The movie companies can measure social media sentiment. Deadpool's score was overwhelmingly positive, which is why that movie cost 50m and brought in over 750m +. BvS' was overwhelmingly negative, which is why the movie cost 400m, but will have problems cracking 1B. They've got to make better stories, other than to have Superman and Batman running around looking like a couple of assholes.
I can't find the article. This link says the social media score was positive (Batman v Superman Receiving Positive Social Media Reaction | Comicbook.com).
That's not even remotely true. Maybe you heard that stat and missed the part about it being something like 5th biggest for 100M+ openings. But for all movies? Nope.
Yeah after DVD/Bluray, cable/network/TV syndication, toys, licensing, sure, they'll make money. We hashed this out a few pages back regarding man of steel, same story here.
yeah I meant for blockbusters (100m+ openings). Obviously shitfest arthouse films that release in 10 theatres nationwide and all 19 fans watch it the first weekend will have bigger drops.
There's easily 30+ films on that list before BvS that aren't arthouse films. BvS had a shitty second weekend so you don't need the hyperbole.
This is what I don't get. It's one thing to make a gamble on one thing and it not to pay off, but it's like the WB execs watch these movies and all think they're good so they keep green lighting them.
Yeah, there were some debates on here about profit...Now, I'm not sure if this industry works like most, I know Hollywood is kind of odd; but if it does, people need to remember there are many other considerations outside of raw profit. Like the fact I'm positive there are a team of actuaries there that have put projections and values on these franchises, so even a profit can be very disappointing compared to what a franchise SHOULD make relative to the market, given it's name recognition and typical draw. In addition, they have to judge their investments compared to what they could have made putting the money elsewhere; so even if you turn a profit, if it's not higher than how comparative investments are doing, its still a loss, technically--it's never about how much you made, it's about how much youcould have made.
Unfathomable that a movie that has made almost 700 million dollars world wide could be a potential flop. On the other hand, I'm shocked that a movie this fucking horrible could make that much money in the first place.
Remember that the first Reboot Tomb Raider was a flop at 4 million copies sold. Companies have no sense of perspective.
When you spend 400m on a movie, and you have to share your box office revenues with partners, then it all adds up. It's not like the 700m goes directly into their pockets.