• Light/Dark
  • Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Wkd Box Office - 3•8-10•19 - Slayven's nightmare becomes reality, as audiences spend $153M domestic and $455M worldwide on Carol Danvers' debut.

Status
Not open for further replies.
ZeoVGM

ZeoVGM

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
76,219
Providence, RI
El Bombastico said:
It only got a sequel because the new Chinese investors of Legendary Pictures saw how well it did in China.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yes, China saved the movie. Without it, it would have been a bomb.

Edit: To clarify, I think "bomb" and "flop" are very harsh terms that should be saved for movies that do so poorly, they are past the point of no return. For example, a movie like Mortal Engines.

The term is a bit subjective, obviously, but I find it being overused and a bit hyperbolic in some situations. I believe a movie can underperform while not being a flop. If a movie does well enough in one country that convinces the studio to move forward with a sequel, I don't think that's a bomb.
 
Last edited:
hodayathink

hodayathink

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,055
A movie "losing money" doesn't necessarily make it a bomb. There are other ways in which movies make their money besides theatrical runs, and a big movie that ends up $30-50M in the red after it leaves theaters still has a decent chance at ending up profitable, if only barely. A bomb is, generally speaking, a movie that underperforms so badly that there's no way it'll even come close to making its money back even after streaming rights and home video sales and everything else are considered. Pacific Rim gets close to that, but I don't know if it actually makes it there.
 
El Bombastico

El Bombastico

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
36,055
hodayathink said:
A movie "losing money" doesn't necessarily make it a bomb. There are other ways in which movies make their money besides theatrical runs, and a big movie that ends up $30-50M in the red after it leaves theaters still has a decent chance at ending up profitable, if only barely. A bomb is, generally speaking, a movie that underperforms so badly that there's no way it'll even come close to making its money back even after streaming rights and home video sales and everything else are considered. Pacific Rim gets close to that, but I don't know if it actually makes it there.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

A movie bombing only refers to its theatrical run. You're absolutely right that a movie that bombs in theaters can make back its budget or even be profitable by home video/other means.

Problem is its impossible to know because studios rarely, if ever, tell us how well a movie does financially outside of theaters. You can guess, of course, but the other problem is good old Hollywood Accounting. If we were to believe Hollywood, Return of the Jedi lost money
 
litebrite

litebrite

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
21,832
hodayathink said:
A movie "losing money" doesn't necessarily make it a bomb. There are other ways in which movies make their money besides theatrical runs, and a big movie that ends up $30-50M in the red after it leaves theaters still has a decent chance at ending up profitable, if only barely. A bomb is, generally speaking, a movie that underperforms so badly that there's no way it'll even come close to making its money back even after streaming rights and home video sales and everything else are considered. Pacific Rim gets close to that, but I don't know if it actually makes it there.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's all relative. A movie could bomb at the box office and become very profitable after the money generated in ancillary markets. It doesn't change the fact it bombed at the box office.
 
Last edited:
hodayathink

hodayathink

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,055
litebrite said:
It's all relative. A movie could bomb at the box office and become very profitable after the money generated in ancillary markets. It doesn't change the fact it bombed at the box office.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

My point is "it lost money != it's a bomb" because the amount of money matters. A movie losing $50M through it's theatrical run doesn't necessarily make it a bomb. A movie losing $150M does. The line is somewhere in there.

Also, Hollywood accounting isn't "that" complicated anymore.
 
litebrite

litebrite

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
21,832
hodayathink said:
My point is "it lost money != it's a bomb" because the amount of money matters. A movie losing $50M through it's theatrical run doesn't necessarily make it a bomb. A movie losing $150M does. The line is somewhere in there.

Also, Hollywood accounting isn't "that" complicated anymore.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You're arguing different degrees of bombs. But they all bombed tbh.
 
El Bombastico

El Bombastico

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
36,055
hodayathink said:
My point is "it lost money != it's a bomb" because the amount of money matters. A movie losing $50M through it's theatrical run doesn't necessarily make it a bomb. A movie losing $150M does. The line is somewhere in there.

Also, Hollywood accounting isn't "that" complicated anymore.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Lost the studio money during its theatrical run = Bomb.

You can argue different all you want, that's how I (and most everyone else) see it.
 
Messofanego

Messofanego

Member
Oct 25, 2017
26,201
UK
BringBackSonics said:
Really interested in the demographics of the movie compared to other marvel movies
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Mostly male actually but women under 25 were more. Quite similar ratio between PoC groups.

