Disney (and others) at the Box Office - Current State of Affairs

TP2000

Well-Known Member
David Corenswet is terrific as Superman, the best since Christopher Reeves. He makes him such a kind, lovable and good-hearted person. Rachel Brosnahan is also pitch-perfect as Lois Lane.

He is certainly easy on the eyes, that's for sure. I do see a lot of similarities with Christopher Reeve.

I can only imagine the knife-edged jawline young Mr. Reeve would've had in '78 if he'd had access to all those jaw exercise contraptions the young guys use now. I wonder which one young Mr. Corenswet is using? Whatever it is, it's working! 🤣
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
Superman going to have to do a lot of heavy lifting domestically to get it profitable just from box office alone

At $225 Million for production, and another $100 Million for marketing, it would require roughly the following global box office to break even ;

TP2000 Imperial System (assuming, for now, a perfectly even domestic/foreign box office split of $650 Million globally):

Superman: $225 Production, $100 Marketing, $195 Domestic, $130 Foreign = $0 Profit, Break Even

Ahhh… not really… people want to say movies are 3.x the budget for Disney…. Brave New World had a 180 budget… many said it’s break even was 420… but the all Disney movies fail crowd said it needed more… granted those figures usually come from one poster who does not even care for movies later then 70’s not named Barbie…. But some here want to quote those numbers to support their own biases

That's me. 😎

I use the assumption that a major global movie gets 60% of its box office take from domestic theaters, and 40% of its box office take from overseas theaters. Add that to the reporting from reputable industry sources (Variety, The Hollywood Reporter, Los Angeles Times, etc.) on its production budget and marketing budget, and you get the break even point and any profit or loss. It's mathy, but it's not rocket science.

There's also the Metric System which is a less nuanced formula, and pulls forward many potential future earnings from streaming or Disney+ subscriptions gained or retained by dividing the final number by two. Simply 2.5X the production budget in total global box office, divided by two, to break even. But for many Disney movies that often overperform domestically compared to overseas, it can inflate or deflate the stats relative to the actual box office reality at the time.

You can use the Metric System, if you'd like. Some of my dearest friends, online and in real life, use the Metric System! :)
 

AdventureHasAName

Well-Known Member
You are now indirectly claiming that The Little Mermaid 2023 made a lot of money. It's a very similarly budgeted and marketed production.

Let's not rip off that old bandaid. Though I like that all it takes is one external Disney film and my modelling seems to be the pessimistic one. 😂
Before or after the UK gave them $65 million in reimbursements? :)
 

AdventureHasAName

Well-Known Member
I'm going to ask a Superman spoilers question because it's been bothering me for several days and I'm not sure where else to ask it ...

SPOILERS

How the hell did Lex Luthor think that "drowning" Superman by filling his lungs with nanobytes so he couldn't breathe was going to kill Superman ... when Superman routinely flies into outer space and clearly does not require breathing or oxygen (at least for extensive periods of time, if at all)?
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
I'm going to ask a Superman spoilers question because it's been bothering me for several days and I'm not sure where else to ask it ...

SPOILERS

How the hell did Lex Luthor think that "drowning" Superman by filling his lungs with nanobytes so he couldn't breathe was going to kill Superman ... when Superman routinely flies into outer space and clearly does not require breathing or oxygen (at least for extensive periods of time, if at all)?

Interesting.

I would file that conundrum along with others from the 1978 Superman, which was a classic tale of American immigration. 🧐

I remember being eternally bugged by the concept of Lex Luthor making California fall into the sea by setting off an atomic bomb on the San Andreas Fault. Nevermind the terribly clever new place names he gave to his desert, suddenly coastal, properties like "Marina Del Lex". I could not for the life of me think how 500 miles of coastline would simply fall into the sea and disappear. The San Andreas is a Strike-Slip Fault for Godsakes, it's not even close to a Reverse Thrust Fault! :banghead:

Anyone who watched PBS West Coast stations in the 1970's knew the San Andreas was a Strike-Slip Fault.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
Before or after the UK gave them $65 million in reimbursements? :)
And what are the tax rebates for Ohio and Georgia where Superman was filmed? I'll answer that for you, approximately 30% respectively for each. So that is potentially a ~60% tax rebate for a movie like Superman.

