D&D Movie/TV D&D Movie Hit or Flop?

At that point, only time will tell.

I think the last few years were special regarding everything, and making decisions purely on what made how much money in those years seems like a bad business decision.

Zardnaar said:

I never said a sequel was impossible but unlikely.

Paramont+ may not even be around in few years. Not long ago that article revealed they're losing money and projections are 5 years to profit.

Another pro movie poster also claimed screen rant was a rag btw and not worth it.

10 Reasons Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves Bombed At The Box Office

Honor Among Thieves bombed for several reasons.

screenrant.com

Click to expand...

I claimed they were a rag not worth it? When? [Noteworthy by the way: that article was written by someone whose primary experience is writing for the same news website I wrote for, for many years, about movies and television.]

Whether or not Paramount+ succeeds or fails is irrelevant to the analysis of studios, particularly Hasbro, to support a sequel or other separate D&D movie. The streaming money brought in from the D&D movie, in direct purchases and subscribers, is meaningful even if Paramount+ ended next week overall, because there is ZERO relationship between the success or failure of the larger streaming platform and an individual movie content which that platform happens to stream.

You keep claiming it's "not a third party" but that is misrepresenting the situation - that's not how corporate structures work and Paramount pictures is not, in fact, Paramount+. Paramount+ is a subsidiary of Paramount Streaming which is a subsidiary of Paramount Global. They are different entities under eventually the same larger umbrella Paramount Global, all with very distinct financials.

It's not like money made by the streaming platform somehow doesn't "count" as much because it's under a larger Paramount Global umbrella instead of being streamed by Netflix. Paramount Global owns for example CBS. If CBS went under, would you be claiming that was relevant to whether Comedy Central succeeds or fails? They're exactly as related as Paramount+ and Paramount Pictures. Paramount Media Networks for example is also a separate entity under the larger structure which owns Showtime and Comedy Central and MTV and Nickelodeon. Again, none of those are related to the success or failure of Paramount+ either. Financially speaking, these are all separate entities.

I'll ask again, what is your level of expertise in this field? If there is no answer I will assume the hints you've given are the truth - none, you're just a fan who reads some stuff on the net like everyone else. Which, again, isn't itself a knock but it does mean you should stop telling people things like "I think you just don't understand" when you're also just a fan whose understanding is likely just as good or bad as anyone else you're talking to.

I think we all roughly understand about the same here. We have a legit debate about how important the streaming aspect of the movie is to the larger picture, and about how much of the marketing budget there really was for the movie, and about how much revenue they receive from theaters domestically and internationally, and about how much ancillary money they make from revenue streams associated with the movie like toys and branded products and such. These are all legit debates. None of them should be dismissed as "you just don't understand as well as I do" when it comes to these topics. None of us are claiming to have insider knowledge. So can we please just discuss this stuff without the declarations of fact and expertise which are not?

Mistwell said:

I claimed they were a rag not worth it? When? [Noteworthy by the way: that article was written by someone whose primary experience is writing for the same news website I wrote for, for many years, about movies and television.]

Whether or not Paramount+ succeeds or fails is irrelevant to the analysis of studios, particularly Hasbro, to support a sequel or other separate D&D movie. The streaming money brought in from the D&D movie, in direct purchases and subscribers, is meaningful even if Paramount+ ended next week overall, because there is ZERO relationship between the success or failure of the larger streaming platform and an individual movie content which that platform happens to stream.

You keep claiming it's "not a third party" but even that is false - that's not how corporate structures work and Paramount pictures is not, in fact, Paramount+. Two different entities under the same larger umbrella but very distinct financials. It's not like money made by the streaming platform somehow doesn't "count" as much because it's under a larger Paramount umbrella instead of being streamed by Netflix.

I'll ask again, what is your level of expertise in this field? If there is no answer I will assume the hints you've given are the truth - none, you're just a fan who reads some stuff on the net like everyone else. Which, again, isn't itself a knock but it does mean you should stop telling people things like "I think you just don't understand" when you're also just a fan whose understanding is likely just as good or bad as anyone else you're talking to.

Click to expand...

Nobe but as I said Paramount paying Paramount+ is just shuffling money around themselves. Someone has to eat the less regardless in that scenario. That's not bringing in additional income as such. Disney apparently does something similar wit Disney+. It's robbing Peter to pay paul

I did reference numbers paid by Netflix for various movies eg Knives Out, Borat franchise. That's tens of millions of real money coming in on top of the box office then you can apply the sone arguement used here aboutbits steaming income based on views. John Wick 4 will presumably go to Netflix like the 3 previous movies. That's a direct boost to income to the studio.

That's not applicable here and in any event it's been reported Paramount is losing money on steaming. Essentially they woukd have to pay themselves to make D&D make money while losing money on whatever they paid.

VoD is direct income as well minus whatever the cut is the service take.

One can just look at the box office numbers as well. I've been very consistent in saying D&D might make a profit on the back end but it's far from a hit movie like John Wick which cost less and made its money back purely on the box office.

