Quote:
Originally Posted by DoucheMcCloud
1. Into Darkness earned $70 million it's opening weekend. Star Trek earned $75 million.
2. Industry analysts and the studio expected $90-$100 million, so it's far short of expectations.
3. Studios DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT expect sequels to earn less than their predecessors, especially when the budget of the sequel is $40 million more than the original. Look no further than Spiderman 2, The Dark Knight, The Matrix Reloaded, Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, etc. Iron Man 2 was slightly below Iron Man ($6 million less) but Iron Man 3 has already exceeded both films.
4. Into Darkness will likely earn its $190 million dollar budget back domestically (minus marketing, of course) but it won't be a major earner and will certainly have a disappointing take. Generally speaking, a film begins to decline in its second week of release by 50%. Given that next weekend is a 3 day holiday, it's likely that Star Trek will only see a modest loss of maybe 30%-40%, so the total would be around $135 million or so in week two (and I'm being optimistic).
By week three, the domestic gross would likely be around $20 million and by week four, all bets are off because The Man of Steel is released and it will get crushed. $10 million in week four would be huge.
So for the sake of guessing, that puts the film at the following:
Week 1: $85 million
Week 2: $50 million ($135)
Week 3: $20 million ($155)
Week 4: $10 million ($165).
By the end of an 8 week run, it should probably reach $190 million but that isn't exactly a given, especially when considering the tepid response the film received this weekend and the other choices available in Iron Man 3, Man of Steel, in a addition to Monsters University and World War Z the weekend of June 18th.
If it hasn't hit its budget by the end of June, it's dead in the water.
|
Your numbers may end up being correct, but the actual remit to the producer/film less exhibitor and distributor fees (even when the film is financed in whole or part by the distributor) is typically on a sliding scale from as little as 90% for an event movie during the first couple of weeks to around 70% in the out weeks. Internationally, the distribution breakdown is much different, with around 50% returning to the producer/financed.
Even if the budget before P&A was $190mm (it wasn't), the film should perform much better overseas than the first one. Part of the reason it opened up first overseas was there was virtually no way for it to make back its budget and marketing spend primarily from the domestic box office - hence the change in distribution strategy.
So if it ends up making the money you estimate, you're looking at a remit of around $140mm (less around $40mm direct marketing and fees) or $100mm from the domestic ($90mm deficit) - so they'd need $180mm internationally to break even. Of course they'll make additional in home entertainment, so they should be okay - but it likely won't do huge business.
Frankly, there was no reason it needed to cost as much as it did IMO, but I guess if a lot of buildings don't crumble, it's just not a summer blockbuster.