D&D Movie/TV D&D Movie Hit or Flop?

[bedir than]

The vast majority of sales on those platforms on any given week are either going to be newly released movies/TV shows or movies/shows on sale.

Except that Honor Among Thies is topping other new releases

‘Dungeons & Dragons’ Leads VOD, While ‘A Man Called Otto’ Takes the #1 Netflix Slot

Unlike its “Scream VI,” Paramount is giving a PVOD lead for its adaptation of the role-playing game. Meanwhile, studio titles comprise most of Netflix’s top ten.

www.indiewire.com

 

[Jaeger]

Thank you Devilbass!

We can now put this to rest:

2) The traditional metrics of box office assessment no longer work, and it needs to account for several other factors that will take a while to collect. ...

i.e. "You can't call D&D a flop just based on the box-office performance because 'muh streaming'..."

Which is untrue because, the "traditional" metrics are still used; because everything still works the same!

I have pointed this out a few times but it was ignored, so I figured the best way was to get one of them to do it for me. (Or in this case to 'like' when someone else did).

I was really hoping that mistwell or bedir than was going to jump all over my obvious contradiction, (I was starting to worry they would gloss over what I did yet again, like they did in my sunday, and monday responses, which is why I got more wordy), but your response was perfect, as both of them agreed with your post with likes.

In more than one post I have said:

The best hope for D&D fans for a sequel is that the film becomes a fan favorite like 2013 Pacific Rim.

How do they do that?

As you wonderfully pointed out: (My replies are not directed at you Devilbass, because I agree with everything you posted.)

HAT and P+ each have their own, separate profit/loss to account for.

i.e. By tracking how the film does over time.

That's how it has Always Worked.

In the past they would track the films progress from rental, to premium cable, to cable, then down to network tv.

If P+ attributes enough of their new and renewing subscribers to HAT using some internal metric, then some portion of that revenue will be attributed to it as well.

The same game, different format.

All VOD rental and buy and streaming platforms like Paramount+ have done is re-create the Rentals, Premium/Basic cable run a film would use to make money on the back end, just in a view on demand format. (Streaming companies are basically "inventing" on-demand cable tv with their premium and ad tiers.)

So claiming that D&DHat is not a flop because there are: "..several other factors that will take a while to collect." Does not hold water.

Because as has been nicely pointed out in a post that Everyone agrees with, they are tracking how the movie does on the backend essentially the same as they always have.

Because all the new factors are the same as the "old" factors, just in a different format.


Did D&D flop at the box office? Yes.

It didn't break even, and it now has around a 100m hole to fill on the backend.

Does it have a shot at 'fan favorite' status, and replicate what the 2013 Pacific Rim film did?

Only time will tell on that.

Because nobody but the studio knows what it will make on the backend. Just like every other film released over the past 40 years...

 

[Myrdin Potter]

Thank you Devilbass!

We can now put this to rest:


i.e. "You can't call D&D a flop just based on the box-office performance because 'muh streaming'..."

Which is untrue because, the "traditional" metrics are still used; because everything still works the same!

I have pointed this out a few times but it was ignored, so I figured the best way was to get one of them to do it for me. (Or in this case to 'like' when someone else did).

I was really hoping that mistwell or bedir than was going to jump all over my obvious contradiction, (I was starting to worry they would gloss over what I did yet again, like they did in my sunday, and monday responses, which is why I got more wordy), but your response was perfect, as both of them agreed with your post with likes.

In more than one post I have said:


How do they do that?

As you wonderfully pointed out: (My replies are not directed at you Devilbass, because I agree with everything you posted.)


i.e. By tracking how the film does over time.

That's how it has Always Worked.

In the past they would track the films progress from rental, to premium cable, to cable, then down to network tv.




The same game, different format.

All VOD rental and buy and streaming platforms like Paramount+ have done is re-create the Rentals, Premium/Basic cable run a film would use to make money on the back end, just in a view on demand format. (Streaming companies are basically "inventing" on-demand cable tv with their premium and ad tiers.)

So claiming that D&DHat is not a flop because there are: "..several other factors that will take a while to collect." Does not hold water.

