Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
So it's exactly 30% off Abrams masterpiece ad this point? That's not as bad as I thought as of now.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Star Wars: The Last Jedi (Ep 8). SPOILERS. Plot points revealed and discussed.
- Thread starter MisterPenguin
- Start date
So it's exactly 30% off Abrams masterpiece ad this point? That's not as bad as I thought as of now.
Quinnmac000
Well-Known Member
A successful franchise should increase with every film or maintain within fifteen percent of the last film which some franchises do (Despicable Me, Fast and Furious, Hotel Transylvania, Lord of the Rings, Toy Story, The Purge)....
Rogue one not doing well is fine because its more so a spin-off than a main series film. Star Wars should have been able to maintain their success on name alone, its not like those films that manage to keep their numbers are some of the best films ever....
Rogue one not doing well is fine because its more so a spin-off than a main series film. Star Wars should have been able to maintain their success on name alone, its not like those films that manage to keep their numbers are some of the best films ever....
Gomer
Well-Known Member
That would be true for your typical franchise. Building an audience movie to movie and expanding until it hits critical mass and falls off. Something like Lord of the Rings, Captain America, or Pirates of the Caribbean would apply there. The audience needs convincing and as movies win them over or don't as they are released, they increase or decrease accordingly. A successful franchise will build momentum and grow with each release.
The front heavy franchise, like a Star Wars or Jurassic Park starts hot and then peters out, resets for a decade or so, rinse and repeat. Those franchises are front-loaded, because their originator was a lightning in a bottle, phenomenon, type of release. It becomes a cultural event and can't be reproduced and subsequent movies fade. The reboot will usually repeat that model when there is demand for it (as in Jurassic World, Phantom Menace, or the Force Awakens) because the anticipation again turns the first release in a long time into one of those zeitgeist defining "movies of an era". And again, the subsequent movies will fade, sometimes taking small steps up or down based on miscellaneous factors of the box office environment at times of release, but never coming close to the original.
To suggest that a movie that was the top domestic gross of all time should grow with each release is really just an excuse to call any result a failure as it sets unrealistic expectations. The next "Jurassic" movie will probably follow suit and come in 20-30% lower than "World". The Avatar movies will follow a similar pattern. Just as Attack of the Clones, or Age of Ultron, or The last jedi did.
Quinnmac000
Well-Known Member
And if they do end up lower as I stated, its a wasted investment. That same money can be used to create a new juggernaut or a traditional successful franchise. Yea you get quick money up front and impressive records but in the end, you leave people with a nasty taste in their mouth about the products being released. Like Terminator, Shrek after the 4th one came out, etc....
Gomer
Well-Known Member
I think history would show otherwise. The return from films, tv, merchandise, and a variety of other revenue streams are higher on the front loaded franchises than the slow burn growth ones. Disney would much rather have the Star Wars prequels than the pirates series. Both are good but the cultural imprint on the former makes it lasting regardless of any fan sentiment. Plus the diminishing returns on movies like the last Jedi are still two or three times what a sequel in a so called “ healthy franchise” will bring in.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
I would tend to agree...it doesn't apply to ALL movies...pirates comes to mind...
But generally should be true. I'm not sure this idea that disney is "ok" with a 25% bleed was ever really true where it matters - the corner office next to bashful in Burbank.
Who really knows? But if the last jedi is leading to more drop each time? Because let's face it this solo thing isn't gonna do the franchise any favors...the the episode 9..."the triumph of the streamlined/multinational focused conservative story"...or whatever Its called...could lead to a crossroads for disney long before they would have guessed it.
Star Wars should sell itself. Maybe not more each time...but somewhat consistent. Down 30% isn't consistent.
You're right, because down 31% or 37% would be consistent. And if TLJ takes in $1.36 Billion, which it seems on track to at least, then it would be perfectly consistent as others have said above with the drop off from the first of a trilogy to the second...
Here's your chart. Otherwise knows as... facts.
