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

[Zardnaar]

Right, I'm pointing out VoD when comparing the three movies. You keep saying Wick and Mario are better on streaming, which is IMPOSSIBLE as neither of the other two movies are streaming.

No, it hasn't. You just quoted the post with links and screen caps showing that the popularity of Honor Among Thieves remains incredibly strong now almost 2 months after being released on VoD. We're nearing 45 days straight as the most popular on demand movie on Google, for example.

There's no reading of the VoD data that can insist that it's losing popularity. That's just plain untrue.

You're still talking box office, which is silly. The box is known.
The VoD looks to be stronger for Honor Among Thieves than the two other movies.

You originally asked "Will Honor Among Thieves be a financial success?" in this very thread. The answer isn't something you like and so you've invented many, many

All I'm saying is it's unlikely streaming will make the difference outside Hollywood accounting eg Paramount pays Paramount+ money.

1. HAT isn't going to a third party paying tens of millions of dollars for it.

2. It basically has to attract tens of millions of dollars which can be measured with first click metrics.

3. Paramount+ is losing money on streaming.

VoD+ streaming has to generate 100 million. We can make an educated guess HAT isn't doing Mario levels of money on VoD.

I don't think you realize how hard that 100 million is to make up without a third party paying tens of millions.

 

[bedir than]

We can make an educated guess HAT isn't doing Mario levels of money on VoD.

How would this guess be educated when all the evidence is that on VoD Mario isn't as popular as D&D?

I don't think you realize how hard that 100 million is to make up without a third party paying tens of millions.

Paramount doesn't need to make up 100 million. The math is pretty clear. They're short only 50. Considering D&D has been the most popular movie on P+ for a month and is more popular than Mario on VoD, do you think Paramount could have made 50 million in two months?

 

[Zardnaar]

How would this guess be educated when all the evidence is that on VoD Mario isn't as popular as D&D?

Paramount doesn't need to make up 100 million. The math is pretty clear. They're short only 50. Considering D&D has been the most popular movie on P+ for a month and is more popular than Mario on VoD, do you think Paramount could have made 50 million in two months?

It's very debatable if HAT has beaten Mario. I suspect they would he screaming it from the rooftops if it had broken 75 million.

It sens Mario and John Wick gave longer legs on VoD.

50 million unlikely imho but not impossible. Paramonts probably out around 85+ million (25 million production plus marketing your number was 62-64 million iirc).

Another thing is you've discounted all the smaller streamers. I can rent HAT on Xbox and I woukd have to check but I think there's more of them than Paramount subscribers.

 

[Kaodi]

I have finally seen the movie. I enjoyed it, but it was middling in many ways. I am not sure how much of an impression it will have made in the long term. More than the first movie, though that is not saying much. I hope there is a sequel though. I feel like there is a lot of opportunity for a sequel to be better and maybe less cloying now that there will be less need for exposition.

 

[bedir than]

It sens Mario and John Wick gave longer legs on VoD.

Does it seem that way? What evidence do you have that the two films doing worse in VoD are actually more popular?

Paramonts probably out around 85+ million (25 million production plus marketing your number was 62-64 million iirc).

You have once again completely ignored that Paramount Global had distribution rights everywhere but Canada and the UK. Because you've been ignoring that you created a number in your imagination disconnected from reality.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

The level of success of a movie can't be compared with the titles from several years ago. The ciphers of D&D:HaT shouldn't be so bad to be a "first episode" when several movies are suffering true bombs in the box office this year. We also we should compare with other titles produced by Paramount+.

Star Trek returned to the cinemas some years ago, and the weren't so superhit, but now they are producing several TV series, and they haven't been cancelled yet, because these are working.

If Star Trek can work as serie then also a D&D action-live serie should be tried. With a miniserie shouldn't be too risky.

And we can't safe what is going to happen in Hollywood and the rest of entetaiment industry, and we could see M&A now we can't imagine yet. There is merit and luck if Paramount can survive a couple of years more being independient. Even some "heavyweight" of the cinematographic studios could face to the bankrupt.

Star Trek: Beyond in 2016 was a budget of 185 M$ and a box office of 343,5 M$. (D&D was 150 M$ budget and 208,2 in box office).

There may be reasons to feel a little disappointed but not too ashamed. The production was right, it was a fun movie, but some external circustances also happened.

 

[Mistwell]

I don't think you realize how hard that 100 million is to make up without a third party paying tens of millions.