Tax rebates are 100% part of the industry no matter the filming locations used around the world, and is not the talking point that some of you all think it is.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
I'm going to ask a Superman spoilers question because it's been bothering me for several days and I'm not sure where else to ask it ...

SPOILERS

How the hell did Lex Luthor think that "drowning" Superman by filling his lungs with nanobytes so he couldn't breathe was going to kill Superman ... when Superman routinely flies into outer space and clearly does not require breathing or oxygen (at least for extensive periods of time, if at all)?
Welcome to comic book logic where plot holes exist and you have to suspend disbelief for most movies.

I have to assume that by this point (only 3 years since going public) Superman hasn't been to space yet for Lex to know this.
 

AdventureHasAName

Well-Known Member
Interesting.

I would file that conundrum along with others from the 1978 Superman, which was a classic tale of American immigration. 🧐

I remember being eternally bugged by the concept of Lex Luthor making California fall into the sea by setting off an atomic bomb on the San Andreas Fault. Nevermind the terribly clever new place names he gave to his desert, suddenly coastal, properties like "Marina Del Lex". I could not for the life of me think how 500 miles of coastline would simply fall into the sea and disappear. The San Andreas is a Strike-Slip Fault for Godsakes, it's not even close to a Reverse Thrust Fault! :banghead:

Anyone who watched PBS West Coast stations in the 1970's knew the San Andreas was a Strike-Slip Fault.
When I lived in Los Angeles, I used to purposefully annoy my friends by asserting that the greatest hero in film history was Gene Hackman in Superman because, if successful, his plan would have knocked Los Angeles into the ocean.

texas GIF


/Otisburg seemed nice.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
Interesting.

I would file that conundrum along with others from the 1978 Superman, which was a classic tale of American immigration. 🧐

I remember being eternally bugged by the concept of Lex Luthor making California fall into the sea by setting off an atomic bomb on the San Andreas Fault. Nevermind the terribly clever new place names he gave to his desert, suddenly coastal, properties like "Marina Del Lex". I could not for the life of me think how 500 miles of coastline would simply fall into the sea and disappear. The San Andreas is a Strike-Slip Fault for Godsakes, it's not even close to a Reverse Thrust Fault! :banghead:

Anyone who watched PBS West Coast stations in the 1970's knew the San Andreas was a Strike-Slip Fault.
Yes but for the other 200M people in the US (population at 222M in the US in 1978 and 22M in California) at the time that didn't grow up studying the San Andreas it seemed plausible since that was always the joke, that a good earthquake would make it fall into the Pacific.
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
Yes but for the other 200M people in the US (population at 222M in the US in 1978 and 22M in California) at the time that didn't grow up studying the San Andreas...

I just love Google! Honestly, what would we do without it now?!? It's funny to think about, but there's an entire generation of children who grew up not even knowing a world without it.

Encyclopedia Britannica, my foot! And just try looking that up in your Funk & Wagnalls. 🤣
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
I just love Google! Honestly, what would we do without it now?!? It's funny to think about, but there's an entire generation of children who grew up not even knowing a world without it.

Encyclopedia Britannica, my foot! And just try looking that up in your Funk & Wagnalls. 🤣
Heck I venture to guess that most of the US outside of California still doesn't know, or at the very least doesn't care, about the San Andreas and the type of fault it is and whether a huge quake on it would actually cause the state to fall into the Pacific or not. Google or no Google.

Also you do know that other search engines existed before Google, they even exist today.
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
Heck I venture to guess that most of the US outside of California still doesn't know, or at the very least doesn't care, about the San Andreas and the type of fault it is and whether a huge quake on it would actually cause the state to fall into the Pacific or not. Google or no Google.

Also you do know that other search engines existed before Google, they even exist today.

I was referring to the exact population stats for the USA and California in 1978. It would've taken me some time, and the data would be at least a year or two old, if I'd tried to look that up in an Encyclopedia Britannica in 1978. Or had to wait for the public library to open in the morning to have access to it.

It's an amazing world we live in now compared to 1978! That was my only point. :)
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
I was referring to the exact population stats for the USA and California in 1978. It would've taken me some time, and the data would be at least a year or two old, if I'd tried to look that up in an Encyclopedia Britannica in 1978. Or had to wait for the public library to open in the morning to have access to it.