"At this point tonight on International Women's Day, Captain Marvel continues to remain male heavy 61% to 39% on PostTrak, though Females over 25 remain the second best draw at 24% behind M25+ (39%), but ahead of Men under 25 (22%). And at 4 1/2 stars and an 86% from females and 80% from males, everyone is just charmed by Captain Marvel. Diversity demos are broad 47% Caucasian, 20% Hispanic, 16% African American and 14% Asian. Definite recommend is still high for the Anna Boden-Ryan Fleck directed MCU title at 69% with 58% of the audience saying it met their expectations and 35% saying it exceeded."
https://deadline.com/2019/03/captain-marvel-opening-weekend-box-office-breaks-records-1202571905/
 
GraveRobberX

GraveRobberX

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,056
So EndGame Disney Hype train when?

I'm guessing just as Dumbo releases, the Onslaught begins

Avenger's April has a nice ring to it

Whole month leading up to the finishing event of a 10 year film anthology, also a new beginning to the next 10!

Need a trailer to satiate this thirst
 
PHOENIXZERO

PHOENIXZERO

Member
Oct 29, 2017
12,096
Messofanego said:
Misogynist, alt right snowflake idiots championing Alita over Captain Marvel doesn't even make sense. Both films have more similarities in terms of themes (female empowerment, embracing emotions, inclusivity, etc) that go against the idiots than differences.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You'd think they'd be pushing "the real Captain Marvel" coming out next month but... They're idiots.
 
ZeoVGM

ZeoVGM

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
76,219
Providence, RI
litebrite said:
Plus it's pretty simple. If a film not only didn't break even but lost money during it's theatrical run then it was a Box Office Bomb.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think that's an oversimplification, especially as finding out exact numbers for movies that are quite close (such as the original Pacific Rim) can be difficult.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box-office_bomb

Box-office bomb is a subjective term, as gauging the financial success of a film is difficult. There is also no reliable definition of the term. Not all films that fail to earn back their estimated costs during their theatrical runs are considered "bombs".[2] The label is generally applied to films that miss earnings projections by a wide margin, particularly when they are very expensive to produce.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

But again, it is a bit subjective in certain cases so it's likely not worth arguing over as much as we are.
 
Peru

Peru

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,134
Kin5290 said:
No, Captain Marvel is actually a good movie with strong acting and interesting characterization and relationships that doesn't deliberately undermine its central theme to facilitate a third act punchup.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

WW doesn't do that, though.
The futility of defeating the 'god of war' becomes very apparent to her, it's not he that's causing man to fight, that's the sad realization, and that all ties into its central theme (humanity's capability for good and bad).

I liked both movies!

El Bombastico said:
I personally saw no chemistry between them. To each his own, though.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAaJPWgDTGc
 
hodayathink

hodayathink

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,055
litebrite said:
It has nothing to do with the internet nor is it a terrible definition.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
El Bombastico said:
Says you.



Yep. "Box Office Bomb" has been around as term since at least the 80s. Nothing to do with the internet.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

First of all, it has to do with the internet's inability to have nuance in any conversation, so everything has to be "the best" or "the worst", "great" or "terrible", "a hit" or "a bomb" with no room for anything in between those two. Apparently there's no such thing as a mild disappointment, if you even lose $1M theatrically, then you've bombed, no questions asked. I mean, by this definition, Happy Death Day 2, which had a $9M production budget, is probably gonna be a bomb. Yes, the term has been around for a while, but it's always referred to large failures, not mild disappointments.

Second, whether a movie makes it's money back during its theatrical run doesn't tell us whether a movie is profitable, whether it was a worthwhile investment for the studio, it doesn't really tell us anything except, well, whether it made its money back during its theatrical run or not. If all you care about is scoring points during arguments, then yeah, I guess that means something, but if you're actually curious about how the movie industry works and how and why movies get made (at the budgets that they do), it doesn't really tell you very much.
 
litebrite

litebrite

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
21,832
hodayathink said:
First of all, it has to do with the internet's inability to have nuance in any conversation, so everything has to be "the best" or "the worst", "great" or "terrible", "a hit" or "a bomb" with no room for anything in between those two. Apparently there's no such thing as a mild disappointment, if you even lose $1M theatrically, then you've bombed, no questions asked. I mean, by this definition, Happy Death Day 2, which had a $9M production budget, is probably gonna be a bomb. Yes, the term has been around for a while, but it's always referred to large failures, not mild disappointments.

