|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jul 17, 2018 20:51:31 GMT
So flop then? Other movies have made more in this same amount of time and been called flops. The same doesn't apply here because its MCU? I wonder... Maybe? I don't know what the budget was for the film. Even if it did I could careless. It's not like I'm getting any money from it.And that right there is the bottom line, innit?
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Jul 17, 2018 22:39:33 GMT
So flop then? Other movies have made more in this same amount of time and been called flops. The same doesn't apply here because its MCU? I wonder... What films have made more that are considered flops?
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Jul 18, 2018 14:10:52 GMT
Ouch. It’s certainly not as catastrophic as the numbers for JL and *Solo*, but those are still some rather poor holds for this kind of movie. I can’t believe I’m saying this, but the movie might actually struggle to hit $200 million domestically. See what I mean? See my previous post in this thread.
"...not as catastrophic as the numbers for JL..." is not a statement that is borne out by the facts. Here are the facts as of this writing (7/17/18). Antman and Wasp: 136 domestic, 287 world Justice League: 229 domestic, 657 world (all numbers from Box Office Mojo)
SO when Antman and Wasp makes 229 domestic and 657 world THEN we can talk about it being catastrophic in comparison.
The expectations are the difference though. You make a valid point about people giving it a free pass because it's Marvel, but the comparison to JL is a poor one. Ant-Man is a 3rd tier character at best. Justice League has the three most popular characters in DC's stable; there's no reason it shouldn't be able to pull in Avengers type numbers. So I would agree with you that Ant-Man is a BO disappointment by MCU standards, but it's expected to have smaller (pardon the pun) returns. For JL to do its numbers in today's market is nothing short of a disaster.
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jul 18, 2018 14:26:12 GMT
So flop then? Other movies have made more in this same amount of time and been called flops. The same doesn't apply here because its MCU? I wonder... What films have made more that are considered flops? This is one example I used in another post:
Antman and Wasp: 136 domestic, 287 world
Justice League: 229 domestic, 657 world
(As of 7/17/18 all numbers from Box Office Mojo)
Solo's another:
211 domestic, 384 world
Now surely Antman will beat Solo, but at THIS point it was already clear that Solo was a flop and yet Antman is not getting the same talk. Because MCU? I think so...
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Jul 18, 2018 21:24:04 GMT
This is one example I used in another post: Antman and Wasp: 136 domestic, 287 world Justice League: 229 domestic, 657 world (As of 7/17/18 all numbers from Box Office Mojo) Solo's another:211 domestic, 384 world Now surely Antman will beat Solo, but at THIS point it was already clear that Solo was a flop and yet Antman is not getting the same talk. Because MCU? I think so... Well Ant-man and the Wasp has a budget of $162 million. Solo has a budget of $275 million and Justice League was $300 million so a vast amount more. With those movies the domestic gross didn't come anywhere close to the budget. Ant-man will pass it's budget domestically by the end of the week though probably. They say you're meant to make double the budget worldwide to break even. Solo won't come remotely close and Justice League just about did. Ant-man will make about 3-4x it's budget. It hasn't even come out in France, Italy, UK or Japan either yet.
|
|
|
Post by Spike Del Rey on Jul 18, 2018 21:31:20 GMT
This is one example I used in another post: Antman and Wasp: 136 domestic, 287 world Justice League: 229 domestic, 657 world (As of 7/17/18 all numbers from Box Office Mojo) Solo's another:211 domestic, 384 world Now surely Antman will beat Solo, but at THIS point it was already clear that Solo was a flop and yet Antman is not getting the same talk. Because MCU? I think so... Well Ant-man and the Wasp has a budget of $162 million. Solo has a budget of $275 million and Justice League was $300 million so a vast amount more. With those movies the domestic gross didn't come anywhere close to the budget. Ant-man will pass it's budget domestically by the end of the week though probably. They say you're meant to make double the budget worldwide to break even. Solo won't come remotely close and Justice League just about did. Ant-man will make about 3-4x it's budget. It hasn't even come out in France, Italy, UK or Japan either yet. Add China to that list where it hasn't yet been released.
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Jul 19, 2018 6:27:02 GMT
the glass is half full, others see it half empty. numbers are what they are, they don't lie But how people INTERPRET those numbers is ALL OVER THE PLACE, in some cases tantamount to a lie.