It's an amazing world we live in now compared to 1978! That was my only point. :)
I'm aware of what you were referring to, I was just expanding on my point. Also as mentioned there were other search engines available before Google, and many others available today as well. Google doesn't have to be the only search tool used is my point.
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
I'm aware of what you were referring to, I was just expanding on my point. Also as mentioned there were other search engines available before Google, and many others available today as well. Google doesn't have to be the only search tool used is my point.

Oh, I know. I just generally go to Google. It's the easiest to use for me, but I'm sure there are others available. I've tried Bing once or twice, but it was noticeably inferior. Especially for pictures.

Is there a better one than Google I should be using? I'm surprised Google hasn't been busted up by the FCC yet. If they busted up the Bell System, then Google seems an even bigger target. Even at its height, and sponsorship of CircleVision at Disneyland, the Bell System didn't have quite the hold on communications and information-gathering that Google has today.

Oh, dear. We're way off topic on Box Office now. My fault! :(
 

Tha Realest

Well-Known Member
Also you do know that other search engines existed before Google, they even exist today.
As someone who was very familiar with Yahoo and Lycos and AskJeeves (and Prodigy and Compuserve before that), and remembers when “the internet” was a disparate set of Usenet forums, the Google of two plus decades ago was truly revolutionary. It’s now entered the lexicon as default for “internet search engine,” and I can tell you from personal experience my kids and their friends don’t consciously use “Google,” but rather some combination of Siri and AI software to answer basic questions. Ex., I don’t believe my youngest, who doesn’t have a personal device and only uses Siri to prompt searches, has ever consciously gone to Google.com and typed a query.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
Just saw Superman, wasn’t a fan but loved the Dog. Way too silly. I put this in the league of Superman 3 with Richard Pryor. Not close to Superman 1/2.
Felt like a tv show.
kids were split. Both loved the dog one thiught Jurassic film was better other thought this film was better then Jurassic.
I can totally see that side of it

I look at it this way: I like the tone of it…but I don’t want to spoil it. I think the actors were very good in their characters too…which is in most non-spoiler reviews. You got nothing if the performances aren’t good.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
So still about past arguments and grievances from the past decade with you? Time to let that go and move on, its not good to hold onto that.

And it might have been obvious to you, but it clearly wasn't obvious to everyone which is why the fandom broke into two main factions (and more later on) and became toxic. Many camps on this one, no matter what ultimately happened with Rian.

Also fans are human are they not? Humans are inherently stupid, one just needs to look at the state of the world right now and you can see this. So don't try to put the fandom into some higher state of being devoid of stupidity just because of some past grievance.


Second weekend drops for Superman will be interesting. Is this weekend just a pop because its new or is it a starting trend for the weeks to come?

F4 will also be interesting as it will indicate where things are with the MCU. I also still disagree with your assessment that F4 are fringe, the public is familiar with these characters by now (after 3 previous movies), so whether or not they were originally is irrelevant.
There is nothing “past grievances” about the current state of Disneys Star Wars…they have lost…and will continue to lose billions in ancillary sales until they get some non diehards back into the room with some fist pumping in front of the screen…be that a silver one or a LED one on a wall.

The supporters of this disjointed nonsense from the KK regime have been proven wrong and will continue to be. It doesn’t matter if I say it…or you admit it…the die is cast. They best do better. Here Endeth the lesson.

Now back to superheroes

I actually think Superman will see the least drop off of a second week of any major release this year…but that’s just a hunch

And fantastic four is still heading for troubled waters…but again…just a hunch

Let’s see it play?
 
Last edited:

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
He is certainly easy on the eyes, that's for sure. I do see a lot of similarities with Christopher Reeve.

I can only imagine the knife-edged jawline young Mr. Reeve would've had in '78 if he'd had access to all those jaw exercise contraptions the young guys use now. I wonder which one young Mr. Corenswet is using? Whatever it is, it's working! 🤣
I loved Maisel as Lois

100%…maybe the best ever. And I really wanted to love Amy Adams…but it just didn’t work
 
Last edited:

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom