Hollywood's Abysmal 2023 in Numbers
POSTED BY: 6ixStringJack
UPDATED: Friday, August 2, 2024 09:17
VIEWED: 13031
PAGE 16 of 25
Quote:
Originally posted by whozit:Quote:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:Quote:
Originally posted by whozit:
https://www.movieinsider.com/movies/2024
This is what 2024 is looking like, there are few that may be worth a look.
Any bets on which will be the big ones?
That could be fun. Archiving that list before the new year starts and everybody give their top 10 picks for either worldwide gross or ww gross vs production budget (profitability).
We couldn't predict when new movies would break up that schedule or when movies were pushed off until 2025 or later, but with the archive backup we'd know which movies weren't on the list when we all made our guesses.
--------------------------------------------------
Political correctness is just tyranny, with a smiley face.
Joker 2, Ghostbusters 4 and Deadpool 3 will likely do well, they have built in fan bases, there may be some surprises.
My guess is that out of the 3 of them, Ghostbusters 4 is going to be a failure.
Afterlife only made $203.6 Million on a $75 Million budget. It needed $187.5 Million to break even. Almost not even worth making another sequel, really, since it only made 108.6% of the breakeven point.
Comparatively, Songbirds & Snakes has made $303.3 Million on a $100 Million budget so far, which is 121.3% of what it needed to break even, and it will probably end its worldwide run somewhere between 130 and 135% of what it needed. So not only was Songbirds & Snakes a success in the end, but it was more successful than Ghostbusters 3 was.
There's been too much damage done to that brand. Not just the 2016 mistake, but the fact they left it dormant for decades. I was one of the biggest Ghostbusters fans in the world when I was a kid after I watched it with my old man and I remember watching every episode of the cartoon with him and my brothers growing up, but I haven't bothered watching Afterlife yet. It may have been a step in the right direction after the 2016 bomb, but to me it comes off just as cynical. Ghostbusters was never supposed to be FOR KIDS. It was something we felt like we were getting away with watching that we shouldn't have been watching. Even the first season of the cartoon was pretty adult themed most of the time before the Studio Execs got involved and made it a dumb kids cartoon.
So I guess there's my first meaningful prediction for 2024. Unless Sony managed to lower the production budget for Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire to only $60 Million or less, my guess is that it doesn't break even. At least not on its own. They could probably try to really get kids excited about the toys again, and maybe put out a new cartoon to keep them coming back for more. There probably is a big potential for merchandising the brand again after all these years if they do it right. There is a huge void left in that area by Star Wars and Marvel toys not selling. I just wonder if kids really care about playing with action figures anymore when so much entertainment is available digitally these days.
Quote:
The Fall Guy looks like fun, it may do well. BUT, 2024 is an election year, I'm sure somebody will shoot their mouth off chase off some audience members.
Yeah... I'm sure we're in for a lot more preaching in 2024.
Keep voting with that wallet.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Here is a good video talking about how they "kidified" the cartoon and why they did the stupid changes.
It also mentions that the studio considered Ghostbusters II a failure after it made only $215 Million in 1989, even though it only cost $25 Million to make.
So Ghostbusters II made $11 Million more than Afterlife on 1/3rd of the budget and was considered a failure. If you calculate for inflation, Ghostbusters II made $532 Million on a $62 Million budget and they weren't happy with that.
Think about that... They made an 850% profit and weren't happy. I don't have my updated 2023 spreadsheet in front of me at the moment, but it's possible that there weren't even 10 flicks put out this year that did as well as Ghostbusters II did in 1989.
Oh how low are the expectations today compared to 30 years ago...
There are other videos about how they "kidified" the second movie, but other than mentioning that it was considered a failure by Colombia Pictures this video doesn't go into that at all.
ETA:
There you go. Nostalgia Critic rails hard on the dumbing down of the 2nd movie for kids.
--------------------------------------------------
Political correctness is just tyranny, with a smiley face.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
This whole thing has gotten completely out of hand, which is one more reason to NOT go to the movie theater:
When is this movie really going to start? I’ve been here half an hour.
By Richard Zoglin, New York-based writer and critic | Dec 27, 2023
It took me a few weeks to get out to see the new Martin Scorsese film, “Killers of the Flower Moon”; the running time of three hours and 26 minutes was pretty daunting. Still, on a recent weeknight, I trekked to my local multiplex in New York City for an 8:30 p.m. showing. Since I knew it would be a long evening, I made sure to arrive a few minutes late, to miss some of the pre-show ads and trailers.
Not late enough. I still had to sit through several minutes of previews and AMC Theatres promotions, before Leonardo DiCaprio finally appeared on the screen. But not in the movie — he was interviewing Scorsese about the historical background of the film, which recounts the organized murders of Osage tribe members in 1920s Oklahoma. After three or four minutes of their gab, the theater finally darkened, and the film seemed ready to start. But wait — there was Scorsese again, addressing the audience to say, once more, how honored he was to “tell this powerful historical story in the most authentic way possible.” By the time the movie dawdled onto the screen, a three-hour-26-minute film had ballooned into a nearly four-hour evening.