Because as has been nicely pointed out in a post that Everyone agrees with, they are tracking how the movie does on the backend essentially the same as they always have.

Because all the new factors are the same as the "old" factors, just in a different format.


Did D&D flop at the box office? Yes.

It didn't break even, and it now has around a 100m hole to fill on the backend.

Does it have a shot at 'fan favorite' status, and replicate what the 2013 Pacific Rim film did?

Only time will tell on that.

Because nobody but the studio knows what it will make on the backend. Just like every other film released over the past 40 years...

Despite my back and forth with Mistwell (I still disagree with the position that box office does not matter), I can look at recent behaviour for streaming spending.

$200M for The Tommorrow War
$70M to $90M for Army of the Dead

Not to mention the huge $$$ spent on shows like the new Lord of the Rings and Willow.

If you consider the likely $100M+ hole that the D&D movie has after Box Office, it is quite reasonable to see that as an IP investment in the way the look at streaming services today. That is why I have not characterized this as a bomb or disaster even though it failed to come close to cover the budget at the box office.

Next up for me is to dig through recent 10-K to see how these investmentsd are being accounted for. So much fun ....

 

[Umbran]

I think this is key: because the data is internal to Paramount, the reality is that HAT will make exactly as much on streaming as Paramount says it does.

Eh. Do that on an earnings call with shareholders and they call it "fraud".

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

D&D needs the movie to become a fan favorite, but this is hapenning.

Maybe the flaw was the prejudice the movie was only for nerds or geeks, when it was produced to be fun for all type of audiences.

We shouldn't say it to be a flop when we can see the future of the D&D cinematographic universe has got a great potential.

It is a relative success if we remember it is a "pilot episode", the goal was "to break the ice". Now they are more people willing to watch movies of this type, even if they don't know the original game.

Maybe now other company dares to produce an animated serie based in Paizo's Starfinder to become rival of Star Wars and Star Trek.

 

[Jaeger]

Despite my back and forth with Mistwell (I still disagree with the position that box office does not matter), I can look at recent behaviour for streaming spending.

$200M for The Tommorrow War
$70M to $90M for Army of the Dead

The difference here is that Paramount+ is not really "paying" for D&DHat streaming rights, as they are both owned by the same parent company.

But:

...
If you consider the likely $100M+ hole that the D&D movie has after Box Office, it is quite reasonable to see that as an IP investment in the way the look at streaming services today. That is why I have not characterized this as a bomb or disaster even though it failed to come close to cover the budget at the box office.

I do agree that they could absolutely justify/write-off the loss as an "investment" to grow subscribers for their platform.

And I also do not feel D&D outright bombed either. It observably did not tank like Shazam2 did. It didn't make back its money, but the people that saw it liked it.

D&D becoming a 'fan favorite' over time seems to be the only real path for a sequel at this point though.

And as has been pointed out. Hasbro has already green-lit at least one D&D tv/streaming series several months ago, so there are more bullets in the cinematic D&D gun.

 

[Zardnaar]

Pacific Rim keeps being brought up. It made over double its budget at the box office so the back end likely dragged it over the line. Hellbits made almost double HAT. Adjust for inflation it has.

 

[Mistwell]

I really doubt D&D hitting #1 on the VOD platforms is really all that "meaningful". It's a new, big budget blockbuster. I can't imagine any new big blockbuster not hitting #1 on release week on VOD platforms.

That was the noteworthy part - it beat out other movies on VOD expected to be #1. I am pretty distant from any VOD circles though so I really don't know how meaningful that is.

 

[delericho]

Eh. Do that on an earnings call with shareholders and they call it "fraud".

I'm not suggesting they say anything that isn't true, or even dishonest. But when you have sole access to what data exists, and complete discretion over what to report and what to omit, you get to choose the story you want to tell.

 

[Umbran]

I'm not suggesting they say anything that isn't true, or even dishonest. But when you have sole access to what data exists, and complete discretion over what to report and what to omit, you get to choose the story you want to tell.

Fair. They can be qualitative - "This greatly exceeded expectations in streaming, so we will now..." They just can't make quantitative statements that aren't true.