Black Panther: Wakanda Forever

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I don't remember anyone saying it was going to do *more* that the first movie. I'm sure you'd be able to quote the several people from this thread to back up that claim, which may be difficult since you immediately quote someone saying it will make less.

…look harder. But not that much. A ton of bravado on this one. Which is typical…but even a bit understandable.

The first One was a significant effort…it did very well.

 

[Disney Irish]

As long as you’re speaking more as a marvel fan than a Disney fan…I will yield to your judgment.

I can speak as both.

Disney has shown a shocking inability to read the fanbases of their core IP. It’s a “factory” of creative void and misunderstanding.

Feige is for the most part left alone to make the decisions for Marvel. And Feige knows the fanbase and the content really well, as deep down he is a fan himself. Doesn't mean there aren't missteps along the way. But it does mean that when there is a misstep the fans are more likely to give them a pass as Feige so far has known how to correct those missteps. Obviously some opinions will vary, but I think that is the general consensus among fans.

And they suck at remakes and reboots. Don’t even try it…
…make mighty ducks 9 and home alone 11 if you must

The MCU at some point in the future will reboot things, its been done in the comics more times than I can count. Again Feige know the content. The difference is these wouldn't be a traditional reboot/remakes. I trust Feige will know how to reboot the MCU when the time is right.

The problem with Disney fans is they can’t sleep at night if they have to accept they make tons of mistakes…so they refuse to do it.

So then they embolden more.

Marvel fans have been eating pretty good for the last 14 years with the MCU. So I believe most can sleep pretty well at night.

 

[TP2000]

I don't remember anyone saying it was going to do *more* that the first movie.

Go back to July, 2022 of this thread. There were a couple folks saying exactly that.

But I've said silly stuff here in the past too, so I'm not going to call them out specifically. No harm, no foul.

Hell, back in 2012 I actually posted here that I thought Luigi's Flying Tires was a lot of fun*!

* = Once you waited in line two or three times and learned how to steer the damn thing.

 

[TP2000]

Isn't it amazing that when you name the top domestic box office, that other movies -- purely by coincidence -- don't have a higher box office.

It's almost as if a movie that makes it to the top is the top and all the others aren't. Hmm...

I'm pretty sure I quite clearly called out that we were discussing movies from the past 12 months, not movies of all time historically since the invention of the moving picture. Or sound. Or color. Or Demi Moore being topless.

 

[TP2000]

…look harder. But not that much. A ton of bravado on this one. Which is typical…but even a bit understandable.

The first One was a significant effort…it did very well.

I think it was a safe bet that this second one would do at least $900 Million globally. Yet now it likely won't reach that.

But doing $1.5 Billion or higher? That seems wildly optimistic, even six months ago.

The real story here is that the budget for this second Black Panther movie swelled to $250 Million, meaning it's just barely earning Burbank a few tens of millions in profit over a month after its release. How these budgets bloat up that big is beyond me and my non-Hollywood brain. But so few seem to question it, that perhaps it's just best to ignore that angle and pretend it's no problem?

Sort of like Crypto. So many people just want to ignore the most basic questions about that weird concept.

Sorry, I just got back from a dinner with friends where we talked about Cryptocurrency, and all of us worked damned hard our entire lives and are now comfortably retired; a retirement that is dependent on traditional stocks and bonds and commodities and pensions and cash in the bank. How on earth the Smart Set decided that random computer code written by some neckbeard nerd in the Bahamas was actually worth something is beyond us! It was a very fun and very funny dinner tonight!

 

[Disney Irish]

How on earth the Smart Set decided that random computer code written by some neckbeard nerd in the Bahamas was actually worth something is beyond us!

I'm not a crypto guy at all, I've always thought it was a fad for many reasons. But if you actually know how currency works you'd understand that the cash in the bank ain't actually worth anything. There is nothing backing a dollar except what a bank and the US Government says its worth. Tomorrow they could say a stick of gum is the new currency and all your dollar based retirement is wiped away. So whether a dollar, stick of gum, or digital currency, they are all actually worth nothing but what banks and governments say they are worth. The world's financial market is a house built of cards, 2007/2008 taught us that.

Now as for why some computer code, well that gets into blockchain and distributive ledgers, too deep and technical for this site. But if you want to know more about it, check this link out for an easy to understand explaination.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I think it was a safe bet that this second one would do at least $900 Million globally. Yet now it likely won't reach that.

But doing $1.5 Billion or higher? That seems wildly optimistic, even six months ago.

The real story here is that the budget for this second Black Panther movie swelled to $250 Million, meaning it's just barely earning Burbank a few tens of millions in profit over a month after its release. How these budgets bloat up that big is beyond me and my non-Hollywood brain. But so few seem to question it, that perhaps it's just best to ignore that angle and pretend it's no problem?

