which prompted them to update all their marketing for a new date and a new trailer...only to delay it again to September 2021, with again more trailers and marketing stuff released. The movie was done for a year and half until its release and it went through 3 different marketing cycles. It was quite dramatic. That's why the movie was so expensive and needed so much to break even.
For Uncharted the delays were about production. It had nothing to do with marketing the movie. My point is Sony never had to organize multiple marketing pushes for Uncharted like it happened for 007.
Ultimately none of this matters, Sony is happy with these results so far, if not they wouldn't be calling it their "new hit movie franchise".
Lognor
Banned
Interesting because just a few days ago Variety reported a production budget of $120m! https://variety.com/2022/film/box-office/uncharted-opening-box-office-dog-1235186135/
And that is the number being reported by every other source. Unless Variety got updated information not sure where this discrepancy is coming from.
Agreed the delays were nothing like 007. And with most of Uncharted's delays they were earlier in production before most of the marketing kicked off. But the movie was still delayed later in production, first from October 2021 to February 11 and then finally to February 18. Minimal delay at the end there but it certainty added to marketing costs to some degree.
Also, with Sony calling it their "net hit movie franchise" that too is part of the marketing. We see a lot of this post release marketing to try to keep interest in the film. This is not unique. And I've said the film is off to a decent start, but at this point it's not guaranteed to turn a profit. It will need to have some legs. We'll see over the next few weeks!
TexMex
Member
I knew it would be bad, but it’s worse than I expected. But how do you do an. Uncharted movie where Drake doesn’t even have a gun? I think at worst he hits someone over the head. This was the Uncharted Disney afternoon special.
A slap in the face to fans and the people responsible should be put in FEMA camps.
A slap in the face to fans and the people responsible should be put in FEMA camps.
TearInto5th
Member
Marky Mark shouldve at least grown a stache.
EDMIX
Writes a lot, says very little
Trust when I'm saying this......most don't care. Legit, 99.99999% don't care. Uncharted fans might think they are the majority, but clearly such a thought tells me some on here simply don't subscribe to reality. The majority of that fanbase will be the movie fans, just like Transformers, just like Marvel, just like DC films, just like many adaptations.
Many will tell you that The Walking Dead doesn't remind them of the comic, do you think the millions that watch that show give a shit? They are now the majority in that fanbase, not the original work. So this whole "doesn't remind me" of this or that doesn't matter, they don't need to be 1.1 to do well or be a massive series and anyone using that logic needs help. I've never seen that shit ever matter with an adaption and I've never seen that really used to gauge success or not.
Overall....its irrelevant.
Even with the most massive IP, Harry Potter legit has 500 million sales, yet the film series has like 1.3 billion views. So you might want it to remind you of this or that, but none of that is really needed for it to be a massive hit and a good film or something. This is a video game to a film, many elements simply can't work in the film so if you want something to remind you of the to that degree, play the fucking game then...
Oddvintagechap
Member
Using James Bond is an example to grade Uncharted’s success is dumb ass hell.Yet the deal that studios are hotly chasing is not very profitable.
Under its previous agreement, Sony paid 50 percent of the production costs for “Spectre” — which totaled some $250 million after accounting for government incentives — but received only 25 percent of certain profits, once costs were recouped. Sony also shouldered tens of millions of dollars in marketing and had to give MGM a piece of the profit from non-Bond films Sony had in its own pipeline, including “22 Jump Street.”
In a 2014 email stolen by hackers and widely published online, Andrew Gumpert, who then oversaw business affairs for Sony, figured that the studio would realize about $38 million in profit if “Spectre” performed as “Skyfall” did. And “Spectre” did not, taking in $881 million, about 20 percent less than “Skyfall,” which was released in 2012.
Why, then, do studios want to distribute Bond so badly? Bragging rights, mostly. Having a Bond movie on the schedule guarantees at least one hit in a business where there is almost no sure thing.
Five Studios’ Mission: Winning the Distribution Rights to James Bond (Published 2017)
Sony, whose contract to market and distribute the films expired in 2015, gave its presentation on a recreated set from “Dr. No.”www.nytimes.com
Using James Bond as an example for anything is pointless. Barbara Broccoli has a bunch of requirements, huge productions costs, huge marketing budgets, first dibs into revenue, dibs into revenue into other franchises… basically whoever offers the most concessions gets the rights to make James Bond.
Uncharted doesn’t need anything close to this. There’s literally only one company to feed. Sony.
Alter_Fridge
Member
Not to mention Craig is the anithesis of a baby face
sol_bad
Member
Movie was a lot of fun with cool set pieces. I liked Nate, Sully and Chloe in this as their first meeting together. I don't understand people saying "as an Uncharted film it's crap", it feels very Uncharted to me.
Because if that's the reason, surely people can understand a thing or two about budgets, it would be substantially more expensive to implement those elements.
Does it not feel like Uncharted because there is no super natural element or crazy big underground civilization?
Ammogeddon
Member
Watched it this weekend and enjoyed it. Loved the Easter eggs too.
There was a scene in the trailer where he had one but it wasn’t in the movie. I guess they cut it.
crunchyBiscuits
Member
I missed it, but apparently it's in the mid-credits scene
mcjmetroid
Member
Now, just imagine how much money it would have made if it was actually good...
ToTTenTranz
Banned
Saw the movie yesterday. It's a fun movie, and it's the kind of which we gain from watching in an IMAX theater IMO.
It has about the same kind of over-the-top action scenes as the games, so it's more than what we'd have in an Indiana Jones movie. I would have preferred a bit less high-paced action scenes and a bit more half-fake-History lore with a bit more mystery, but that's my opinion about the games too.
In the end, it's easily one of the best videogame to movie adaptations, and Sony seems hell bent into making this a movie franchise.
It has about the same kind of over-the-top action scenes as the games, so it's more than what we'd have in an Indiana Jones movie. I would have preferred a bit less high-paced action scenes and a bit more half-fake-History lore with a bit more mystery, but that's my opinion about the games too.
In the end, it's easily one of the best videogame to movie adaptations, and Sony seems hell bent into making this a movie franchise.
Yes, it is.
pasterpl
Member
I get it. It is nice action movie, without too much of substance, but it was never going to be festivals winning movie, it was supposed to be entertainment for the masses that will make good money. Not sure why people are surprised. But what I find funny people shit on Netflix productions which are doing exactly the same - producing, easy to digest fun for the whole family, not overly ambitious, easy to follow Etc.
sol_bad
Member
No, this is definitely higher quality than say Red Notice. Red Notice (car chase in the tunnel, yuck) looks cheaply made, this doesn't. The crazy thing is that Uncharted is a vastly cheaper movie, Netflix still trying to work out how to budget things correctly.
Tiago Rodrigues
Member
Actually:Uncharted Worldwide total is currently $154,035,478. It Is doing good, damn ya'll are some haters lol
Uncharted
www.boxofficemojo.com
Uncharted is now about to reach 230M WW and is aiming at $300M in a week from now.
Honestly it's kind of incredible it's doing this good just 2 weekends after its full WW release and without what's going to be its 2nd biggest market (i think).
Stooky
Member
Wow, Probably might boost after the Covid restrictions are relaxed
WitchHunter
Banned
Marky Mark is on the right track to become Bruce Willis.
Vaelka
Member
I only knew him from the Saw movie he was in, I had no idea he was such a wacky dude and actor.