15mm and 28mm Fanatik | 09 Jul 2013 8:44 p.m. PST |
is looking grim, according to some analysts: link With recent mega-budget failures like 'John Carter' and 'The Lone Ranger,' maybe Hollywood will be more leery in green-lighting expensive productions in the future. Regardless, I will be among the first in line for it this Friday. |
chuck05 | 09 Jul 2013 9:05 p.m. PST |
Ive been itching to see Pacific Rim for months! Its pushing all my good buttons. Kaiju. Giant Robots. Anime. Whats not to love. I really hope the desire to do original movies doesnt die because of a couple of supposed big budget failures. I enjoyed John Carter and The Lone Ranger. Its too bad the studio wont take a risk on a sequel. Id go and see them. At some point the current hot properties were new ideas that someone took a risk on. Was Despicable Me a proven asset? What about the first Iron Man movie? |
doug redshirt | 09 Jul 2013 9:55 p.m. PST |
What do John Carter or The Lone Ranger have to do with giant monsters and robots. I saw the first trailer for The lone ranger and decided I wouldn't see it. I read the John Carter books so was less then enthused to see it. I have been waiting on Pacific Rim for a long time. Am going with my son this weekend. But then I grew up watching giant monster movies from the 50s and 60s. |
Mako11 | 09 Jul 2013 10:03 p.m. PST |
Might be worth the $5.00 USD movie ticket, but I wouldn't pay full price. From what I've heard, the visuals should be stunning, but I'm not so sure their story telling is up to the task. Still, probably better than average for a monster movie. |
War Monkey | 09 Jul 2013 11:58 p.m. PST |
We have a theater that plays all the movies for a couple of weeks at $2.50 USD a person just before they go to DVD sales, I think I can wait |
nazrat | 10 Jul 2013 5:19 a.m. PST |
So now films flop before they even premier? Jeez, at least wait until people actually see them (or don't). But the fact is John Carter MADE MONEY. And I don't think you'll find anyone out there that thinks that it's initial lackluster performance had anything to do with the quality of the movie-- it was a complete marketing fail, pure and simple. I loved it, myself
|
AfricanAl | 10 Jul 2013 5:48 a.m. PST |
At least there isn't a big campaign against it, as with 'Ender's Game'. |
BrigadeGames | 10 Jul 2013 6:29 a.m. PST |
Here is a review from Forbes by the same guy who, based on his review, changed my mind about The Lone Ranger (which was a hoot.) I am going to trust the guy again and see it. The guy says that the trailers do not do it justice. Kind of sounds like an "Independence Day" type film. link Too many reporters want to predict the next film doom and gloom. Drives me nuts. With TLR and JC that means sequels will probably never get made and that sucks. |
Pictors Studio | 10 Jul 2013 6:48 a.m. PST |
If I get a chance I'll see it. It looks exciting and fun and it has been a while since I've seen a giant monster movie that looked this good. The problem, as with any movie these days, is finding the time. |
richarDISNEY | 10 Jul 2013 7:14 a.m. PST |
I saw The Lone Ranger, TWICE, last weekend and loved it both times. I am looking forward to this too. I'd rather see things like The Lone Ranger or Pacific Rim over another "hangover" or "this is the end" or dram-rom-com or 'art' film. My two pence.
|
Ron W DuBray | 10 Jul 2013 8:03 a.m. PST |
well I am planning to see it, unlike the loneranger, WWZ, and others. It looks like fun. |
15mm and 28mm Fanatik | 10 Jul 2013 8:08 a.m. PST |
So now films flop before they even premier? Jeez, at least wait until people actually see them (or don't). I agree with you, but nowadays with advance screenings and pre-release tracking data analysts love to predict how a movie will perform before they even come out. They're like sharks that smell blood in the water. They'll pounce on a film mercilessly before (and after) the release date. JC and TLR were examples, but they also destroyed Will Smith's 'After Earth' and tried (but failed) to buzzkill 'World War Z.' But the fact is John Carter MADE MONEY. And I don't think you'll find anyone out there that thinks that it's initial lackluster performance had anything to do with the quality of the movie-- it was a complete marketing fail, pure and simple. Yes, it came out on top in its international gross (domestic plus foreign), but it was still a write-off for Disney since the rule-of-thumb is that the studios only take 50 percent of the receipt, and the production budget does not include marketing and promotion expenses. They could've marketed it better, and the fallout did result in the ouster of Disney's studio chief and another executive, but it's hard to say how successful JC would've been commercially since most moviegoers today probably never heard of 'John Carter' from Mars. |
Rasaloam | 10 Jul 2013 8:14 a.m. PST |
wasn't there a big stink about the studio inflating the cost to make John Carter so they could do some fiddly things tax-wise. They didn't market it well intentionally and charged a ton of stuff to it's budget to make it look like a failure as they didn't plan to make a series out of it. maybe just rumor I guess, but the film was enjoyable, and alot of people saw it (like someone else posted, it did make money even at the budget it was listed as). |
15mm and 28mm Fanatik | 10 Jul 2013 11:14 a.m. PST |
wasn't there a big stink about the studio inflating the cost to make John Carter so they could do some fiddly things tax-wise. They didn't market it well intentionally and charged a ton of stuff to it's budget to make it look like a failure as they didn't plan to make a series out of it. I heard that too. Sounds like Disney saw the writing on the wall and tried to minimize their losses from JC. The way to do that is to 'cook the books' and make it look like your losses are much higher than it actually is. The top 1 percent do it on their federal tax returns all the time. |
chuck05 | 10 Jul 2013 2:46 p.m. PST |
I read somewhere that there was a change in management before John Carter came out. The new management didnt want to support anything the old management did and therefor John Carter's marketing was non existent. |
Coelacanth | 10 Jul 2013 3:30 p.m. PST |
My inner child wants to see this pretty bad:
Early reviews on Rotten Tomatoes are pretty good: link I plan to see it this weekend. Ron |
Tankrider | 10 Jul 2013 4:19 p.m. PST |
I wanna' see Mech Warriors fight Godzilla. I'm in. |
MKGipson | 10 Jul 2013 7:02 p.m. PST |
IMAX, all the way! BIG fights, BIG screen! |
Sergeant Crunch | 10 Jul 2013 8:29 p.m. PST |
I don't care if there is a story or not, just want to see robots beating the snot out of monsters. |
StarfuryXL5 | 10 Jul 2013 9:26 p.m. PST |
|
basileus66 | 10 Jul 2013 11:39 p.m. PST |
I will watch it, no question. Giant robots, giant monsters and a good script? What is not to love? |
nazrat | 11 Jul 2013 6:30 a.m. PST |
I will be going for sure! |
Paint it Pink | 11 Jul 2013 7:18 a.m. PST |
Waiting to go see this when it is out here in Blighty, which is soon I believe. Runs off to check cinema times. What's not to like? |
darthfozzywig | 11 Jul 2013 10:03 p.m. PST |
Yes, it came out on top in its international gross (domestic plus foreign), but it was still a write-off for Disney since the rule-of-thumb is that the studios only take 50 percent of the receipt, and the production budget does not include marketing and promotion expenses That is correct: Worldwide gross = $282,778,100 USD Divided by 2 = $141,389,050 USD Production cost = $250,000,000 USD Worldwide marketing = $100,000,000 USD Current loss = ($208,610,950) So yeah, two hundred million in the hole. And it's not like the kids are buying tons of John Carter action figures, either. So while Disney will whittle that down over time through blu-ray/DVD sales (which are a dwindling resource, by the way), in the meantime that's still a huge writedown. Any way you slice it, it was a financial disaster. |
boy wundyr x | 12 Jul 2013 7:26 a.m. PST |
I wonder what happens to the people who spend $100 USD million on marketing and get such crappy results
Probably promoted. |