Sort of like Crypto. So many people just want to ignore the most basic questions about that weird concept.

Sorry, I just got back from a dinner with friends where we talked about Cryptocurrency, and all of us worked damned hard our entire lives and are now comfortably retired; a retirement that is dependent on traditional stocks and bonds and commodities and pensions and cash in the bank. How on earth the Smart Set decided that random computer code written by some neckbeard nerd in the Bahamas was actually worth something is beyond us! It was a very fun and very funny dinner tonight!

I identified crytpo as the dumbest current idea when I first learned about it and dismissed it outright

I’ve learned never to second guess that instinct

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I'm not a crypto guy at all, I've always thought it was a fad for many reasons. But if you actually know how currency works you'd understand that the cash in the bank ain't actually worth anything. There is nothing backing a dollar except what a bank and the US Government says its worth. Tomorrow they could say a stick of gum is the new currency and all your dollar based retirement is wiped away. So whether a dollar, stick of gum, or digital currency, they are all actually worth nothing but what banks and governments say they are worth. The world's financial market is a house built of cards, 2007/2008 taught us that.

Now as for why some computer code, well that gets into blockchain and distributive ledgers, too deep and technical for this site. But if you want to know more about it, check this link out for an easy to understand explaination.

Is this another “millennial Econ” class?

Because the dollar is no longer on the gold standard…does NOT mean that crypto has any real comparison to centuries old currency markets.

It’s exactly what TP says: a shortcut. A bunch of kids in the middle of the night wanting to be rich and unwilling to follow “the pattern”…so they ordered papa Johns and stayed up all night (for 5 years) and came up with a computer smoke screen with nothing behind it.

And then they paid Matt Damon to plug it

 

[MisterPenguin]

I'm pretty sure I quite clearly called out that we were discussing movies from the past 12 months, not movies of all time historically since the invention of the moving picture. Or sound. Or color. Or Demi Moore being topless.

Yes, I did see how you chose the parameters of your comparisons so as to have cherry-picked information to make the point your were making.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Were people really expecting this to top the first movie?

After a quick scan of this thread, apparently so.

I don't remember anyone saying it was going to do *more* that the first movie. I'm sure you'd be able to quote the several people from this thread to back up that claim, which may be difficult since you immediately quote someone saying it will make less.

Go back to July, 2022 of this thread. There were a couple folks saying exactly that.

But I've said silly stuff here in the past too, so I'm not going to call them out specifically. No harm, no foul.

I did go back to the posts of July 2022, and only one person said it would make more.

Not "people", not "a couple of folks."

And in that time frame, one person predicted less and two other said they didn't know how it would do.

The foul is your constant posting of misinformation.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I'm pretty sure I quite clearly called out that we were discussing movies from the past 12 months, not movies of all time historically since the invention of the moving picture. Or sound. Or color. Or Demi Moore being topless.

…I’m sorry….my brain scrambled…

What was the subject again?

 

[Mr Ferret 75]

Is this another “millennial Econ” class?

Because the dollar is no longer on the gold standard…does NOT mean that crypto has any real comparison to centuries old currency markets.

It’s exactly what TP says: a shortcut. A bunch of kids in the middle of the night wanting to be rich and unwilling to follow “the pattern”…so they ordered papa Johns and stayed up all night (for 5 years) and came up with a computer smoke screen with nothing behind it.

And then they paid Matt Damon to plug it

 

[Heppenheimer]

I'm not a crypto guy at all, I've always thought it was a fad for many reasons. But if you actually know how currency works you'd understand that the cash in the bank ain't actually worth anything. There is nothing backing a dollar except what a bank and the US Government says its worth. Tomorrow they could say a stick of gum is the new currency and all your dollar based retirement is wiped away. So whether a dollar, stick of gum, or digital currency, they are all actually worth nothing but what banks and governments say they are worth. The world's financial market is a house built of cards, 2007/2008 taught us that.

Now as for why some computer code, well that gets into blockchain and distributive ledgers, too deep and technical for this site. But if you want to know more about it, check this link out for an easy to understand explaination.

Sigh...

The value is based on past good behavior and continued expectation of such, that people agree on its value and have reassurance that said value will be maintained by responsible stewardship... which is largely the way the US Treasury Department has acted throughout its history.

The stick of gum and digital currency have no such institutional trust, hence their value is solely based on what someone else is willing to pay for them.

I would really love to track down the crypto-bros who circa 2019 told me how much I was missing out, how behind the times I was, how I was afraid of innovation, etc. I would like to compare how their crypto dreams have panned out against my slow but steady traditional investments. Because along with institutional trust, Schadenfreude is also a thing.

 

[Phroobar]

As long as you’re speaking more as a marvel fan than a Disney fan…I will yield to your judgment.

Disney has shown a shocking inability to read the fanbases of their core IP. It’s a “factory” of creative void and misunderstanding.

