Peter B. Parker
Sophomore
Watch the hands, not the mouth
@babygroot
Posts: 853
Likes: 411
 
|
Post by Peter B. Parker on Aug 25, 2017 12:17:40 GMT
So far it has made 71.8 million USD, on a rather modest budget of 60 million USD. This might not be a flop after all.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Aug 25, 2017 22:45:42 GMT
We'll see.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2017 2:54:03 GMT
Hmm. The movie sucked but for some reason I'm glad that it's doing well? Maybe it's just because I want more Stephen King adaptions in the future.
|
|
Peter B. Parker
Sophomore
Watch the hands, not the mouth
@babygroot
Posts: 853
Likes: 411
|
Post by Peter B. Parker on Aug 30, 2017 12:59:21 GMT
Now at $88million worldwide. I think $100million could be possible at this point, unless It delivers that predicted $50million opening weekend
|
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Aug 30, 2017 21:36:27 GMT
It needs to make $120 million world wide to be considered a box office success.
|
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Aug 31, 2017 5:22:48 GMT
interesting....
|
|
|
|
Post by bonerxmas on Aug 31, 2017 5:48:51 GMT
1. that is only the production budget, you have to at least double it to get full cost
2. a hit movie is not one that "makes back is money," a hit has to make a lot of money in order to cover the losses for the many flop movies, and it also has to pay for studio overhead
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2017 15:58:32 GMT
There will be no sequels. You can take that to the bank
|
|
Peter B. Parker
Sophomore
Watch the hands, not the mouth
@babygroot
Posts: 853
Likes: 411
|
Post by Peter B. Parker on Sept 3, 2017 16:04:21 GMT
Now at $101 million. I don't think it will hit $120 million before IT comes out, but I do have hope for $120 million before the likes of Blade Runner 2049 come out
|
|
Peter B. Parker
Sophomore
Watch the hands, not the mouth
@babygroot
Posts: 853
Likes: 411
|
Post by Peter B. Parker on Sept 12, 2017 17:14:46 GMT
It's starting to slow down now, especially because of September release like IT, with a total of $107 million. Could have done better, but considering it had negative reviews going for it and the start of the summer slowdown, it did ok.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Sept 12, 2017 19:35:58 GMT
There will be no sequels. You can take that to the bank I'm calling it. Five years from now they'll do a reboot and pay closer attention to the books. |
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Sept 14, 2017 16:46:19 GMT
It's starting to slow down now, especially because of September release like IT, with a total of $107 million. Could have done better, but considering it had negative reviews going for it and the start of the summer slowdown, it did ok. No, it really didn't do ok. I haven't seen it, so it may be a great movie but it did not do well at the box office. There's no way around it at this point. |
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Sept 14, 2017 20:26:05 GMT
It's starting to slow down now, especially because of September release like IT, with a total of $107 million. Could have done better, but considering it had negative reviews going for it and the start of the summer slowdown, it did ok. By what it brought in and where from I'm guessing the studio didn't even take in $50m, which even for a lower than normal $60m budget for a big film, so obviously that would means it lost minimum of about $10m just on it's production cost, add in marketing and you maybe looking at $50m in losses, so yeah imo it really didn't do well.
It'll probably break even or make a little cash when TV & home media is factored in but it failed in the theatres and probably wont get a sequel, unless it's a passion project or something for a big wig high up in the studio.
|
|
