|
Post by thisguy4000 on Dec 12, 2019 19:16:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Dec 12, 2019 19:27:45 GMT
Interesting, I didn't think they'd make a sequel to this one.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Dec 12, 2019 20:07:27 GMT
Cool to hear.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Dec 12, 2019 21:47:30 GMT
Interesting, I didn't think they'd make a sequel to this one. Why not? the movie did well for it's budget and was widely well received on top of that it would make solid money from home media and TV deals plus these films all act as massive adverts for their characters and their huge merch catalogues, seems like a sequel would be obvious, curious as to why you wouldn't have thought so yourself.
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Dec 12, 2019 22:22:05 GMT
Well it did alright but I wouldn't have thought it would have made enough that they'd have bothered with making a sequel to it. Except for that Fantastic Four failure it was one of the lowest grossing superhero movies in 7 years.
I'd have expected them to put the time and effort into something else that could be bigger.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Dec 12, 2019 22:30:47 GMT
But on one of the lowest cbm budget's in the last decade also, it had an estimated break even point of $250m at worst and blew past that by over $100m, so they clearly didn't spend lots on marketing either, so all things considered it did pretty good, I am more surprised they are doing another Batman film personally, considering the last 2 movies featuring Batman bombed in the cinema's.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Dec 13, 2019 1:38:05 GMT
But on one of the lowest cbm budget's in the last decade also, it had an estimated break even point of $250m at worst and blew past that by over $100m, so they clearly didn't spend lots on marketing either, so all things considered it did pretty good, I am more surprised they are doing another Batman film personally, considering the last 2 movies featuring Batman bombed in the cinema's. I guess they want a fresh start. Again.
|
|
|
Post by onethreetwo on Dec 13, 2019 2:02:33 GMT
5 years later. No rush, guys. No rush.
|
|
|
Post by onethreetwo on Dec 13, 2019 2:04:31 GMT
The average man lives 76 years. You're waiting one fifteenth of your life for this sequel. Just be glad you weren't 73 when the first one came out.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Dec 13, 2019 2:49:49 GMT
What exactly are we referring to when we’re talking about the last two movies featuring Batman “bombing in cinemas”? Justice League and what? The LEGO Batman Movie or BvS? If either of those movies bombed, I don’t see how Shazam! could be considered a success.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Dec 13, 2019 11:23:08 GMT
What exactly are we referring to when we’re talking about the last two movies featuring Batman “bombing in cinemas”? Justice League and what? The LEGO Batman Movie or BvS? If either of those movies bombed, I don’t see how Shazam! could be considered a success. BVS, it took back estimated I think $40m less than what WB spent on making and marketing the movie, combined they spent $407m on it and took back iirc $367m, also Shazam! had a budget of less than 1/3 of BVS's, and presumably a marketing budget 1/3 the size also, hence it's BE point being estimated at $230-250m compared to BVS's $800m, going by how those BE breakdowns tend to seem to be figured out as, one would assume Shazam likely had a combined cost of $120-130m.
Also with BVS costing likely a little over 3 times as much as Shazam to make, if we tripled Shazam's numbers it would have made like $1.1b, which if BVS had made that they would have cleared about $50-60m theatrically based on how their box office was split, which if you apply the same split to Shazam they took back a total of about $150m on a combined cost of probably $120-130m, so it would have made money.
How much a movie makes is on it's own worthless information, how much it cost, where it made it's money, how long it took to make it's money is all vital information in figuring out if a movie made money in the cinema's. a US movie that makes $1b in the us will likely return $500-550m to the studio based on the ticket splits, a US movie that makes $1.5b in China however can return less than $500m based on how China's box office split for foreign films works, this is why so many studios now partner with Chinese companies in their movies so they don't get the smaller % from the box office.
BVS did make money though thanks to home media and TV/Streaming deals which when all was said an done made BVS profitable by about $100m, but it was a theatrical flop or bomb however you want to call it.