Scorsese is one of many filmmakers and critics who have campaigned for seeing movies the old-fashioned way — on the big screen in theaters, rather than through streaming services at home. But I wonder how many of these film lovers (who generally see movies in a comfy screening room, where they start on time and no one has to sit through ads for PlayStation) have actually been to a movie theater lately. It has become a grueling experience.
Set aside the $10 bags of popcorn and the confusing array of projection formats — Imax, 4DX, Dolby — that can boost the ticket price to $25 or more. And I’m not complaining about audience members who talk and scan their cellphones during the movie; complaints about unruly patrons date back to the days when people used to read the title cards aloud in silent films. No, it’s the bloated running times of so many current films and the expanding pre-show folderol that have turned moviegoing into an endurance test.
There once was a time (it now seems quaint to recall) when you had to go to Europe to see commercials in a movie theater; American movie houses were blessedly free of them. Not anymore. On another trip to the multiplex, to see Ridley Scott’s “Napoleon” (which weighs in at a relatively compact two hours and 38 minutes), I counted a dozen commercials, for everything from Hyundai to M&M’s, before the Regal voice of God told us to silence our cellphones and “enjoy the show” — after which came another slew of ads, for various Pepsi drinks; six trailers for upcoming movies (because where better than a screening of “Napoleon” to look for fans of “Drive-Away Dolls” and “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom”?); and a pitch for the Regal Unlimited subscription plan. Thirty minutes in hard-sell captivity before the movie finally started.
Don’t get me wrong: I love going to the movies. After the pandemic, I returned to the theaters much sooner than most of my friends. But it’s becoming harder to justify that ordeal at the multiplex, rather than waiting a few weeks for the film to show up on Netflix or Amazon Prime.
Watching a movie on the big screen can be absorbing, even thrilling. But it’s not a religious experience. My blood pressure spikes every time I see those platform heels stepping through a puddle on the way to a movie theater — the opening of Nicole Kidman’s inescapable promotional spot for AMC Theatres.
“We come to this place … for magic,” she intones reverently, as she settles into a seat in a deserted theater, stares beatifically up at the screen and rhapsodizes about “that indescribable feeling we get when the lights begin to dim. … Somehow heartbreak feels good in a pl
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Another reason to NOT go to the movies:
How in the World Did Ferrari End Up Using a Line From Walk Hard?
Ferrari avoids many of the Walk Hard pitfalls. It even offers many pleasures: Penélope Cruz overacting with all her might, cool cars on winding Italian roads, a guy cut in half even more disgustingly than Nate Cox. But after that line, I simply could not take Ferrari seriously.
For no matter its impeccable production design, brilliant direction, or whipcrack editing, it is infected with the fatally silly virus that infects basically all biopics: the self-seriousness inherent in creating a portrait of a Great Man (or, very occasionally, a Great Woman), who brushes aside all else in pursuit of that very Greatness. The wigs, the clichés, the golden-hour light of Italy 1957: It’s all in service of a fundamentally foolish goal, one that not even a director as good as Michael Mann can achieve without making me giggle. It’s that goal, not only the specific music-biopic tropes, that Walk Hard is satirizing. And Mann’s Ferrari, serious as a Mass, steers right into the wall.
https://slate.com/culture/2023/12/ferrari-movie-adam-driver-walk-hard-
line.html
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
2024 will be full of sequels but it looks a lot better than 2023, if they keep the woke crap to a minimum they may do well in 2024. I think the studios learned a lesson in 2023.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I don't think they have learned. In 1925, Herman Mankiewicz (“Citizen Kane”) sent a telegram to his friend Ben Hecht, the playwright, trying to lure him from New York to Los Angeles. “Millions are to be grabbed out here and your only competition is idiots,” he wrote, adding, “Don’t let this get around.” 1925 is long ago, but the competition is still idiots.
Originally posted by whozit:
I think the studios learned a lesson in 2023.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:I don't think they have learned. In 1925, Herman Mankiewicz (“Citizen Kane”) sent a telegram to his friend Ben Hecht, the playwright, trying to lure him from New York to Los Angeles. “Millions are to be grabbed out here and your only competition is idiots,” he wrote, adding, “Don’t let this get around.” 1925 is long ago, but the competition is still idiots.
Originally posted by whozit:
I think the studios learned a lesson in 2023.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
In 1925 the film industry was still a NEW industry and growing, now they're looking at merging and maybe selling off divisions. I still believe there will be major changes in the film and TV industry in 2024, they don't have the money to throw around anymore.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Did you know there is an article titled: 15 Movies That Bankrupted Their Studios? That is how business has always worked. The most incompetent die and most business leaders are incompetent and very much deserve what misfortune happens to their businesses. The bad ones survive only because they are lucky. Eventually, their lucky streak ends and they die.