Bairstow
Well-Known Member
There probably isn't a good "normal" case for any group of films such as these. With films this big there are always going to be so many factors at play that determine whether any particular installment of a "trilogy" is going to be more successful than another. What's fascinating to me is that when anticipation for a sequel is huge, and the wide consensus is that the second film was an artistic disappointment, it's the next film that often pays the price for lowered quality.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=matrix.htm
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=mummy.htm
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=taken.htm
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=matrix.htm
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=mummy.htm
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=taken.htm
Cars 3 took a real beating. It was much higher rated than Cars 2, and yet, most likely because of how bad Cars 2 was, did poorly at the B.O.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=pixarcars.htm
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Funny how "facts" don't tell the whole story...
Star Wars ran for 2 years...it was a different era...
And phantom menace was one of the most disappointing movies to audiences ever...but here's the thing: the other studios cleared almost their whole summer schedule for it. They didn't want to lose on movies they had invested in because of the Star Wars juggernaut...no tentpoles near it. The second biggest movie that summer? Austin power:the spy who ged me (which was far better)...attack of the clones sucked royally too:..doubling down on the mistake.
Now TFA and TLJ are both "fantastic"...so your charts tell me...so why should there be a $700 mil drop? I could see if TFA made $3.2 bil...but it didn't...it made a huge impressive haul, but nothing obscene at today's prices...500 mil less 6 years after avatar...no?
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
.
Indeed...but I think that's a hard example here because cars 2 sucked...and nobody is claiming that this movie or its predecessor did
Disney Analyst
Well-Known Member
TLJ is already #8 worldwide for 2017 and #2 domestically.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
That was a certainty as soon as the opening crawl started...
What's in question here is where does it end? It took in $21.5 yesterday...which is fine...but even Forbes, which writes a sarcastic article about the concern over star wars everyday, mentions that the day to day tracking for this movie is lower as a percentage than the previous 5 Star Wars movies...And many others.
So here's the thing: in order to get to the still predicted number - roughly double - its a huge uphill climb. Movies don't have legs and are typically all but gone at 6 weeks....and are heavily front loaded at the box office. Thor and coco are down to their final showings around me...and that's a ton of tneaters.
Gomer
Well-Known Member
Napkin Math Time! (Sorry, I enjoy box office figures way too much)
Rogue One made approx. $100m after New Years Day. The Force Awakens a bit over $200m.
Industry projections have TLJ at 550 through Monday. If it hits that and only matches that Rogue One Number, it will finish at 650 domestically. If it splits the difference, it will end closer to 700.
So far, without China, International and Domestic seem to be holding at an even 50/50 split. So assuming that stays true, it would end its run at $1.3b-$1.4b minus China. Chinese projections are hard to come by, but I did see one that speculated a roughly $100m which makes sense as it falls (As it seems to everywhere else) right between Rogue One and The Force Awakens.
So, assumptions all in line again, that would bring it up to $1.4-$1.5b. 70-75% of TFA. A lower drop off than either ESB or AotC. I think Disney will be happy with that. Even if it fizzles a bit in January with increase competition from movies like Jumanji and finishes at $1.3b that will match the drop-off percentages of both previous trilogies. Which I would imagine would be the more pessimistic, but realistic end of the projections for the movie.
7!
6!
6!
Wendy Pleakley
Well-Known Member
Are you really suggesting The Last Jedi is a wasted investment if it doesn’t match the once in a generation gross of The Force Awakens?
It’s already made more money than 99% of movies can only dream of.
Quinnmac000
Well-Known Member
Just because it makes money doesn't mean it made the same amount of profit. Blumhouse with their low cost $5 million dollar films almost made the same amount of pure profit as Marvel with less overhead and name recognition. Star Wars costed production and marketing around $500 million and rule of thumb is it has to double it to just break even. So if it has to make a billion to break even, and it lets say only makes 1.3 billion, for all that work and effort they only made $300 million which could have been used to increase their catalog and library offerings.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
1.5 would be "acceptable"...$1.3 I'm guessing is not...that's a lot of scratch and we're probably looking at a lower take for part 3...
It seems silly to talk in terms of disappointment with this kinda cash...but disney cannot afford for interest to wane in any of its IP...most definitely this one. They have a cancelled cartoon show and apparent declining demand for the products. Is it possible that Lucas just has killed it long term, perhaps? But exceptional movies would help that...and I don't think they've made one.
They very much treated rogue one like the ugly stepchild...not nearly as much praise or attention was given to it...but it think it performed better considering what each film had working before and against it. I have some theories why...