>http://www.vulture.com/2016/07/paul-feig-ghostbusters-reboot-c-v-r.html
AAAAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA
>Barely hitting 45 million worldwide in its opening weekend.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHHAAHAAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA
>>72100802
But why does it need that much money?
The movie was only 150 million
I doubt it needs that much to break even. Even if we double the budget to account for marketing and assume movie theaters taking a larger cut the longer the movie goes on, it'd probably need closer to 350 million to break even.
>>72100901
>Studios get 100% of box office receipts, even from foreign markets
>>72100860
Production companies they took loans from take cuts, the theaters take cuts, and international sales take even bigger cuts.
They're fucked
>>72100901
Feig LITERALLY said it needs 500 million world wide.
Because Sony isnt the only company taking a cut from them.
>>72100965
He can say whatever the fuck he wants. He can say it needs to gross a billion to break even.
>>72100995
>He can say whatever the fuck he wants. He can say it needs to gross a billion to break even.
You're a stupid fuck, he's the director of the god damn movie who was in direct conversation with the producer of the movie.
These chicks look pretty good for being over 40 desu senpai.
>>72100901
Tentpole movie. He wants it to stand out, not just succeed. Studios won't take chances if it's not going to lead to other movies. It's an investment.
>>72100802
They'll make
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/07/17/ghostbusters-opens-empty-theatres/#disqus_thread
The arguments I'm hearing from SJWs now is that GB was always a low-tier IP, with the internet making it bigger than it really was. So the $46 million BO is the franchise's peak.
I mean, there's some merit in that GB is probably not as popular in the mainstream as many thought. But this still feels and sounds like an excuse for its poor BO showing.
>>72101241
I had 3 fucking words to type.
They'll make it.
>>72101260
The original Ghostbusters, when adjusted for inflation, netted over 500 million.
>>72101061
This, you also have to take into account the advertising budget, and based on how much they whored the movie out, you can bet your ass the ad budget alone was double the production budget.
>>72101344
Also cost a lot less to make and a much, MUCH small ad budget.
>>72101383
The original film, even when taking inflation into account, had a budget of around 60~ million. Less than half of this flick.
>>72101260
I guaranteed that a proper sequel with the actual cast and stablished carachters and lore would break the 500.
The Jews tried to push the >muh diversity shit and got fucked in the ass. I'm happy they lost shekels.
Warcraft had a similar budget to this, and earned just under 500 million. They're reporting though the movie is still in the hole by around 15 mil.
The 500 million number really isn't a meme.
>>72101453
It was the age where practical effects were a mastered craft and the rise of optical effects, which saw it quickly rise and fall to CGI.
We really need to get back to basics with practical effects and set building. I can't believe it would be more expensive than just green screening everything.
>>72100860
A combination of Hollywood accounting and the fact that the production budget isn't everything that was spent on it (advertising and the like).
Also notice that he doesn't say it needs to make 500 million to break even, just that 500 million is the minimum amount that the studio has decided it needs to make to be satisfied with it. It's important to remember that to the people funding it a film is an investment and they want a return on that investment. If it simply "broke even" they wouldn't make any money off it. If they aren't making any money on it then there's no point to invest such huge amounts of money.
>>72101603
This.
But don't worry, Sony announced that they'll be making a Ghostbusters 2!
>>72100860
Jesus Christ every thread
>>72101653
If a movie breaks even, it's an alright investment.
You'll be making money over time with advertising deals, merch, and things of that nature.
500m to break even seems like the norm, anyhow.
>>72101744
150 million production budget + 100 million advertising budget = 250 million.
Then you gotta factor in thought the theater's cut, and the fact that international brings less returns than domestic.
It evens out to where 500 million is not unreasonable.
>>72101658
didnt they also imply that this was to be their mcu?
cus thats fucking hilarious
>sony email leaks literally explain how movie box office revenue is split between the theater, distributor, and the production company
>people still argue this
$500 as a break even point is believable
>>72101906
How was this going to be their MCU? Could they crossover with other properties? Ghostbusters meets Scooby Doo?
>>72101701
Stupid Toadsharer
>>72102895
And how will that work. Is Hemsworth going to play Thor and the receptionist?
Based chinky-dinkies
>>72102962
>so superstitious that a movie about ghosts can cause a societal uproar
>based
>>72101614
The effects in the original GB were ass
>>72102895
Ghostbusters with scooby doo with 21 jump st with men in black with hunger games
>>72102985
Has nothing to do with superstitions. For Pete's sake, don't be so fucking stupid. You're making the rest of us Americans look as stupid and uneducated as you.
It has everything to do with the CCP making sure they stay in power by suppressing any sort of idea that might cause the masses to revolt.
It's the same reason China disapproves of or bans time travel stories.
>>72102985
That's not really that superstitious. I heard in some countries people believe that everyone is equal lmao
>>72103014
I'm hardly a Ghostbusters fan but cmon dude. The stay pufft marshmallow man scene looks good even today.
>yfw between McCarthy and Feig there is 24 million dollars tied up in salaries.
>>72103014
Most of the effects aged well, dem demon dogs tho, they are straight ass, but it's understandable given the techniques of the day.