I would very much like for you to describe your experience or objective dataset you have access to which backs up your claim that you "realize" how hard or easy it is to make that figure better than others here.

You've been stating a level of expertise for months now on this topic, without every stating why your claim has merit for your level of expertise. It sure seems like "I read some stuff on the internet which everyone has access to" is your level of expertise.

Which is not itself a knock, but it becomes a real hard knock when you go around telling others things like "I don't think you realize [what I realize]" about a set of facts where we all have the same data you have.

We have PEOPLE WITH ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE, EXPERIENCE, AND ACCESS TO DATA YOU DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO who state in published vetted and professionally edited articles for actual, revenue generating publications that are well respected in the industry who as a matter of routine have disagreed with your views on this topic (see below for another example *). That does not in itself make them right and you wrong, but it does absolutely bring into question why you keep telling others things which imply you simply "know better" than everyone who disagrees with you on this topic. Why do you know better? What's your actual professional background in this which give you the confidence to tell others they just don't understand this topic as well as you do?

* Another example. Screenrant, which is a professional revenue generating publication, in an article written by Shawn S. Lealos who is an industry professional and has been for years writing in that industry about 1200 articles, and Dalton Norman another industry professional for many years having written about 1000 articles in that industry, states on June 14, 2023,

"The success of Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves has made a sequel possible" and "The overwhelming success of Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves has certainly warranted a sequel."

They mention streaming is likely the key to a sequel, and that both John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein seem very happy with what they are seeing. They are up for a sequel or different D&D movie.

The article also mentions something which hasn't been talked about much here: the legal hurdles they had to overcome to make this movie were significant, a lot had to be untangled (and it's unclear if any of those costs are in the production budget) and another movie is more likely because that knot of legal issues were untangled and the investment in the ability to even make a D&D movie was meaningful.

 

[Zardnaar]

I would very much like for you to describe your experience or objective dataset you have access to which backs up your claim that you "realize" how hard or easy it is to make that figure better than others here.

You've been stating a level of expertise for months now on this topic, without every stating why your claim has merit for your level of expertise. It sure seems like "I read some stuff on the internet which everyone has access to" is your level of expertise.

Which is not itself a knock, but it becomes a real hard knock when you go around telling others things like "I don't think you realize [what I realize]" about a set of facts where we all have the same data you have.

We have PEOPLE WITH ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE, EXPERIENCE, AND ACCESS TO DATA YOU DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO who state in published vetted and professionally edited articles for actual, revenue generating publications that are well respected in the industry who as a matter of routine have disagreed with your views on this topic (see below for another example *). That does not in itself make them right and you wrong, but it does absolutely bring into question why you keep telling others things which imply you simply "know better" than everyone who disagrees with you on this topic. Why do you know better? What's your actual professional background in this which give you the confidence to tell others they just don't understand this topic as well as you do?

* Another example. Screenrant, which is a professional revenue generating publication, in an article written by Shawn S. Lealos who is an industry professional and has been for years writing in that industry about 1200 articles, and Dalton Norman another industry professional for many years having written about 1000 articles in that industry, states on June 14, 2023,

"The success of Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves has made a sequel possible" and "The overwhelming success of Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves has certainly warranted a sequel."

They mention streaming is likely the key to a sequel, and that both John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein seem very happy with what they are seeing. They are up for a sequel or different D&D movie.

The article also mentions something which hasn't been talked about much here: the legal hurdles they had to overcome to make this movie were significant, a lot had to be untangled (and it's unclear if any of those costs are in the production budget) and another movie is more likely because that knot of legal issues were untangled and the investment in the ability to even make a D&D movie was meaningful.

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

 

[mamba]

We also we should compare with other titles produced by Paramount+.

why, why can we not compare to any movie / studio. I give you that we should compare to 2023, but I see no reason to limit it to one studio.

It’s like saying you can only compare eg the Ford pickup to other cars made by Ford, but not to other pickups…

 

[Zardnaar]

why, why can we not compare to any movie / studio. I give you that we should compare to 2023, but I see no reason to limit it to one studio.

Ot’s like saying you can only compare eg the Ford pickup to other cars made by Ford, but not to other pickups…

Well we xan compare it to other movies released at similar time eg Creed and John Wick.

You cant really spin 200 odd million box office vs 150 million BO and 60+ million marketing as a good result.

It's done worse than Prince of Persia, Assassins Creed and Warcraft. All of which are regarded as box office disappointments.