Two movies can make the same or very similar amounts of money and if they love one but hate the other the one they hate will get called a flop and the one they love will get all the lee way they can possibly afford it.
As of this writing Ant Man would be considered a flop if it was a DCEU movie or even a Star Wars movie. People would be saying "See? The franchise is fatigue!"
But its MCU so allowances are made like "the expectations were lower", or "It's just Ant Man, not the Avengers or the Justice League", or here's my favorite "the budget was lower", as if the general audience knows or even cares what the budget is.
Bottom line people aint going in the numbers we expect from bigger scale blockbusters.
You don't know that the budget is the biggest part of the equation? Why do you suppose these budgets are set where they are? It's because the studio has certain expectations for certain movies. A horror film would never get the same budget as a Star Wars movie. That's because horror movies make much less. But they keep making horror movies? Can you guess why? Because they make a profit due to the lower budget. You are desperate to mock a Marvel movie here. It's not doing great, but it's hardly a flop. They set the budget lower because Ant-Man doesn't make as much as other MCU movies. Check out the most profitable movies of all time. It's not the movies that grossed the most. This shouldn't be hard to understand unless you just don't want to understand due to an agenda: www.thecinemaholic.com/most-profitable-movies-time/
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jul 20, 2018 16:45:29 GMT
This is one example I used in another post: Antman and Wasp: 136 domestic, 287 world Justice League: 229 domestic, 657 world (As of 7/17/18 all numbers from Box Office Mojo) Solo's another:211 domestic, 384 world Now surely Antman will beat Solo, but at THIS point it was already clear that Solo was a flop and yet Antman is not getting the same talk. Because MCU? I think so... Well Ant-man and the Wasp has a budget of $162 million. Solo has a budget of $275 million and Justice League was $300 million so a vast amount more. With those movies the domestic gross didn't come anywhere close to the budget. Ant-man will pass it's budget domestically by the end of the week though probably. They say you're meant to make double the budget worldwide to break even. Solo won't come remotely close and Justice League just about did. Ant-man will make about 3-4x it's budget. It hasn't even come out in France, Italy, UK or Japan either yet. From a previous post of mine on this thread...
"...allowances are made like "the expectations were lower", or "It's just Ant Man, not the Avengers or the Justice League", or here's my favorite "the budget was lower", as if the general audience knows or even cares what the budget is. Bottom line people aint going in the numbers we expect from bigger scale blockbusters."
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jul 20, 2018 16:56:11 GMT
But how people INTERPRET those numbers is ALL OVER THE PLACE, in some cases tantamount to a lie.
Two movies can make the same or very similar amounts of money and if they love one but hate the other the one they hate will get called a flop and the one they love will get all the lee way they can possibly afford it.
As of this writing Ant Man would be considered a flop if it was a DCEU movie or even a Star Wars movie. People would be saying "See? The franchise is fatigue!"
But its MCU so allowances are made like "the expectations were lower", or "It's just Ant Man, not the Avengers or the Justice League", or here's my favorite "the budget was lower", as if the general audience knows or even cares what the budget is.
Bottom line people aint going in the numbers we expect from bigger scale blockbusters.
You don't know that the budget is the biggest part of the equation? Why do you suppose these budgets are set where they are? It's because the studio has certain expectations for certain movies. A horror film would never get the same budget as a Star Wars movie. That's because horror movies make much less. But they keep making horror movies? Can you guess why? Because they make a profit due to the lower budget. You are desperate to mock a Marvel movie here. It's not doing great, but it's hardly a flop. They set the budget lower because Ant-Man doesn't make as much as other MCU movies. Check out the most profitable movies of all time. It's not the movies that grossed the most. This shouldn't be hard to understand unless you just don't want to understand due to an agenda: www.thecinemaholic.com/most-profitable-movies-time/HAH! Ok, great, now I have an "agenda"!
Listen up folks, I have an agenda! I'm a sock account paid by Warner Brothers to ruin Disney and Marvel.
Dude, my agenda is that when its MCU and come in low everyone makes excuses for it, but if its DCEU or Star Wars or whatever else and it comes in low its a flop.