Second, whether a movie makes it's money back during its theatrical run doesn't tell us whether a movie is profitable, whether it was a worthwhile investment for the studio, it doesn't really tell us anything except, well, whether it made its money back during its theatrical run or not. If all you care about is scoring points during arguments, then yeah, I guess that means something, but if you're actually curious about how the movie industry works and how and why movies get made (at the budgets that they do), it doesn't really tell you very much.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
In general I agree with you about nuance however the context is much different with low to mid budget films being a dissapointment and a big budget blockbuster relatively making the same and being a bomb because there was much more at stake.
 
Ichthyosaurus

Ichthyosaurus

Banned
Dec 26, 2018
9,375
KamalaHarris said:
I'm sure she can but she sure didn't show it in Captain Marvel
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

tenor.gif
 
KillstealWolf

KillstealWolf

One Winged Slayer
Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
16,099
Captain Marvel has Goose, Wonder Woman has no Goose. Therefore, Captain Marvel is the better film of the two.
 
Visanideth

Visanideth

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
4,771
CommodoreKong said:
You really think most of them actually saw Alita?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That's the only safe takeaway. Having seen both, I think Alita is the more "girl-power" movie of the two (even if CM is a bit more overt and blunt about it).
How a misogynist could see CM as less threatening than Alita escapes me.


Alita is also the better movie, but hey, that's just my opinion.
 
Window

Window

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,284
El Bombastico said:
Alita is an anime, so she is a waifu to them.

If that makes no fucking sense, don't worry, that just means you're sane.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think there's more to this idea than you give it credit for. Alita wears her heart on her sleeves, easily falls in love with the first boy she sees, is portrayed as naive and is supposed to be otherworldly in her beauty. People have posted how they fell in love with Alita (the character). That in itself is not a bad thing of course. If anything it just shows how well the character was executed. However it also tends to invite a certain type of fans unfortunately. Carol I imagine is not quite as agreeable of a character (well Alita is a bit of a rebel as well tbh so maybe it really does make no sense at all).
 
guek

guek

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,177
Window said:
I think there's more to this idea than you give it credit for. Alita wears her heart on her sleeves, easily falls in love with the first boy she sees, is portrayed as naive and is supposed to be otherworldly in her beauty. People have posted how they fell in love with Alita (the character). That in itself is not a bad thing of course. If anything it just shows how well the character was executed. However it also tends to invite a certain type of fans unfortunately. Carol I imagine is not quite as agreeable of a character (well Alita is a bit of a rebel as well tbh so maybe it really does make no sense at all).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No, you're right. Alita has a sense of vulnerability that Carol lacks entirely. Carol is never portrayed as naive, just manipulated.
 
Penny Royal

Penny Royal

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
4,158
QLD, Australia
I liked Alita more than CM but enjoyed both movies.

I suspect Alita will be the one I rewatch, and I hope that JC backs a sequel as I loved the aesthetics of the world.
 
LL_Decitrig

LL_Decitrig

User-Requested Ban
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
10,334
Sunderland
Visanideth said:
How a misogynist could see CM as less threatening than Alita escapes me.


Alita is also the better movie, but hey, that's just my opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I'm prepared to accept the nutters' own framing on this: it isn't the film, it's the outspoken feminism of Brie Larson. Add to this the typical extreme right hatred of Disney's pandering to diversity, they see themselves as heroes holding back a huge tide of pop culture that contradicts their twisted worldview.
 
Bumrush

Bumrush

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,770
KillstealWolf said:
That's one success for Disney on their roadmap to dominate the 2019 box office.

kfLYyAd.jpg
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It's crazy to say this, but if they end up below $10B it will almost feel...disappointing. What an insane lineup. Credit where credit is due with how they've handled MCU, Pixar / Disney Animation and Star Wars, especially. Disney needs to take a hard look at how they handle everything else (the Dumbos of the world), but in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter too much.
 
Aaron

Aaron

I’m seeing double here!
Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,077
Minneapolis
ZeoVGM said:
I think that's an oversimplification, especially as finding out exact numbers for movies that are quite close (such as the original Pacific Rim) can be difficult.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box-office_bomb



But again, it is a bit subjective in certain cases so it's likely not worth arguing over as much as we are.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Should be worth noting too that this doesn't always match studio expectations.

Back when Tangled came out you had people on GAF trying to argue that it "bombed" because it only grossed 200m or so against a 260m budget. The budget was inflated because they scrapped a Rapunzel movie three or four times before landing on an idea that worked, and rolled those budget costs into one movie. Anyone who wanted to argue that Disney wasn't happy with the final film's success was crazy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.