All that being said however these cbm's for WB & Disney have the advantage of being owned by the companies also, so the company makes money off of the merch of these things, which with BVS is another place they made their money, since BVS was announced annual Batman merch sales have doubled, which I guess explains why they want to do another Batman movie already, who cares if he's lost possibly $250m at the box office in the last 5 years, he's brought in over $3b in merch sales between 2015 and 2017 alone.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Dec 13, 2019 15:49:55 GMT
What exactly are we referring to when we’re talking about the last two movies featuring Batman “bombing in cinemas”? Justice League and what? The LEGO Batman Movie or BvS? If either of those movies bombed, I don’t see how Shazam! could be considered a success. BVS, it took back estimated I think $40m less than what WB spent on making and marketing the movie, combined they spent $407m on it and took back iirc $367m, also Shazam! had a budget of less than 1/3 of BVS's, and presumably a marketing budget 1/3 the size also, hence it's BE point being estimated at $230-250m compared to BVS's $800m, going by how those BE breakdowns tend to seem to be figured out as, one would assume Shazam likely had a combined cost of $120-130m.
Also with BVS costing likely a little over 3 times as much as Shazam to make, if we tripled Shazam's numbers it would have made like $1.1b, which if BVS had made that they would have cleared about $50-60m theatrically based on how their box office was split, which if you apply the same split to Shazam they took back a total of about $150m on a combined cost of probably $120-130m, so it would have made money.
How much a movie makes is on it's own worthless information, how much it cost, where it made it's money, how long it took to make it's money is all vital information in figuring out if a movie made money in the cinema's. a US movie that makes $1b in the us will likely return $500-550m to the studio based on the ticket splits, a US movie that makes $1.5b in China however can return less than $500m based on how China's box office split for foreign films works, this is why so many studios now partner with Chinese companies in their movies so they don't get the smaller % from the box office.
BVS did make money though thanks to home media and TV/Streaming deals which when all was said an done made BVS profitable by about $100m, but it was a theatrical flop or bomb however you want to call it.
All that being said however these cbm's for WB & Disney have the advantage of being owned by the companies also, so the company makes money off of the merch of these things, which with BVS is another place they made their money, since BVS was announced annual Batman merch sales have doubled, which I guess explains why they want to do another Batman movie already, who cares if he's lost possibly $250m at the box office in the last 5 years, he's brought in over $3b in merch sales between 2015 and 2017 alone.
Shazam! reportedly cost anywhere from $80-100 million without marketing. It made less than $150 million domestically, and made around $30 million in China. BvS reportedly cost $250 million without marketing. That means that the movie made over three times its production budget, just like Shazam! If BvS qualifies as a bomb, then it seems unlikely that Shazam! made a profit.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Dec 13, 2019 16:51:04 GMT
BVS, it took back estimated I think $40m less than what WB spent on making and marketing the movie, combined they spent $407m on it and took back iirc $367m, also Shazam! had a budget of less than 1/3 of BVS's, and presumably a marketing budget 1/3 the size also, hence it's BE point being estimated at $230-250m compared to BVS's $800m, going by how those BE breakdowns tend to seem to be figured out as, one would assume Shazam likely had a combined cost of $120-130m.
Also with BVS costing likely a little over 3 times as much as Shazam to make, if we tripled Shazam's numbers it would have made like $1.1b, which if BVS had made that they would have cleared about $50-60m theatrically based on how their box office was split, which if you apply the same split to Shazam they took back a total of about $150m on a combined cost of probably $120-130m, so it would have made money.
How much a movie makes is on it's own worthless information, how much it cost, where it made it's money, how long it took to make it's money is all vital information in figuring out if a movie made money in the cinema's. a US movie that makes $1b in the us will likely return $500-550m to the studio based on the ticket splits, a US movie that makes $1.5b in China however can return less than $500m based on how China's box office split for foreign films works, this is why so many studios now partner with Chinese companies in their movies so they don't get the smaller % from the box office.
BVS did make money though thanks to home media and TV/Streaming deals which when all was said an done made BVS profitable by about $100m, but it was a theatrical flop or bomb however you want to call it.
