Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8981001" data-attributes="member: 7023840">I've been over this <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/d-d-honor-among-thieves-director-cast-interviews-begin-as-marketing-ramps-up.696207/#post-8954606" target="_blank">before</a>, but there is a big difference between Hollywood Accounting and whether a movie is "profitable," and, for that matter, why expectations often matter.Since I've covered it so many times, I'm going to make it brief.1. Hollywood Accounting. This is nothing more than normal accounting, except maybe the extreme version. Just the idea that studios will use all the tricks in the book (and then some) in order to "zero out" profits. But this has nothing to do with common parlance of profitability. In other words, Hollywood Accounting is applied to all movies and doesn't really have anything to do with conversations about profitability. Unless you made the mistake of entering into a share of the profits (ugh, don't), no one care about this.2. Box-office profitability. This is what most people are talking about. Again, this is a really rough figure- but it's the idea that a movie make more at the box office than its production costs. Of course, studios don't always report the true production costs (TAX BREAKS!), or the true marketing costs, and this doesn't take into account all sorts of factors, from in-movie advertising (product placement) to merchandise (toys, etc.) to rights for VOD and streaming- which are increasingly important. But this is why movies that might seem profitable, or slightly profitable, are actually flops to the studio, while movies that seem like they are money losers are actually money makers. 3. Finally, expectations can matter a great deal- the studio's expectations. The WoW movie is a great example. It did great business ... in China. But was considered a flop because it so underperformed in America. The trouble with the movie was in a lot of areas- it was considered a flop in English-speaking countries; the massive profits in China were in a market that gives the smallest percentage of box office back, and there is never a guarantee of release of a western movie in China, all of which made the movie a break-even proposition and means that the studio has no interest in a franchise.All of this is only a little interesting. Why? Because to begin with, why do we care how these movies perform? Obviously, it's just another way to continue "rooting" for or against things. Which goes to [USER=6789971]@bedir than[/USER] and his point about the nature of fans hating on things .... it's why, even today, you have people arguing about the profitability of BvS. WHO CARES. It's just another symptom of toxic fandom.More importantly, there is an easy way to tell how a movie does. See what happens next! Do they want to make more? If so, it did well. If not, regardless of accounting and other issues, it didn't. Pretty pretty simple. As for the D&D movie, they likely have an arranged streaming deal and hope for merchandising (Hasbro), which goes into the profitability or lack thereof, not to mention they need something to introduce the various media plays they are making. All of which is to say that the box office profitability is not the most important indicator, but it is important that it continues to beat expectations.</blockquote>

Verification