The actual matketing budget is maybe quadruple what is on paper, but they paid us shills out of a diverted slush fund. I made great money posting in support of Ghostbusters, some threads here but mainly on Reddit and FB. I even made some fake blogs under a pseudonym. I didn't make as much as guys like Patton but it was well worth my time.
>>72103085
I hate to admit it but Ghostbusters with 21 Jump St. sound pretty good.
>>72101383
>Also cost a lot less to make
And looked way fucking better.
When will we actually go back to practical effects? CGI here looks horrid.
>>72100965
>Feig LITERALLY said
But I thought you all believed Feig was a disillusion tool. Now you are using his word as the irrefutable law of the universe.
Just admit you fucking spergs need woman to suffer because it would help you cope with your pathetic lives.
>>72103586
He is a disillusioned tool, no this doesnt contradict that you fucking spastic.
He made the fucking movie, of course he knows how much it has to make to break even.
>>72103687
Lol he
>LITERALLY
said
>like 500 million
>>72103375
b8. post proof fag
>>72103586
>the guy who made the movie hasn't been briefed on how much it must make to break even
Are you actually fucking retarded?
>>72103778
lol he
>LITERALLY
spoke like
>a retard
Do you have autism or were you neglected as a child?
>>72103778
But his 500+ million dollar guess falls in line with the traditional hollywood math to predict desired box office returns. One would even expect Feig to have maybe some inside knowledge on what Sony was looking for in a return, since he made the thing.
>>72103842
Haha, you dummy. He wasn't talking about the movie breaking even. Or if he was you can't prove it. Look at the quote again. He said it "has to at least get $500 million worldwide..."
To what?
Maybe he was just speculating what it would take to prove that it was respected by any and all audiences
>>72104108
Ok. That makes sense. Cause if this movie just broke even I don't think that would have changed the minds of the fat angry young men. -See this thread for reference.
>>72104108
Nobody ever fucking means it like that you dipshit.
>>72104193
Yup. Figured you would actually have no proof.
>>72104187
This
>>72104221
HE FUCKING SAID "THIS MOVIE HAS TO AT LEAST GET 500 MILLION WORLDWIDE"
THAT MEANS IT HAS TO GET 500 MILLION WORLDWIDE.
THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE INTERPRETATION OF THIS SIMPLE STATEMENT
>>72104108
>I think it needs to make this arbitrary amount to be respected people.
There are comparables out there as far as production cost, who did 400+ million worldwide, and are considered failures. For a summer blockbuster film, what he mentions is in line for expectations.
I don't get how 1:1 parity in production/marketing, and % of box office take going to studios, all the sudden becomes "just a guess" when these outlines have existed for years.
>>72101699
what do you mean it was a low budget film man
>>72104305
It has to get that much worldwide...for what?
To be approved for a sequel? For him to be satisfied? For you to accept your place in this world?
I dunno. Maybe it's to break even, but that wasn't stated by the source that was quoting a passive estimate from another persons thoughts.
It's not over till it's over
>>72101658
I will fucking die if they make a Ghostbusters 3 using the new characters and not with the original characters.
>>72104381
>low budget
>150 million not including marketing
Faggot.
>>72104305
I'm tired of these Feig-apologists. Why is what he said so final? Why is he your source of truth in the world?
Stop memeing, this movie is doing really well
>>72104508
>I'm tired of these Feig-apologists. Why is what he said so final? Why is he your source of truth in the world?
Oh silly me i thought you were retarded, its just bait.
I apologize, my Summer-dude, you excited for Sophmore year?
>First weekend did better than expected
>Will get to $500 million easy when it comes out in China.
MRA GamerGoobers BTFO
>>72104584
>Stop memeing, this movie is doing really well
>needs 500 million to do well
>has barely scratched 60 mil worlwide in its release weekend
>Star Trek comes out next week, followed by Bourne, and Suicide Squad
A-anon... i dont know how to tell you this...
>>72104610
>when it comes out in China
A-anon i dont know how to break this to you...
>tfw I convinced my parents not to go see it
I told my mom that it opens with a queef joke, and she thought it was disgusting. I also had to explain to her what a queef was.
>>72104610
>China
He doesn't know.
>>72104398
500m to break even, as an estimate, everything after that is company profit and that determines conventionally if it'll get more funding for followup projects. Even if it hits 400m it might not be completely canned but it'll be relegated to wait until next IP renewal.
>>72104610
about that my tumblr friend
>>72104610
>China
>>72104398
The realities of box office returns, especially for this type of film during this period of the year, are pretty straightforward.
>We know it cost 144 million after rebates in production costs.
>We know they at least spent 100-120 million on marketing, and thats probably being conservative.
>The 144 million in production costs isn't a situation where Sony ponies up all the cash. They take out loans based on the size of the project, and based on the predicted outcome, they can have varying interest rates in excess of 20%. This is also a move for Sony to mitigate loss, because these loans are insured, so they can write off certain parts of this in case of failure.
>144+100 gives you 244 million in marketing and production. For the sake of simplicity, I'll go with 300 million when you factor in industry loans. 300 million dollars, and it hasn't been released yet.
>The film is released, they take percentages of ticket sales, ranging from 50-80% domestically, and as low as 25% overseas.
>While this film is in theatres, the studio is still paying interest on this loan from production.
>The general rule is production+marketing, multiplied by two, to establish a break even.
>In Sony's case, I'd like to believe its closer to mid 500's, but the reality is they are probably closer to 600 to start seeing a little cash flow coming in.
The reality is, Sony doomed this from the start with the financial mismanagement.
t. someone who worked in distribution contract negotiation/financial accountability for a large theatre chain for 4ish years
>>72103452
MiB's a good venture too. Hopefully the crossover would live up well enough.
>>72104794
>I'd like to believe its closer to mid 500's, but the reality is they are probably closer to 600 to start seeing a little cash flow coming in
>>72104712
They actually rejected the movie because the other movies were never shown in China, so they figured that people wouldn't care.
>>72104712
>Super-Power Dare-To-Die Team
what
>>72104665
>>72104675
>>72104712
>>72104718
Ok, why are you all so eager to correct someone who is throwing around obvious bait. Why do you have such a strong desire to be validated and useful?
You Bautistas need to calm the fuck down.
>>72104610
should we tell him?
>>72100802
>Paul Feig, so brave, such a hero
>champion of womyns' rights
Back to movie jail for you Feig, where you can suffer for our sins.
>>72105346
Lol. I mean autists*
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OG83qBuQ_A8
>>72101260
>>72101344
Budget: 69.6 million
Box office: 684.84 million
Huge profit margin, big box office. For 84 that film was HUGE.
>>72101879
Breaking even isn't even a true option ever.
Breaking even is not a goal, it'a not why people put in money to make a movie, and Ghostbusters isn't an artistic pursuit by any account.
Breaking even is the lowest acceptable outcome for all investors involved, but in essence it makes their investment 100% worthless, they were better off wrapping that money in rubber bands and hiding it under their beds. Breaking even means you just wasted a year of possible investments that would net millions of dollars off of JUST interest.
They are hoping to just break even at this point, which really says a lot about how fucking poorly this movie is doing.
This movie and everything involved, merchandising and games, are literal cancer in the eyes of investors.
>>72100802
Paul Feig's got a bit of a little girl obsession...
>>72101744
>If a movie breaks even, it's an alright investment.
you are retarded and your parents are disappointed by you.
when asked by their friends what you're doing they look away awkwardly and make up some bullshit. go improve your life and stop spewing shit on my board
>>72101744
>Breaking even is an alright investment.
>>72105913
shake it like u maked it baby
>>72105859
No wonder he got called Paul Fag.
>>72105859
>little girl obsession
Melissa McCarthy is not what I'd call little
>>72102781
>>sony email leaks literally explain how movie box office revenue is split between the theater, distributor, and the production company
source? i'd like to see official numbers
>>72104967
Honestly, the MIB/21 Jump St is a good idea. There was nowhere else to go with Jump Street and it lets them make a cheap MIB film.
>>72101744
With the economy inflation, 'breaking even' means going backwards if your money is tied up for a year doing nothing.
Better to put their money in the bank than risk it for a negative return. Not worth it in the slightest
>>72101744
Breaking even is not good. Its actually a loss; due to monetary inflation, money today is worth more than money a year from now
So, when you break even with an investment over a couple of years, you actually lost money; you could have invested that money elsewhere, or just kept it and made more than breaking even on that investment.
>>72101744
>>72105913
>when asked by their friends what you're doing they look away awkwardly and make up some bullshit. go improve your life and stop spewing shit on my board
Rekt
>>72101744
>If a movie breaks even, it's an alright investment
How?
How is throwing your money into a risky venture justified by getting it all back? Why would you ever risk any of your money when the option is lose or get the same amount back?
You don't have to be Adam Smith to see this
>>72107753
>literally answers your question in the next sentence
>>72107911
No, because you could have lost some or all of it.
It's not worth it to risk your money when the best case scenario is a loss or a zero net gain.
In order to risk any money, you have to be under the impression that it would be beneficial of you to do so, such as earning more money.
What are you failing to understand about this?
You understand that investors want to make money, right?
>tfw bernie sanders took all the lunch money from this film's target audience
>>72107911
No you dumbass, it isn't worth it because you invested all that effort and time and in the end you're in the same place where you started
>>72100943
Wrong
>>72104712
>Super Power Dare to Die Team
If they named it this and didn't bother trying to tie in Ghostbusters shit to it it would have cost $50m less and probably been a better movie.
>>72100802
if this isnt proof that modern remakes are money laundering fronts for drug cartels and mafias, nothing will.
>>72100901
You're a retard. To break even, the film needs to double it's production and marketing cost. 244 million means Sony needs at least 488 million.
>>72108808
>I don't understand greentexting
>>72100860
High interest loans are taken out to finance movies, plus the advertising/merchandising/rights purchases are not even included in the budget and for most movies all of that is at least equal to the production budget. Plus all of the money it produces doesn't go only to sony.