There's a double standard.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Jul 20, 2018 17:07:10 GMT
From a previous post of mine on this thread... "...allowances are made like "the expectations were lower", or "It's just Ant Man, not the Avengers or the Justice League", or here's my favorite "the budget was lower", as if the general audience knows or even cares what the budget is. Bottom line people aint going in the numbers we expect from bigger scale blockbusters. It makes zero difference if the general audience know or don't know the budget. The Box Office in relation to the budget is the business and that's just common sense. John Wick didn't make a third of John Carter but which one got the sequel and which one is one of the most well known movie bombs of all time? You can argue it hasn't done as well as expected but it's obviously not a flop like Solo.
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Jul 20, 2018 17:43:46 GMT
You don't know that the budget is the biggest part of the equation? Why do you suppose these budgets are set where they are? It's because the studio has certain expectations for certain movies. A horror film would never get the same budget as a Star Wars movie. That's because horror movies make much less. But they keep making horror movies? Can you guess why? Because they make a profit due to the lower budget. You are desperate to mock a Marvel movie here. It's not doing great, but it's hardly a flop. They set the budget lower because Ant-Man doesn't make as much as other MCU movies. Check out the most profitable movies of all time. It's not the movies that grossed the most. This shouldn't be hard to understand unless you just don't want to understand due to an agenda: www.thecinemaholic.com/most-profitable-movies-time/HAH! Ok, great, now I have an "agenda"!
Listen up folks, I have an agenda! I'm a sock account paid by Warner Brothers to ruin Disney and Marvel.
Dude, my agenda is that when its MCU and come in low everyone makes excuses for it, but if its DCEU or Star Wars or whatever else and it comes in low its a flop.
There's a double standard.
An agenda is the only explanation I can come up with for you ignoring the budgets of movies. That's the determining factor in movies making money. It's simple math. The other explanation is ignorance...perhaps you somehow didn't know this. Is that what it is?
|
|
NormanClature
Junior Member
"Anyone would think tin-pot-dictatorship is a bad thing???!?"
@armyofone
Posts: 2,108
Likes: 1,196
|
Post by NormanClature on Jul 20, 2018 18:22:21 GMT
If it doesn't pass $500 million at the worldwide BO, it's a fail. That doesn't look very likely to happen at this point.
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jul 20, 2018 18:27:59 GMT
From a previous post of mine on this thread... "...allowances are made like "the expectations were lower", or "It's just Ant Man, not the Avengers or the Justice League", or here's my favorite "the budget was lower", as if the general audience knows or even cares what the budget is. Bottom line people aint going in the numbers we expect from bigger scale blockbusters. It makes zero difference if the general audience know or don't know the budget. The Box Office in relation to the budget is the business and that's just common sense. John Wick didn't make a third of John Carter but which one got the sequel and which one is one of the most well known movie bombs of all time? You can argue it hasn't done as well as expected but it's obviously not a flop like Solo. it TOTALLY makes a difference! The general audience doesn't know nor care how much a movie costs. They don't go see a movie because it costs more to make, or less to make. They could care less about that. They go to see a movie if they like it. So bringing up budgets to explain why people didn't go to see a movie is what is irrelevant.
Go ahead... ask the people in your orbit if they know how much the last movie they saw cost to make and whether or not that was a factor in them seeing that movie. I'll wait...
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jul 20, 2018 18:33:32 GMT
HAH! Ok, great, now I have an "agenda"!
Listen up folks, I have an agenda! I'm a sock account paid by Warner Brothers to ruin Disney and Marvel.
Dude, my agenda is that when its MCU and come in low everyone makes excuses for it, but if its DCEU or Star Wars or whatever else and it comes in low its a flop.
There's a double standard.
An agenda is the only explanation I can come up with for you ignoring the budgets of movies. That's the determining factor in movies making money. It's simple math. The other explanation is ignorance...perhaps you somehow didn't know this. Is that what it is? The general audience doesn't know nor care how much a movie costs. They don't go see a movie because it costs more to make, or less to make. They could care less about that. They go to see a movie if they like it. So bringing up budgets to explain why people didn't go to see a movie is what is irrelevant. Go ahead... ask the people in your orbit if they know how much the last movie they saw cost to make and whether or not that was a factor in them seeing that movie. I'll wait...
