|
Community Links |
Social Groups |
Pictures & Albums |
Members List |
Search Forums |
Advanced Search |
Go to Page... |
|
Thread Tools |
08-12-2009, 05:06 PM | #61 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2008
Location: On break
Posts: 4,659
|
Quote:
The stated production budget is $175 million. Those saying "it needs to make $300 million to break even" are both ignoring that marketing costs aren't usually factored into the decision to make a sequel, and ignoring that studios don't release the numbers for the HUGE amounts of money they tend to make on DVD sales. Though the real fact of the matter is that except for those that work for Paramount's budgeting and accounting offices, no one knows what the movie really needs to make to "break even." It's all guess work. I can say this for absolute certain, though...the movie does NOT need to make $300 million in theaters to get a sequel.
Getting knocked off "the top spot" is also completely irrelevant to the movies' success. It's about dollars earned, not how many weeks it stays #1. Most summer films don't stay in the #1 slot longer than a week, two weeks at most (and before anyone brings up "The Dark Knight" I said MOST summer movies, not all). Studios do in fact combine both production costs and promotion costs. If they didn't they every movie would just make a 10 million dollar film and spend 50 million promoting it and think "oh well if my movie makes 15 million its a success." So again yes they add those numbers together, thinking otherwise is just plain silly! And they don't usually consider DVD sales, as I said usually! Van Dame, Cuba Gooding Jr. Antonio Banderas have hit after hit on DVD but that does not mean their future films will get a theatrical distribution. DVD sales as of right now are an essential revenue source but its not their main focus at all. Hell The Butterfly Effect, Children of the Corn, The Cell and countless other films had a sequel so yes you are correct it does not need to make anything to have a sequel greenlit. A film can make not a cent to get a sequel greenlit! |
08-12-2009, 05:12 PM | #62 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2008
Location: On break
Posts: 4,659
|
Quote:
No, well, actually yes, you probably did, but that's because most people misunderstand what "greenlighting" actually means.
Paramount has said that The Joe sequel is "in development" or going to be very soon. That does NOT mean that it's "greenlit." "Green Lighting" is when Paramount sets aside the money and gives the go-ahead to start full-fledged production. "In development" is just Hollywood corporatespeak for "we're kicking around ideas and we'll let you know when we decide if we're going to run with any of them or not." For example, a Superman Returns sequel has been "in development" at Warner Brothers almost since the week after Superman Returns hit. Basically, Paramount has NOT guaranteed that there's going to be a sequel. A lot of people are taking it that way and it's just not correct. Of course Paramount is going to talk sequel after a reasonably healthy opening weekend...they want to try to convince more people to go see it so they won't be "behind" when the sequel comes along. In development means that a producer is in the planing stages. Its when a producer is either going to option a script or work on a spec script. |
08-13-2009, 07:09 AM | #63 |
Crimson Nerd
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Virginia
Posts: 12,579
|
Quote:
Well Duh........ everything in life is a guess until it happens. We can all just speculate on a sequel until its in production. Even if its been greenlit means nothing. But you are completely wrong in what you said but that's okay I will help you out here.....
Studios do in fact combine both production costs and promotion costs. If they didn't they every movie would just make a 10 million dollar film and spend 50 million promoting it and think "oh well if my movie makes 15 million its a success." So again yes they add those numbers together, thinking otherwise is just plain silly! Quote:
And they don't usually consider DVD sales, as I said usually! Van Dame, Cuba Gooding Jr. Antonio Banderas have hit after hit on DVD but that does not mean their future films will get a theatrical distribution. DVD sales as of right now are an essential revenue source but its not their main focus at all.
Quote:
Hell The Butterfly Effect, Children of the Corn, The Cell and countless other films had a sequel so yes you are correct it does not need to make anything to have a sequel greenlit. A film can make not a cent to get a sequel greenlit!
Quote:
Greenlit and greenlight are the same thing............ If something is greenlit or had the greenlight given it means that project goes into pre-production. Pre-production is so vague as it means a producer can waffle and take as much time as he wants to bring on the correct people. He will search for writers if needed, producers and a director.
In development means that a producer is in the planing stages. Its when a producer is either going to option a script or work on a spec script. Pre Production on a franchise film is also quite different from this "waffle" period you're talking about, because in a franchise situation (which is what G.I. Joe will become if a sequel is made), the studio will want the movie out in a timely fashion. Directors, writers, and all that can be attached while the movie is still "in development." There are plenty of films that get attached to directors and scripts that never end up happening. Because they never got "green lit" by the studio. The "waffle" period is the "in development" period. It's often reported as being "pre production" but true pre-production is set-building, costume designing, casting, animatics, etc... Things that cost money, money that the production doesn't have unless the studio has "greenlit" it. Green lighting means the movie is happening, barring some kind of crazy disaster scenario. Money has been allocated and production (including full-fledged pre-production) moves ahead full steam. That has not happened with the G.I. Joe sequel yet, contrary to what many sites are reporting. Last edited by Jmacq1; 08-13-2009 at 07:17 AM.. |
08-13-2009, 07:20 AM | #64 |
Practicing clarinet BBL
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Iacon
Posts: 247
|
Tuesday $5,960,560
__________________
|
08-13-2009, 08:05 AM | #65 |
Hisstank.Com General
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK England
Posts: 10,220
|
Wow, i'm so happy its doing so well, Yo Joe!!!!
__________________
BST http://www.hisstank.com/forum/g-i-jo...want-list.html Feedback http://www.hisstank.com/forum/buy-se...steve2477.html |
08-13-2009, 08:25 AM | #66 |
Roboskull Pilot
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North West England
Posts: 5,181
|
All I know is that if FANTASTIC FOUR can get a sequal, GI JOE bloomin' better! Glad that we appear to be heading in the right direction (with some countries still to open the film).
__________________
-----------------There's no shame in being a pariah----------------- |
08-13-2009, 06:29 PM | #67 |
FOXHOUNDER
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,493
|
Wednesday: 4,800,000+
|
08-16-2009, 09:54 AM | #68 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2008
Location: On break
Posts: 4,659
|
Quote:
Congratulations, what you've said makes zero sense whatsoever. You're also "completely wrong" but that's ok "I will help you out." If the studios never release marketing numbers, how can they talk about their movies being a "hit" if they didn't all make $100M over their production costs? The reason the marketing costs are hidden is for precisely that reason. If the actual numbers were released, the bar for success would be so high that virtually no movies would be considered "hits" in theaters.
You're missing the key point: Studios do not release the amounts they spend on promotion. They also do not release they amount they earn on DVDs. Coincidence? No, it's not. Marketing money comes from a different "pot" than the production money. Where do you think that marketing "pot" is getting filled from? That's right...DVD sales. That's the reason many movies that don't make $100M past their production budget in box-office take still get sequels...they make up the difference on DVD, and even if the individual movie doesn't, they make enough from essentially non-promoted direct-to-DVD sales (the Van Damme, et al... movies that you're talking about) to more than make up the difference. This is more nonsense given that I can assure you that all of the movies you list "made a cent." But hey, if you're just going to spout nonsense, more power to you. You're basically agreeing with me, then? See, the problem here is that no one from Paramount has actually said "the sequel is green lit." They've said, "We're looking at going into development" and then many sites erroneously reported that as "green lit." And of course "greenlighting" and "greenlit" are the same thing. I never claimed otherwise. Read more carefully next time. Pre Production on a franchise film is also quite different from this "waffle" period you're talking about, because in a franchise situation (which is what G.I. Joe will become if a sequel is made), the studio will want the movie out in a timely fashion. Directors, writers, and all that can be attached while the movie is still "in development." There are plenty of films that get attached to directors and scripts that never end up happening. Because they never got "green lit" by the studio. The "waffle" period is the "in development" period. It's often reported as being "pre production" but true pre-production is set-building, costume designing, casting, animatics, etc... Things that cost money, money that the production doesn't have unless the studio has "greenlit" it. Green lighting means the movie is happening, barring some kind of crazy disaster scenario. Money has been allocated and production (including full-fledged pre-production) moves ahead full steam. That has not happened with the G.I. Joe sequel yet, contrary to what many sites are reporting. If you have a movie in theaters and it cost oh lets say $1,000.00 (I don't want to confuse you with big numbers) and the house keeps oh lets say 50% of the gate receipt and you embark on an advertising campaign of $500.00 to promote this thing......... now its game day and you only sell $2,000.00 worth of tickets. According to you - you made a profit......WRONG! To make a profit you would have to make at least $3,002.00 at the very least. Why you might ask? well the house gets half that so now you are down to 1501.00... you spent 1,000.00 to make that so you are just breaking even there..... and it cost you $500.00 to advertise leaving you with one dollar of profit. Now take that and multiply it by millions and you will hopefully understand why they need to make back there advertisement budget as well as production and still need to give the house a piece of the pie. Now if you think that DVD sales is what covers marketing costs.........good lord........ that is the dumbest thing I have ever heard! Studios outsources different areas of marketing and they don't wait for the DVD sales to pay for them not to mention that they have to embark on a DVD marketing campaign. DVD sales has nothing to do with Marketing.........NOTHING. The Mutant Chronicles went straight to DVD, why? cause they could not bring themselves to spending the marketing costs because the film would not do well in theaters. It's not like they said "Hey, lets spend the money to advertise and when the DVD comes out we will be okay" Thinking that way is naive! Now to correct some things, studios do release marketing numbers....... you just need to learn how to find them. They also release DVD sales........again I am not your tour guide on the Internet......you just need to search. And that is why the bar for success is very high when it comes to profit. I mean there are movies like Mission Impossible 3 that make hundreds of millions and are deemed a failure. The more money you spend the more you have to make.... Does that make sense? Now studios do not ever greenlight a film that is worth over 100million knowing that it does not have a theatrical life. What happens is they make the movie and it turns out to be a big bag of horseshit and have no choice but to release it on DVD, why? Cause they wont spend the money on marketing it! See the trend we have going here..... to spend money they have to know they can make money. And you are correct even crappy movies that bomb at the box office make a cent........... but that does not mean it makes a profit! The Straight to DVD market is a whole different ballgame so we wont go there for now..... As far as the Green light versus greenlit........ YOU should read more carefully.... I never said you did not know the difference. I was simply adding to what you were saying as someone might have been confused as if there was a difference. So yeah I was agreeing with you. when you are right I will say it and when you are wrong I will point it out as well. As far as pre-production is concerned. You cannot change the definition to what you like it to be. Shoot if we all did that then there would be Anarchy in the world........lol. "Officer in my world the definition of yellow light means to gun it before it turns red." not gonna happen buddy. But if we go by your definition of pre-production then you say it is when money is spent. So like when Kevin Smith was paid to write his infamous Superman Draft....... money was spent by the studio so that means they were in pre-production? Not one costume was made or a set built but they paid him a boatload of money. Last edited by Rocky; 08-16-2009 at 10:43 AM.. |
08-16-2009, 10:34 AM | #69 |
Crimson Nerd
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Virginia
Posts: 12,579
|
Well, if you're going to resort to insults, I see no need to continue this discussion.
PS: It's "layman's" not "lamens" and unless you're an accountant, studio head, producer, or marketing executive for a major movie studio, you're just as much a "layman" as anyone else here. |
08-16-2009, 10:40 AM | #70 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2008
Location: On break
Posts: 4,659
|
Quote:
Well, if you're going to resort to insults, I see no need to continue this discussion.
PS: It's "layman's" not "lamens" and unless you're an accountant, studio head, producer, or marketing executive for a major movie studio, you're just as much a "layman" as anyone else here. PS: edited my post and took most of them out........... Last edited by Rocky; 08-16-2009 at 10:44 AM.. |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
So..are we getting YO-JOE or Cobra Cola Monday? | tkprime | G.I. Joe General Discussion | 9 | 07-25-2009 01:36 PM |
My Ebay Auctions End Sunday22nd, Monday 23rd & Tuesday 24th | tintin-3726 | G.I. Joe on Ebay | 0 | 06-21-2008 12:33 PM |
BigBadToyStore Update: 12-Hour Cyber-Monday Sale Starts | DESTRO | G.I. Joe News and Rumors | 0 | 11-26-2007 12:46 PM |
|
|