|
|
Post by CrepedCrusader on Dec 24, 2019 2:20:14 GMT
In 2018, when Solo: A Star Wars Story made $393 million worldwide on a rumored $275 million budget, Outraged Fan Boycotters (OFBs) declared victory, and vowed to use their perceived power on other properties. Then came Captain Marvel, which the OFBs, if anything, went after harder than Solo. What did Captain Marvel make? $1.1 billion. Next came the Rise of Skywalker, which the OFBs are declaring victory over even as we speak despite a worldwide opening weekend of $375 million. Assuming that the film has the same multiplier as the last film in the Star Wars sequel trilogy, it will end up topping out between $1 billion and $1.1 billion. The lesson: literally nobody cares about OFBs or their boycotts, and for all the effect they have they might as well not exist.
|
|
|
|
Post by senan90 on Dec 24, 2019 2:29:31 GMT
Yes, but it's more hilarious to use it as an insult to those deluded losers than some educational fact.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Dec 24, 2019 2:35:32 GMT
A movie boycott just means "I am not interested in seeing this." There's nothing else to it.
The only reason it gets press is because usually it involves franchises and brands and Big Brother frowns on those who don't submit.
|
|
|
|
Post by CrepedCrusader on Dec 24, 2019 3:06:43 GMT
A movie boycott just means "I am not interested in seeing this." There's nothing else to it. The only reason it gets press is because usually it involves franchises and brands and Big Brother frowns on those who don't submit. It's clear that many boycotters genuinely think they have the power to affect a film's box office. Just look at the conspiracies surrounding Captain Marvel, where the OFBs claimed that Disney bought millions of tickets in order to inflate the box office. This was the OFBs showing their inability to accept that they're boycott didn't hurt the film's performance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Catman 猫的主人 on Dec 24, 2019 3:16:15 GMT
Catman has not seen a movie in the theaters since 2001, and they're still making them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Dec 24, 2019 3:40:07 GMT
It's clear that many boycotters genuinely think they have the power to affect a film's box office. Just look at the conspiracies surrounding Captain Marvel, where the OFBs claimed that Disney bought millions of tickets in order to inflate the box office. This was the OFBs showing their inability to accept that they're boycott didn't hurt the film's performance. Traditionally a boycott is where you like something but as a protest you sacrifice your desire for some reason so you refuse to buy it to send a message. I suppose if we say someone likes the Star Wars brand but is not happy with the quality of the current product, they can boycott it to send a message, but it seems weird to me. If I refuse to watch a Star Wars movie it is not a boycott-I just don't find it interesting enough to bother. It's silly to think studios are fussing about domestic Box Office--they dont even care that the film flops in China. They obviously have lots of money to burn.
|
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on Dec 24, 2019 3:46:06 GMT
You would need millions to boycott in order to make a dent at boycotting a certain film.
|
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Dec 24, 2019 9:59:28 GMT
In 2018, when Solo: A Star Wars Story made $393 million worldwide on a rumored $275 million budget, Outraged Fan Boycotters (OFBs) declared victory, and vowed to use their perceived power on other properties. Then came Captain Marvel, which the OFBs, if anything, went after harder than Solo. What did Captain Marvel make? $1.1 billion. Next came the Rise of Skywalker, which the OFBs are declaring victory over even as we speak despite a worldwide opening weekend of $375 million. Assuming that the film has the same multiplier as the last film in the Star Wars sequel trilogy, it will end up topping out between $1 billion and $1.1 billion. The lesson: literally nobody cares about OFBs or their boycotts, and for all the effect they have they might as well not exist. One flaw in the thinking that you have though well several, one is that there was even a boycott, like most things claims to do so are usually just meaningless chest pounding, happens with most entertainment properties, same people say the same this sucks I am never watching this show again, week after week, it's not that they "boycotters" don't matter but that they don't even boycott 99% of the time.
2nd is the idea that if the 20% drop from TLJ which is itself a 10% drop from TFA, totalling over 30% in decline from TFA to TROS is a result of boycotting that this will not exceed beyond this point, the 10% drop from TFA to TLJ resulted in like a 33% drop in TLJ's overall box office, assuming it will have the same multiplier as TLJ maybe wishful thinking, that multiplied drops by even 10% you are talking a loss of $100mfrom that $1b-1.1b estimate.
3rd you assume $1b or $1.1b is a good number beyond danger, TROS has a production budget of $250-300m, both previous Saga films had $185m marketing budgets, so TROS is likely to have the same if not a higher marketing budget, this puts estimated cost for the movie at $435-485m, though industry estimates have said it has a combined amount of around $400m, now as both TFA and TLJ have been estimated to have taken back 45/6% of their BO for Disney this if the Domestic to International market split hold should hold true for TROS also, that means TROS's break even point is as high as $950m on the low end or $1.06b on the high end, and that's if the domestic market stays as strong as it is, if the international market takes a larger chunk of the BO that % that Disney take home is going to shrink, pushing the break even point even higher, as it stands $1.1b could only net Disney less than $20m in profits, and that's before factoring in participation bonuses, but if the $400m number is to believed then yes $1b-1.1b would be a decent profit for Disney, all depends on what those numbers turn out to be and where they come from ultimately.
So if people did boycott this movie and them doing so caused this lower turn out which results in a lower overall box office then the effect they had is driving SW to the point where the grand finale of the entire saga series may be having to scrape tooth and nail just to not lose money, and even if your best case scenario turns out to be true means they cost Disney like a hundred million dollars in profit.
Though this may all be nothing as the release this close to X-Mas may be the cause of the decline which may autocorrect over the films entire run for all we know, but saying people boycotted something and it didn't matter when it clearly shows a decline from saga to saga movie just makes you look very silly if anyone pays attention.
|
|
|
|
Post by vegalyra on Dec 24, 2019 17:00:02 GMT
I bribed some CGI artists at Universal to put out some crummy models for Cats. Then I bribed a bunch of film reviewers to put out horrible reviews for that film. That how you effectively sabotage a film, not a boycott. 
|
|
|
|
Post by bravomailer on Dec 24, 2019 19:14:28 GMT
You're probably forgetting about my boycott of Titanic. It was working so well that Cameron and DiCaprio came to my place and pleaded with me. Well, they were nice enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Dec 24, 2019 19:16:49 GMT
Yeah but it makes for entertaining thread discussions.
|
|