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Jul 20, 2018 18:42:48 GMT
An agenda is the only explanation I can come up with for you ignoring the budgets of movies. That's the determining factor in movies making money. It's simple math. The other explanation is ignorance...perhaps you somehow didn't know this. Is that what it is? The general audience doesn't know nor care how much a movie costs. They don't go see a movie because it costs more to make, or less to make. They could care less about that. They go to see a movie if they like it. So bringing up budgets to explain why people didn't go to see a movie is what is irrelevant. Go ahead... ask the people in your orbit if they know how much the last movie they saw cost to make and whether or not that was a factor in them seeing that movie. I'll wait... There is no reason to wait. Of course people don't care about the budgets for movies. They also don't care if they are profitable.... which is what you were talking about. So it's a bit late to bring up "the public doesn't care" when you were originally talking about something the public doesn't care about. You claimed "flop"...which is 100% determined by the budget of a movie. ...You then discounted the budget. So obviously you really mean "Ant-Man isn't as popular as other MCU movies". We already knew that. We found that out with the first Ant-Man movie. And of course Marvel knew it too...hence the reason for the smaller budget. If you discount the budget, that means every horror movie ever other than IT is a "flop". That's not how it works obviously. Make up your mind what you want to talk about. You brought up the "flop" word....which the public doesn't care about.
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Jul 20, 2018 18:47:59 GMT
If it doesn't pass $500 at the worldwide BO, it's a fail. That doesn't look very likely to happen at this point. And what orifice did you pull that figure from?
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Jul 20, 2018 19:03:28 GMT
If it doesn't pass $500 at the worldwide BO, it's a fail. That doesn't look very likely to happen at this point. Therefore every DCEU film, X-vers film, Dark Knight and over 50% of all MCU fllms failed
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jul 20, 2018 19:27:27 GMT
The general audience doesn't know nor care how much a movie costs. They don't go see a movie because it costs more to make, or less to make. They could care less about that. They go to see a movie if they like it. So bringing up budgets to explain why people didn't go to see a movie is what is irrelevant. Go ahead... ask the people in your orbit if they know how much the last movie they saw cost to make and whether or not that was a factor in them seeing that movie. I'll wait... There is no reason to wait. Of course people don't care about the budgets for movies. They also don't care if they are profitable.... which is what you were talking about. So it's a bit late to bring up "the public doesn't care" when you were originally talking about something the public doesn't care about. You claimed "flop"...which is 100% determined by the budget of a movie. ...You then discounted the budget. So obviously you really mean "Ant-Man isn't as popular as other MCU movies". We already knew that. We found that out with the first Ant-Man movie. And of course Marvel knew it too...hence the reason for the smaller budget. If you discount the budget, that means every horror movie ever other than IT is a "flop". That's not how it works obviously. Make up your mind what you want to talk about. You brought up the "flop" word....which the public doesn't care about. Ok heres the problem... I did say flop, but YOU think that its 100% determined by the budget of a movie which its not. Its determined by whther or not people go to see it. Its not "bit late to bring up "the public doesn't care" since that's what I've been saying all along. This is from my 2nd post in this very thread: "Bottom line people aint going in the numbers we expect from bigger scale blockbusters." And I know you can find similar statements in other threads.
Every horror movie ever made is not a flop even by those standards. Blair Witch 1 made 150 million domestic, Exorcist made 236 domestic and adjusted for inflation that's a whopping $1,025,254,300 making it the 9th most profitable movie ever, still, today! The more recent Insidous 2 made 83 mill. I don't consider any of these flops regardless of budgets.
I've made up my mind about what I'm talking about. You're the one confusing the issue, pal.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Jul 20, 2018 19:27:30 GMT
If it doesn't pass $500 at the worldwide BO, it's a fail. That doesn't look very likely to happen at this point. Agreed, any film that can't gross $500 is a definite fail.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Jul 20, 2018 19:35:06 GMT
They go to see a movie if they like it. So bringing up budgets to explain why people didn't go to see a movie is what is irrelevant. What does that have to do with anything? A movie has a budget, depending on that budget it requires a certain amount of people go see it in order to make a profit. In that regard, not enough people went to see Solo and that's why there's reports that it's going to lose money. Seemingly not enough people went to see Justice League so there were reports that it lost money. Theres no reports like that for Ant-man because enough people have or are going to see it in order for it to make a profit. If the movie is profitable then it's not a flop.
|
|