HAT performed fairly typically for a movie made about a third of its box office week one another third week two and 3 and the rest after that. John Whick made around 25% week one by comparison.

You can pretty much tell if a movie will make money at the box office week 1-3.

Zardnaar said:

Paramount paying Paramount+ is just shuffling money around themselves. Someone has to eat the less regardless in that scenario. That's not bringing in additional income as such. Disney apparently does something similar wit Disney+. It's robbing Peter to pay paul

Click to expand...

Paramount Streaming making money through their subsidiary Paramount+ and sending some of that money to Paramount Studios is not all the same. It's as "separate" a financial entity as Netflix sending that money to Paramount Studios. The dollars are counted exactly the same. It IS "additional income." It is not robbing peter to pay paul. That is not how separate financial entities under a larger umbrella (two up the chain in fact) work. You're too focused on similar names, but that doesn't make them the same thing.

Zardnaar said:

I did reference numbers paid by Netflix for various movies eg Knives Out, Borat franchise. That's tens of millions of real money coming in on top of the box office then you can apply the sone arguement used here aboutbits steaming income based on views. John Wick 4 will presumably go to Netflix like the 3 previous movies. That's a direct boost to income to the studio.

Click to expand...

This is exactly as real money and direct money as Paramount Streaming paying Paramount Studios. You are making a false assumption that, because they're both named in part Paramount and two up the chain you eventually find Paramount Global that makes them "all the same" pot of money. It is definitely not.

Zardnaar said:

That's not applicable here and in any event it's been reported Paramount is losing money on steaming. Essentially they woukd have to pay themselves to make D&D make money while losing money on whatever they paid.

Click to expand...

It is applicable here, and a larger streaming platform losing money is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to this topic. It's like saying "Samsung Washers are losing money therefore Samsung Cell phones are in trouble!" What point do you even think you're making by mentioning that the streaming platform in general is losing money? It doesn't relate to the success or failure of this movie or the dollars made in streaming from this movie.

It's NOT PAYING THEMSELVES. Paramount+ is a subdivision of Paramount Streaming, not CBS or Comedy Central or Paramount Pictures or Viacom or any other entity under the larger Paramount Global.

Zardnaar said:

VoD is direct income as well minus whatever the cut is the service take.

One can just look at the box office numbers as well. I've been very consistent in saying D&D might make a profit on the back end but it's far from a hit movie like John Wick which cost less and made its money back purely on the box office.

HAT performed fairly typically for a movie made about a third of its box office week one another third week two and 3 and the rest after that. John Whick made around 25% week one by comparison.

You can pretty much tell if a movie will make money at the box office week 1-3.

Click to expand...

You used to be able to, but not nearly as often anymore since the pandemic changed viewing habits dramatically. This is a major factor in the Writers Strike, and threatened SAG/AFTRA strike right now. It's the source of our dispute - which is a legit dispute. Streaming monies are both 1) very meaningful to studios, and 2) much more secretive than box office data. It's a dispute people will have for the next decade in all likelihood because it's so secretive, unless these strikes cause a fixed published number to get attached to the back end streaming data.

Mistwell said:

Paramount Streaming making money through their subsidiary Paramount+ and sending some of that money to Paramount Studios is not all the same. It's as "separate" a financial entity as Netflix sending that money to Paramount Studios. The dollars are counted exactly the same. It IS "additional income." It is not robbing peter to pay paul. That is not how separate financial entities under a larger umbrella (two up the chain in fact) work. You're too focused on similar names, but that doesn't make them the same thing.



This is exactly as real money and direct money as Paramount Streaming paying Paramount Studios. You are making a false assumption that, because they're both named in part Paramount and two up the chain you eventually find Paramount Global that makes them "all the same" pot of money. It is definitely not.



It is applicable here, and a larger streaming platform losing money is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to this topic. It's like saying "Samsung Washers are losing money therefore Samsung Cell phones are in trouble!" What point do you even think you're making by mentioning that the streaming platform in general is losing money? It doesn't relate to the success or failure of this movie or the dollars made in streaming from this movie.

It's NOT PAYING THEMSELVES. Paramount+ is a subdivision of Paramount Streaming, not CBS or Comedy Central or Paramount Pictures or Viacom or any other entity under the larger Paramount Global.


You used to be able to, but not nearly as often anymore since the pandemic changed viewing habits dramatically. This is a major factor in the Writers Strike, and threatened SAG/AFTRA strike right now. It's the source of our dispute - which is a legit dispute. Streaming monies are both 1) very meaningful to studios, and 2) much more secretive than box office data. It's a dispute people will have for the next decade in all likelihood because it's so secretive, unless these strikes cause a fixed published number to get attached to the back end streaming data.

Click to expand...

Yeahbits really hard to get streaming data. I suspect part if it is vecause tge streamers themselves don't know how to account for views vs cost vs streaming incone.