And they suck at remakes and reboots. Don’t even try it…
…make mighty ducks 9 and home alone 11 if you must

The problem with Disney fans is they can’t sleep at night if they have to accept they make tons of mistakes…so they refuse to do it.

So then they embolden more.

Case in point. Tron Legacy.

They got everyone excited about Tron Legacy at Comic Con and had a huge party at DCA. Then Tron got derezzed very quickly.

 

[Disney Irish]

Sigh...

The value is based on past good behavior and continued expectation of such, that people agree on its value and have reassurance that said value will be maintained by responsible stewardship... which is largely the way the US Treasury Department has acted throughout its history.

The stick of gum and digital currency have no such institutional trust, hence their value is solely based on what someone else is willing to pay for them.

I would really love to track down the crypto-bros who circa 2019 told me how much I was missing out, how behind the times I was, how I was afraid of innovation, etc. I would like to compare how their crypto dreams have panned out against my slow but steady traditional investments. Because along with institutional trust, Schadenfreude is also a thing.

I agree they have no current institutional trust. And I am by no means a crypto proponent. But with that said there has been talk about having US backed digital currency. My point was to say that it only has value because its agreed value, its not backed by anything other than that agreed value. Just the same as with any other currency today, its all agreed value. A dollar is worthless if that agreed value goes away.

Ultimately I think we're saying the same thing, you just articulated it better.

Anyways, this is a larger topic that is best had elsewhere.

 

[Phroobar]

... Or Demi Moore being topless.

Good times. Good times.

 

[TP2000]

Yes, I did see how you chose the parameters of your comparisons so as to have cherry-picked information to make the point your were making.

I get it that the Marvel films of 2022 underperformed just a tad, especially compared to their hugely bloated budgets. But surely I can't be the only person who, in mid December, looks back on the past year and determines how an industry or set of products did.

You can do that for anything, and people often do in December; for annual car sales, stock prices, commodity prices, bushels of Meyer Lemons, etc., etc.

Which is what I did for movies; the 2022 performance of big budget Marvel and action films. Or would you have liked me to compare the 2022 Marvel/Action Films to the Romantic Comedies of 1994 instead? I'm confused.

 

[TP2000]

I would really love to track down the crypto-bros who circa 2019 told me how much I was missing out, how behind the times I was, how I was afraid of innovation, etc. I would like to compare how their crypto dreams have panned out against my slow but steady traditional investments. Because along with institutional trust, Schadenfreude is also a thing.

I put the Billions that Disney has invested into streaming into a baffling category not far removed from Crypto.

Like Crypto, I just can't figure out how Burbank is going to make any real money off of it long-term.

But at least with streaming, the computer code sends you Herbie Goes Bananas to your TV for 8 bucks a month.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I put the Billions that Disney has invested into streaming into a baffling category not far removed from Crypto.

Like Crypto, I just can't figure out how Burbank is going to make any real money off of it long-term.

But at least with streaming, the computer code sends you Herbie Goes Bananas to your TV for 8 bucks a month.

Streaming is the industry go to for addressing two problems:
1. The decline of lucrative cable/satellite revenue
2. Uncertainty in the box office lasting


It makes total sense. But the problem is none of them has any clue if it will be lucrative long term. They’re guessing and hope they’re right

 

[MisterPenguin]

I get it that the Marvel films of 2022 underperformed just a tad, especially compared to their hugely bloated budgets. But surely I can't be the only person who, in mid December, looks back on the past year and determines how an industry or set of products did.

But you are doing so by abusing data.

How did Wakanda Forever do? How shall we compare it?

I know! Let's only look at the top movies that have done better than it. And, oh, look... it doesn't fare well in that comparison.​

Of course it doesn't. You just abused data. I demonstrated how that abuse is done by deciding to compare Maverick to all the other movies that did better than it. Of course that then makes Maverick look unremarkable.

If you want to stop abusing data by cherry-picking only those data points that fit your narrative/agenda, then look at the box office receipts of *ALL* the wide-released movies from all the studios in the time frame you want to look at. Do that, and Wakanda looks darned good.... compared to all the data, and not your cherry-picked data.

You also abuse data by trying to look at more than one criteria of success at the same time. One criterion is: What was the total Box Office? Another criterion is: Did it make a profit taking into consideration its budget?

And so, you go off on a tangent about movies' budgets since you learned, only recently, the effect of the budget on the profitability and how to figure that out. And so now, movie budgets are your new line of attack.

Do you really think you can get away with such fallacious arguments by sprinkling in your haute cuisine lifestyle of appletinis and soirees in Victorian mansions as you keep hammering away at every Disney content repeating yourself over and over again?

Now if you excuse me, my can of Diet Pepsi is getting warm and I still have some Cheez Whiz left in the can and some Ritz crackers that won't eat themselves.