mamba
Legend
how is the target with marketing < 300M, are you forgetting the factor of 2?Yes I did and you still overshot the target by $100M.
how is the target with marketing < 300M, are you forgetting the factor of 2?Yes I did and you still overshot the target by $100M.
yes they are, P+ still has to pay P for streaming, they are separate entities in this regard, aren’t they.Paramount is the producer. Again, this is all discussed in detail upthread.
you are forgetting streaming and all the other stuff that is being pointed out for HAT here all the timeA movie about which there's no doubt of hit or flop. It's at 24 million globally, after being out just over three weeks. It cost 65 million to make.
Yes I did and you still overshot the target by $100M.
Naw it's still newer in some international outlets.
I've discussed this pretty extensively in this very thread. We will not get hard data on streaming - the WGA strike and likely upcoming DGA is in part over that very issue. All we can know is indications from the studio itself. If they behave like this is a flop then the streaming numbers are lower than expected. If they behave like it was a hit then the streaming numbers are within or exceeding expectations. Every indication we've had so far is the movie exceeded expectations.
That is imperfect data. But welcome to the post-pandemic of movie analysis. There is no longer good data because streaming information is kept secret, even from shareholders. All we know, with absolute certainty, is the studios do consider streaming to be a very meaningful portion of profits for a movie now, where pre-pandemic they didn't and lumped it in with rentals and dvd/bluray sales.
And really all that ever meant anything about the "hit or flop" designation was what the studio thought. What WE thought never changed anything. If the studio is happy with the result, that's all "hit" really ever meant.
The only people using 2.5 are people who think that the pandemic and streaming hasn't changedWe don't know marketing budget so people used the 2.5 number to get 375 million approx break even point.
The only people using 2.5 are people who think that the pandemic and streaming hasn't changed
No. It is not. No industry professional is saying 2.5 any more.It's still relevant for tge box office.
No. It is not. No industry professional is saying 2.5 any more.
The only people using 2.5 are people who think that the pandemic and streaming hasn't changed
That means, according to Cameron, that if “Avatar: The Way of Water” wants to break even, it’ll need to overtake either “Star Wars: The Force Awakens” ($2.07 billion) or “Avengers: Infinity War” ($2.05 billion) in the fourth or fifth slots, respectively.
I've never denied 2x for modern box office success. I've merely added that I expect a sequel and that in the end both Paramount and Hasbro will be pleased with the money they made because of licensing, merch, game sales, and streaming.Production + Marketing x2 is Also still commonly used.
But maybe I'm putting too much stock in the Bona fides of:
Clickbaity industry sites like - Variety:
![]()
‘Avatar 2’ Is So Expensive It Must Become the ‘Fourth or Fifth Highest-Grossing Film in History’ Just to Break Even
James Cameron says that "Avatar: The Way of Water" will need to become the fourth or fifth highest-grossing movie in history in order to break even.variety.com
Quoting some director named - James Cameron:
![]()
Avatar 2's Massive $1 Billion-Plus Expenses Revealed (New Data)
New data revealed just how expensive Avatar: The Way of Water really was.thedirect.com
But, perhaps James Cameron knew what he was doing after all:
It made $2.32 billion worldwide...