Idk howthe strike will play out. It seems the money isn't there in streaming that the strikers expect.

If they get a more transparent deal I suspect tgey will get less money or tge streamers will just offer a lower flame rate to show movies.

VoD is a lot easier to assign value to.

Welcome to another round of Flop or Not, the hit game show where people argue about whether D&D: Honor Among Thieves was a financial success.

Honor Among Thieves has been streaming in the US for 59 days. During that stretch it has always been a top 10 movie, still at 9th and down to Paramount+'s number three.

Paramount+ and Showtime recently merged, kinda. Which may be why Honor Among Thieves global ranking (again it's only available in the USA on P+) went from 55th to 34th.
In Canada it is currently 3rd. But over the 12 days D&D has been available on Netflix Canada it has been the 2nd most watched 9 times and 3rd thrice.

Did you know that Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves wasn't available as a digital download in the UK until last week?!?! That's on Amazon, where in the UK it started off 7th, but has plummeted to 20 somethingth. Not great, but also, what's with the UK not having it available as VoD for two months?

• On Amazon globally it climbed up to #3 during Prime Days.
• On iTunes globally Honor Among Thieves fell to 5th, it's lowest point since May 23rd.
• On Google globally D&D dropped to 2nd, finally losing the number one spot it held for 43 days.
• Still top 10 on Rakuten and there's weird data anomolies for Vudu (similar to Amazon's in mid May).

As a reminder less popular movies on digital made more than 75 million dollars.
Does that mean we know how much Honor Among Thieves made digitally? No. No one has suggested this.
Does that mean it has been a financial flop? No.

Also, this hasn't been shown in a while, but the popularity of D&D (the GAME) in Google Search almost directly corresponded to interest in D&D: Honor Among Thieves. It's also it remains about 30% higher than it was before the film announced.

bedir than said:

Does that mean it has been a financial flop? No.

Click to expand...

Does that mean it was a financial success? also no, we know nothing

bedir than said:

Welcome to another round of Flop or Not, the hit game show where people argue about whether D&D: Honor Among Thieves was a financial success.

Honor Among Thieves has been streaming in the US for 59 days. During that stretch it has always been a top 10 movie, still at 9th and down to Paramount+'s number three.
View attachment 290134
Paramount+ and Showtime recently merged, kinda. Which may be why Honor Among Thieves global ranking (again it's only available in the USA on P+) went from 55th to 34th.
In Canada it is currently 3rd. But over the 12 days D&D has been available on Netflix Canada it has been the 2nd most watched 9 times and 3rd thrice.

Did you know that Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves wasn't available as a digital download in the UK until last week?!?! That's on Amazon, where in the UK it started off 7th, but has plummeted to 20 somethingth. Not great, but also, what's with the UK not having it available as VoD for two months?

• On Amazon globally it climbed up to #3 during Prime Days.
• On iTunes globally Honor Among Thieves fell to 5th, it's lowest point since May 23rd.
• On Google globally D&D dropped to 2nd, finally losing the number one spot it held for 43 days.
• Still top 10 on Rakuten and there's weird data anomolies for Vudu (similar to Amazon's in mid May).

As a reminder less popular movies on digital made more than 75 million dollars.
Does that mean we know how much Honor Among Thieves made digitally? No. No one has suggested this.
Does that mean it has been a financial flop? No.

Also, this hasn't been shown in a while, but the popularity of D&D (the GAME) in Google Search almost directly corresponded to interest in D&D: Honor Among Thieves. It's also it remains about 30% higher than it was before the film announced.

View attachment 290135

Click to expand...

No one's debating its not popular online.

That doesn't directly translate to money at least in quantities you're implying.

Just means those who have already paid for Paramount + presumably are watching it. They essentially gave it away for free to subscribers of Paramount+.

It's a recurring problem with streaming. They've essentially trained their audience to stay at home and watch their movies for free and they're losing money.

It's a widespread industry problem it's not generating the money the old system did. Also see current strikes.

Zardnaar said:

No one's debating it’s not popular online.

That doesn't directly translate to money at least in quantities you're implying.

Just means those who have already paid for Paramount + presumably are watching it. They essentially gave it away for free to subscribers of Paramount+.

It's a recurring problem with streaming. They've essentially trained their audience to stay at home and watch their movies for free and they're losing money.

It's a widespread industry problem it's not generating the money the old system did. Also see current strikes.

Click to expand...

And yet without new popular content people cancel their subscriptions. So without the ‘free’ content paramount+ is deader than a chicken at Popeyes in June. At least with free content they keep subscriptions which eventually can be leveraged into profit.

Zardnaar said:

Just means those who have already paid for Paramount + presumably are watching it. They essentially gave it away for free to subscribers of Paramount+.

Click to expand...

This statement is unhinged.
Subscribers to Paramount+ absolutely, without any doubt, pay for what they're watching. They pay between 4.99 and nearly 20 dollars, every month. Retaining those paying customers has immense value for a streamer.