Originally posted by whozit:
In 1925 the film industry was still a NEW industry and growing, now they're looking at merging and maybe selling off divisions. I still believe there will be major changes in the film and TV industry in 2024, they don't have the money to throw around anymore.
https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/643698/movies-that-bankrupted-stud
ios
Animation companies also die. https://collider.com/animation-companies-that-are-no-longer-with-us/
Even The Walt Disney Company almost died because of Pinocchio. Pinocchio won Oscars but that won't pay the bills.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinocchio_(1940_film)#Box_office
There is so much more about the survival of the fittest businesses at Movie studios that no longer exist: https://www.google.com/search?q=movie+studios+that+no+longer+exist
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:Did you know there is an article titled: 15 Movies That Bankrupted Their Studios? That is how business has always worked. The most incompetent die and most business leaders are incompetent and very much deserve what misfortune happens to their businesses. The bad ones survive only because they are lucky. Eventually, their lucky streak ends and they die.
Originally posted by whozit:
In 1925 the film industry was still a NEW industry and growing, now they're looking at merging and maybe selling off divisions. I still believe there will be major changes in the film and TV industry in 2024, they don't have the money to throw around anymore.
https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/643698/movies-that-bankrupted-stud
ios
Animation companies also die. https://collider.com/animation-companies-that-are-no-longer-with-us/
Even The Walt Disney Company almost died because of Pinocchio. Pinocchio won Oscars but that won't pay the bills.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinocchio_(1940_film)#Box_office
There is so much more about the survival of the fittest businesses at Movie studios that no longer exist: https://www.google.com/search?q=movie+studios+that+no+longer+exist
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
In this years case it's a LIST of flops, not just one. The reason the industry is in the bind they are today is because of bad management, they can't blame COVID for the list of flops this year, they put out poorly written woke crap the fan base didn't want to see. They're making woke crap for an audience that has no interest in Sci-Fi or Super Hero flicks or TV shows. PLUS, they insult the fan base when they refuse to see OR, go to see their crap and give it bad reviews on twitter or their YOUTUBE channel. This is why I'm sure they'll be major changes in 2024, possibly a blood bath.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:What Hollywood needs is more executives who will say to directors: "Killers of Flower Moon is the perfect example of a movie that should NOT be made."
Originally posted by whozit:
In this years case it's a LIST of flops, not just one. The reason the industry is in the bind they are today is because of bad management, they can't blame COVID for the list of flops this year, they put out poorly written woke crap the fan base didn't want to see. They're making woke crap for an audience that has no interest in Sci-Fi or Super Hero flicks or TV shows. PLUS, they insult the fan base when they refuse to see OR, go to see their crap and give it bad reviews on twitter or their YOUTUBE channel. This is why I'm sure they'll be major changes in 2024, possibly a blood bath.
It cost $200 M and sold only $156 M in tickets. Sure thing that director Martin Scorsese and cast are all famous, but so what? Scorsese has a remarkable ability to spend too much money. He has forgotten how to economize. Hollywood makes movies for money. Screw Art with a Capital A. No Hollywood exec should have approved spending $200 M for such a minor work of art, no matter how good the script is or how many weeks it was a best seller on the New York Times Non-fiction book list (147 weeks and counting).
https://web.archive.org/web/20231215170153/https://www.nytimes.com/boo
ks/best-sellers/paperback-nonfiction/
https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Killers-of-the-Flower-Moon-(2023)#ta
b=summary
https://www.metacritic.com/movie/killers-of-the-flower-moon/
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/killers_of_the_flower_moon
KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON
The story of a murder spree in 1920s Oklahoma that targeted Osage Indians, whose lands contained oil. The fledgling F.B.I. intervened, ineffectively.
By David Grann 338 pp. Doubleday. $28.95.
In 1804, President Thomas Jefferson hosted a delegation of Osage chiefs who had traveled from their ancestral land, which Jefferson had recently acquired — from the French, not the Osage — in the Louisiana Purchase. The Osage representatives were tall, many of them over six feet, and they towered over most of their White House hosts. Jefferson was impressed, calling them the “ finest men we have ever seen.” He promised to treat their tribe fairly, telling them that from then on, “they shall know our nation only as friends and benefactors.”
Over the next 20 years, the Osage were stripped of their land, ceding almost 100 million acres, and were forced onto a parcel in southeastern Kansas that measured about 50 by 125 miles (four million acres). This land would be theirs forever, the United States government told them.
And then — as David Grann details early in his disturbing and riveting new book, “Killers of the Flower Moon” — this promise, too, was broken. White settlers began squatting on Osage territory, skirmishes ensued and eventually the tribe had to sell the land for $1.25 an acre. Looking for a new home, the Osage found an area of what was to become Oklahoma that no one else wanted. It was hilly and unsuited to cultivation. The Osage bought the parcel for roughly a million dollars, later adding a provision that the land’s “oil, gas, coal or other minerals” would be owned by the Osage, too. Thus they owned the land above and whatever was below, as well.
No one argued the point at the time. No one but the Osage knew there was oil under that rocky soil. The Osage leased the land to prospectors and made a fortune. “In 1923 alone,” Grann writes, “the tribe took in more than $30 million, the equivalent today of more than $400 million. The Osage were considered the wealthiest people per capita in the world.” They built mansions and bought fleets of cars. A magazine writer at the time wrote: “Every time a new well is drilled the Indians are that much richer. … The Osage Indians are becoming so rich that something will have to be done about it.” Serial murder. That is what was done about it. Hence, the book and, later, the movie. A movie much like a C.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME