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

[mamba]

I really think all the 'talk around' in here is the disconnect between 'financial flop' and 'critical flop'.

I think most talk about financial hit / flop, there are just some that use creative explanations for why it is a financial success

 

[bedir than]

I think most talk about financial hit / flop, there are just some that use creative explanations for why it is a financial success

I'm unaware of anyone in this thread that has called it a success beyond saying that it owned weekend 1

 

[Zardnaar]

I'm unaware of anyone in this thread that has called it a success beyond saying that it owned weekend 1

Didn't even own week one. Needed around double.

It was number 1 vs nothing relevant. Well it beat John Wick on its second week so not a great comparison.

 

[Mistwell]

I posted a link ages ago which included Knives out.

It was referenced along with two other movies Netflix paid 160 million and 200 million for. They're the exception not the rule.

I asked it as an example question and the overwhelming majority of my post was not about that. I disagree with you it was the exception: it's one of the models the industry uses. But fine, was The Irishman (won academy award) a hit or flop?

The typical moviegoers 3-5 million dollars on streaming (they're bought in bundles). Indie movies can get less than 100 000. They're also movies primarily for steaming.

There is no data on any of that. We truly do not have those numbers as even vaguely firm answers.

Knives Out was also a hit at the cinema so in essence Netflix had to pay to make up for the lack of box office for the future ones. Since they were going to primarily be streaming. Knives out also was a lot cheaper than HAT.

Why are you focusing on that minor question I asked when the overwhelming majority of my post had nothing to do with that? NONE of what I posted was predicated on that example. The point, which you are dodging, is a huge component of movie production budgets and profit margins is now based on streaming data we don't have. Nothing you've said answers that in any way.

So if you have any evidence Netflix or anyone else paid top dollar for D&D please present it. I'm guessing you don't have it.

You mean the part about me saying we don't have that data? You don't need to guess: we don't have that data.
HOWEVER the people who do have access to that data are saying the movie is a hit. And to counter that you're saying you disagree based on you...not having the data on streaming so counting it as $0.

I don't think anyone's gonna pay top dollar for a box office flop. The box office performance leaves a hole nig enough a streamer has to pay top dollar for HAT.

Truly, what you think about this topic as an amateur on the outside is irrelevant to that question. The studio seems to think it's a hit right now and THEY have that data, and also happen to be A STREAMING PLATFORM.

How Much Does Netflix Pay for Movies, TV Shows, and Filmmakers?

Not so long ago, the only way you could enjoy movies from your home was to buy a home video release or wait for the movie to come to TV. Now, by then, the

fictionhorizon.com

Knives Out

Budget 40 million.
Box Office 311million

Knives Out - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Knives Out was a box office hit Netflix paid top dollar for it. Over 100 million would have flowed back to the studio.HAT 100 million+ flowing out.

This doesn't answer 90% of what I said. It sure feels like you were trying to score a point (and not a good one) without grappling with the issue being presented.

Again in sum: we know for sure a very meaningful portion of what is considered profit for a movie being made today is streaming revenue. That is a major component now of the formula. You counted it as $0. We know that's a badly inaccurate estimate given that. So why do you continue to use the old outdated formula you know for sure isn't giving you a good estimate?

 

[Mistwell]

The formula is still valid for comparing box office results against the cost.

It's not. That is my entire point. NOBODY in the industry is using that formula anymore, because it's missing a major component of profits. For some movies, whatever it makes at box office is considered purely bonus money and it makes ALL of its money back from streaming. Nothing about that formula is "still valid" for this kind of question given how much it is missing.

And the pandemic is over (I mean, not really, but most people act like it is). Streaming services are not quite as hot. Paramount has a library of their own but if D&D is exclusive to their much smaller streaming service than maybe not as much revenue there.

The pandemic is considered over but Hollywood is permanently changed from it. How they calculate profits from a movie is no longer based on that formula. RIGHT NOW THIS WEEK the writers of Hollywood voted to authorize a strike partially on this very issue. This is the #1 big issue with movie profitability formulas right now and you and Zard are trying to hand-waive it as $0 because you don't have the necessary data to apply it to your outdated formula. That's not how math works. If you don't have the data and you don't have a good basis to guess on the answer (and you don't) you just say that and you use what indications you have from those who do have access to the data. You don't just make up an answer based on your own guesses from the outside with zero to go on.

Do you think that streaming is really going to cover the pretty large hole that HAT will be in?

Yes. I absolutely believe that (and it's not that large a hole at all). And I believe that because the people who have access to all the data seem to all think that's the case.

Did you actually think, as an amateur with no access to most of the relevant data, that your personal instincts were better than the experts who do have access to the data?

Maybe $200M global box office (call it $100M to the studio) compared to estimates of $150M cost plus $100M marketing. Even if the marketing is $50M, that is a $100M hole.

I think “box office flop” is guaranteed. What is your guess in tne rest of the revenue?

I don't have access to the relevant data, much like you do not. So I am making no guess, and purely going off what the studio seems to think. WHICH IS ALL THAT MATTERS FOR THIS QUESTION. There is no meaning to that question other than what the studio seems to think. It being marked as a hit of flop by you or mean has no impact on anything meaningful in life - all that we should be caring about here is if the studio thinks it's a hit or flop. They seem to be, right now, thinking it's in the hit category.

BTW - this strike is about resetting formulas but the extreme of 100% streaming for Black Widow are quickly going behind us. Streaming exclusives are known much more in advance now. So your point is a little stretched.

My post wasn't about streaming exclusives in any way. Nothing stretched at all in my point. When a movie is released to both theaters and then streaming, the current formula used by the studio to determine if they made money or lost money includes, as a meaningful portion, the streaming revenue. Which is a very complicated question, but which determines what people in that industry are paid for their work on such movies.

 

[Mistwell]

I'm unaware of anyone in this thread that has called it a success beyond saying that it owned weekend 1

It's a success. There, I said it. I've given my reasons for calling it that, extensively and repeatedly now.

 

[Zardnaar]

I asked it as an example question and the overwhelming majority of my post was not about that. I disagree with you it was the exception: it's one of the models the industry uses. But fine, was The Irishman (won academy award) a hit or flop?


There is no data on any of that. We truly do not have those numbers as even vaguely firm answers.



Why are you focusing on that minor question I asked when the overwhelming majority of my post had nothing to do with that? NONE of what I posted was predicated on that example. The point, which you are dodging, is a huge component of movie production budgets and profit margins is now based on streaming data we don't have. Nothing you've said answers that in any way.


You mean the part about me saying we don't have that data? You don't need to guess: we don't have that data.
HOWEVER the people who do have access to that data are saying the movie is a hit. And to counter that you're saying you disagree based on you...not having the data on streaming so counting it as $0.




Truly, what you think about this topic as an amateur on the outside is irrelevant to that question. The studio seems to think it's a hit right now and THEY have that data, and also happen to be A STREAMING PLATFORM.


This doesn't answer 90% of what I said. It sure feels like you were trying to score a point (and not a good one) without grappling with the issue being presented.

Again in sum: we know for sure a very meaningful portion of what is considered profit for a movie being made today is streaming revenue. That is a major component now of the formula. You counted it as $0. We know that's a badly inaccurate estimate given that. So why do you continue to use the old outdated formula you know for sure isn't giving you a good estimate?

What's your example of people
saying it's a success?

The week1 launch? The fact that out got good reviews?

Also you're misrepresenting what Isaid. I never said there's no other income sources but we know that there's a big hole that the backend has to fill.

AFAIK Hasbro hasn't said anything amd in event they're not an unbiased source. If they supply the data as well cool otherwise they'll spin it best they can.

Box office data comes from a third party as reported by the movie theatre.

Sure there's other income streams but one can easily say they're losing money there as well since we don't know how merch us selling overall.

You can't say it's a hit or success overall. I cant say it flopped overall.

I can say it flopped at the box office and the scale of that flop has resulted in more money lost than TSR ever pulled off.

The backend may or may not pay off. No idea you can't say otherwise. It's unlikely a flop at the box officeuis going to get top dollar on streaming.

The Irishman was primarily designed for streaming. I'm guessing you don't have the first click data. And yes the Irishman flopped at the box office but it wasn't intended to make money at the box office.

D&D was it's a widespread theatrical release not a streaming vanity/prestige project for a streamer designed to win awards.

Can you produce any evidence any steamer has paid over 100 million for HAT?

 

[mamba]

I'm unaware of anyone in this thread that has called it a success beyond saying that it owned weekend 1

hit <> financial success, for that you just need to make enough money to break even.

There are certainly enough that make it sound like it is that

Every single D&D book is tied to the movie. That's the brand choice they made and it's fueling strong search, strong sales, strong licensing and strong merch.

Paramount and Hasbro knew what the likely BO for a D&D movie would be around, and they overspent because of other economic factors. Paramount got a $150M movie for $75M in theatres and later on P+. Hasbro got a level of brand recognition for D&D that can't be bought with ads.

Paramount has recovered the investment in less 30 days, hasn't it? This is a good sign those doors aren't going to be closed.

Nah not a flop just not a hit. Merch sales seem to be great

 

[mamba]

Yes. I absolutely believe that (and it's not that large a hole at all). And I believe that because the people who have access to all the data seem to all think that's the case.

I don't have access to the relevant data, much like you do not. So I am making no guess, and purely going off what the studio seems to think.

do you have a link for that?

 

[Stalker0]

Since every one seems to be debating what the industry people's are saying, I did a few google searches on the movie just to see what I could find. My goal was not to find reviews of the movie (I think we all agree the movie has reviewed very well) but the articles actually commenting on the movie's financials and success or failure.

Here is some things I dug up, in chronological order (ergo later reports should in theory be more accurate). Note I am just looking at what google is giving me, just to get a feel for what is coming up. I won't say one source is any better than another, you are welcome to make your own judgements.

Note: My assessment or hit or flop is not based on the titles (which often are more extreme) but what the article actually says. So for example articles that are praising the movie but also says "its unclear whether the movie will be profitable" I put in neutral.

April 1st
Hollywood Reporter - No opinion, purely factual - ‘Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves’ Heads for $40M Box Office Opening

April 2nd
Cinema Blend - Neutral - Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves Rolls Well In Its Opening Weekend At Box Office

Indie Wire - Slightly on Hit - ‘Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves’ Brings Honor to the Box Office

Hollywood Reporter - Slighty on Hit - Box Office: ‘Dungeons & Dragons’ Opens to OK $38.5M in North America

April 3rd
Bounding into Comics - Flop - 'Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves' Predicted To Be A Flop Despite Better Opening Weekend Box Office Haul Than Originally Predicted

April 5th
Screenrant - Neutral - 5 Reasons Dungeons & Dragons’ Box Office Is So Big (& Crushed The Original)

April 13th
Project Casting - Hit - 'Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves' To Hit Box Office Opening of $40 Million USD | Project Casting

April 15th
Looper - Slightly Flop - Why Fantasy Movies Are In A Box Office Rut

April 16th
Tenkar's Tavern - Neutral - Two Weeks in: D&D Honor Among Thieves

April 17th
Yahoo Entertainment - Flop - ‘Super Mario Bros.’ Has Dropped a Bob-omb on ‘Dungeons & Dragons’ Box Office Hopes