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

[Zardnaar]

No, it's not. I linked all of them. Your failure to read is not my problem

Yes, that's why I specifically said we don't know. Please do me the courtesy of reading my statements.

Are you suggesting that Air and Creed III were "piles of crud?" Are you further suggesting that being in the top five for a month, all linked here as evidence, doesn't matter? Are you ignoring a month long stretch beating Lasso and Succession?

I'm talking about weeks of performance on multiple platforms globally and you're just ignoring the words and links to argue.

I was speaking of box office returns. Air was limited release, Creed III did better than HAT by around 50% on half the budget.

Lasso and Succession aren't movies.

 

[Mistwell]

Broadly speaking double tgat number.

This is not true. We've discussed repeatedly and excruciating detail why this isn't true before. And by we I do not mean this board I mean YOU have been active and heard those discussions. So repeating what you know to be false is frustrating Zard. You know you don't "double" the total spend. Not broadly, not narrowly, it does not work that way. I don't know why you appear to enjoy misleading people by saying that, but people are going to continue to call you on it every time you do it until you stop doing that. It's WAY more complex than that in meaningful ways.

 

[Zardnaar]

This is not true. We've discussed repeatedly and excruciating detail why this isn't true before. And by we I do not mean this board I mean YOU have been active and heard those discussions. So repeating what you know to be false is frustrating Zard. You know you don't "double" the total spend. Not broadly, not narrowly, it does not work that way. I don't know why you appear to enjoy misleading people by saying that, but people are going to continue to call you on it every time you do it until you stop doing that. It's WAY more complex than that in meaningful ways.

Well it's what publications use as well. Movies been reported as a box office flop even by variety so it's not exactly disingenuous is it.

I've been clear it's an approximation but HAT didn't even get close to any number required to be a hit at the BO.

People have also posted links to the number.

People were apparently happy to accept varietys week 1 HAT (which was mostly a puff iece 70 million week 1 isn't that impressive) but when they post that it comes down to streaming numbers to turn a profit.

Hell HAT didn't even gross its production costs+marketing.

 

[Mistwell]

Well it's what publications use as well. Movies been reported as a box office flop even by variety so it's not exactly disingenuous is it.

I've been clear it's an approximation but HAT didn't even get close to any number required to be a hit at the BO.

People have also posted links to the number.

People were apparently happy to accept varietys week 1 HAT (which was mostly a puff iece 70 million week 1 isn't that impressive) but when they post that it comes down to streaming numbers to turn a profit.

Hell HAT didn't even gross its production costs+marketing.

I am not even talking about the D&D movie anymore, I am talking about you constantly repeating the false claim that you simply double the total cost of the movie and that's what it must make. It's so far from how this works that I am going to call it out every time.

 

[Zardnaar]

DP

 

[Zardnaar]

I am not even talking about the D&D movie anymore, I am talking about you constantly repeating the false claim that you simply double the total cost of the movie and that's what it must make. It's so far from how this works that I am going to call it out every time.

Notice that the movies that variety reported as hits all crossed the 2.5 threshold and the ones tgat didn't at best were marginal?

It's an approximation shorthand for more money the better.

D&D didn't even get 100% of its costs letalone 200%.

D&Ds a fairly typical movie in marketing costs (close to 50% of production budget) and it's split between international/domestic.

One can also look at other movies.

Assassins Creed

Prince of Persia:Sands of Times

Warcraft

None of these movies are regarded as a big hit. They all out performed HAT at the box office.

So one can compare with similar movies in terms of budget and genre.

Did better than God's of Egypt though.

 

[S'mon]

budget was 150 million. As of May 10th it had grossed 202 million dollars. not a huge hit by any measure but not a total flop.

That's really very not good and indicates a sizable loss on the production, as others have said. Is your metric for 'total flop' a film that does not even gross its production budget?

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

Warner lost money with first Tim Burton's movie because they spent too much in the marketing, but the cartoon show was produced, and here they started to earn a lot in the animated version of DC superheroes. My niece would rather superheroes more focused into comedy.

 

[bedir than]

Movies been reported as a box office flop even by variety

The linked Variety story doesn't say this.
Why make this unfactual claim?

 

[nevin]

Soneobes going to take a dunking.

We xan throw the X2.5 thing out since we have a number for marketing not.

151 million production
64 million marketing.

215 million.

Broadly speaking double tgat number. Break even point approx 430 million. Give or take 10% due to the sliding scale.

D&D fell well short of that.

The breaking expectations week one is kind of irrelevant. Those expectations were low to begin with based on pre sales of tickets for a 150 million movie. Even then it exceeded expectations by less than 10% iirc

Also remember how I said marketing is close to 50% of the production budgetfor block Buster movies? 62 is less than 75 million but it wasn't to far off.

X2.5 is used when the marketing budget isn't known. If the movie exceeds that its kind of assumed the back end (streaming etc) takes care of that.

Every movie on variety hit list cleared that 2.5 multiplier.

HAT lost 100 million at the box office. It's not impossible it can limp to a profit overall but sequels are unlikely and it's not a hit movie by any definition and it's being reported as a flop.

but this is money to make a holywood studio happy. What is Hasbro"s happy point.

That's really very not good and indicates a sizable loss on the production, as others have said. Is your metric for 'total flop' a film that does not even gross its production budget?

Hollywoods metric, no argument it's not good. the only question is what did Hasbro want out of it? I don't know what they paid for it. they may not have paid anything. It could be Hollywood paid them a few million for rights to make the movie. In which case it's a win for them. Publicity they got paid for. Also nearly every movie released this year has flopped. Other IP's have gotten second chances because of circumstances. it would be nice if they'd make another one that had better writing and less reliance on snarky humor. Odd's not good but because of the terri-bad year for hollywood with nearly everything flopping we'll see how the narrative goes.