All that being said however these cbm's for WB & Disney have the advantage of being owned by the companies also, so the company makes money off of the merch of these things, which with BVS is another place they made their money, since BVS was announced annual Batman merch sales have doubled, which I guess explains why they want to do another Batman movie already, who cares if he's lost possibly $250m at the box office in the last 5 years, he's brought in over $3b in merch sales between 2015 and 2017 alone.
Shazam! reportedly cost anywhere from $80-100 million without marketing. It made less than $150 million domestically, and made around $30 million in China. BvS reportedly cost $250 million without marketing. That means that the movie made over three times its production budget, just like Shazam! If BvS qualifies as a bomb, then it seems unlikely that Shazam! made a profit. And Shazam had a marketing budget of about 50% of it's budget where as BVS had one of 62.5% of it's budget, Shazam made over 140% more than it's combined production and marketing budgets, BVS made less than 120% more than it's combined budgets, and that's with estimating Shazams combined budgets at their estimated maximums, which if it cost less than that which it could have, which means it made even more than 140% more than it cost, hence how it can be profitable whilst BVS was not.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Dec 13, 2019 17:05:20 GMT
Shazam! reportedly cost anywhere from $80-100 million without marketing. It made less than $150 million domestically, and made around $30 million in China. BvS reportedly cost $250 million without marketing. That means that the movie made over three times its production budget, just like Shazam! If BvS qualifies as a bomb, then it seems unlikely that Shazam! made a profit. And Shazam had a marketing budget of about 50% of it's budget where as BVS had one of 62.5% of it's budget, Shazam made over 140% more than it's combined production and marketing budgets, BVS made less than 120% more than it's combined budgets, and that's with estimating Shazams combined budgets at their estimated maximums, which if it cost less than that which it could have, which means it made even more than 140% more than it cost, hence how it can be profitable whilst BVS was not. Where did you hear about the movie’s marketing budget being only 50% of its production budget?
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Dec 13, 2019 18:22:07 GMT
And Shazam had a marketing budget of about 50% of it's budget where as BVS had one of 62.5% of it's budget, Shazam made over 140% more than it's combined production and marketing budgets, BVS made less than 120% more than it's combined budgets, and that's with estimating Shazams combined budgets at their estimated maximums, which if it cost less than that which it could have, which means it made even more than 140% more than it cost, hence how it can be profitable whilst BVS was not. Where did you hear about the movie’s marketing budget being only 50% of its production budget? Just figuring that based on the reported details so far, if Shazam has a budget between $80-100m and it has a break even point of $235-250, that is putting it's combined budget likely in the range of $120-130m, meaning the marketing would probably be in the $30-50m range.
But even if Shazam had a combined $150m production & marketing budget, which would count as 50% marketing to it's budget, if you apply the exact same split about 42% like what BVS had from it's box office, then that would leave Shazam $152m return from the box office, so it would technically make money either way, but it should have a better return than that due to it making a higher percentage of it's box office domestically than what BVS did.
|
|
|
Post by James on Dec 13, 2019 21:37:11 GMT
Don’t be confused why it’s getting one for the BO performance, be happy it’s getting one in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by primeone on Dec 13, 2019 22:09:23 GMT
Glad they have the same team back too
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Dec 13, 2019 23:31:39 GMT
Glad they have the same team back too Time is of the essence though it seems. Asher Angel isn't getting any younger.
|
|
|
Post by primeone on Dec 15, 2019 11:47:13 GMT
Glad they have the same team back too Time is of the essence though it seems. Asher Angel isn't getting any younger. True. That’s why I wish the film was releasing in 2021.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Dec 15, 2019 15:58:45 GMT
Time is of the essence though it seems. Asher Angel isn't getting any younger. True. That’s why I wish the film was releasing in 2021. Does this mean Shazam will be limited to a single sequel or will they try for a 3rd if it works out? or is the Black Adam movie going to be the middle entry into a "Shazam" trilogy?
|
|