Red Mosquito

BurtReynolds wrote:Marketing is probably the biggest factor. VFX houses seem to be underpaid, but it's still expensive to do the effects. The money is going somewhere.

Worth noting that this batch of movies we're seeing now were affected by Covid, so their budgets went up considerably. Still, movies are getting way too expensive

The Argonaut wrote:Critical Drinker recently had a video that looks at the maths of it all a bit. He's saying Indy 5 is destined to be a flop in part because it cost $300M. Then add another 50% for marketing and give the cinemas their 50% cut of the box office take and the movie would need to make $900M global box office just to break even. Assuming Harrison Ford or someone else is only getting a salary and not a cut of the profits themselves. And why spend $450M to just break even. This thing would need to be one of the ten or fifteen biggest movies of all time for it to have been worthwhile, money wise.

And that ain't gonna happen

Indy 5 is tracking worse than The Flash

I'm quite happy these bloated blockbusters are finally dying. Should open up a new generation of creative, compelling story telling.

Jorge wrote:

Simple Torture wrote:I was under the impression that when you see a listed budget for a film that marketing is not included. Surely, that makes some of these films even bigger losers for the studios.

It's not! Marketing is a hidden number and rarely disclosed. The bigger the movie, the bigger the marketing budget, and I've seen a lot of trades that default to doubling the production budget when they estimate how much money a film needs to generate a profit.

These listed budgets are mostly bs. You're wife sends you to the store and says you can spend $100 there is nothing stopping you from putting $150 dollars on the card. She asks you how it went and you say you spent your budget and just don't mention the other $50. I think what happens a lot with Disney (Marvel/Pixar/Lucas Film) is they spread the extra costs over other movies and tv shows and hide the overflow in those budgets. You are still losing the money but you can spare yourself the public embarrassment and convince investors to keep the money flowing. Of course if you come under budget which someone like James Gunn normally does you shout that from the roof tops.

It feels like the marketing budget for Barbie must be insane.

tree_ wrote:I'm quite happy these bloated blockbusters are finally dying. Should open up a new generation of creative, compelling story telling.

Hollywood has a history of learning the wrong lesson, so I doubt this will be the actual outcome

Farmer John wrote:It feels like the marketing budget for Barbie must be insane.

yeah, i dont even want to know.

But i guess that IP is also trying to sell a ton of dolls too, so maybe thats another way of getting more money.

What's crazy to me is that to do practical effects like they were done 40 years ago would be astronomical in today's money. I can't understand that.

Indy struggles to reach 60 million. Burn it down. Burn it all down. But let Kathleen Kennedy keep her job forever.

It's gonna bomb harder than The Flash when all is said and done

How is that even possible?

Sounds like it's not as bad as survive-nuclear-blast-by-way-of-fridge, at least.

This feels like a reckoning

BurtReynolds wrote:What's crazy to me is that to do practical effects like they were done 40 years ago would be astronomical in today's money. I can't understand that.

I suspect this is because the VFX artists are criminally underpaid and can fill in for the practical pieces at a lower rate. The problem is even the best effects don’t look as good as reality and, compounding that, the studios are thinking effects first as a crutch instead of using effects sparingly to enhance what they’re shooting. If the artists ever get their act together and unionize, I think it’ll help shift the paradigm back somewhat. But we’re living in the age of IPOs, quarterly earnings targets, and venture capital vulture culture. The mindset is how to leverage IP for maximum possible value while minimizing expenses—having a good story is peripheral to that. It’s never going to be like it used to be again.

Its a shame because i liked The Flash enough, and i think Indy is actually a pretty good movie but with those numbers, it was kind of impossible for them to actually make a profit.

There's gotta be a calculus beyond box office that would allow budgets for these movies to be so high. Does Disney+ make that much money? Can they sell streaming rights to this for nine figures? Are they planning to sell a lot of Indiana Jones toys?

In this case it was partly due to covid's effect on production

The Argonaut wrote:Are they planning to sell a lot of Indiana Jones toys?

As long as they're toys geared towards grown men, because I don't think kids give a shit about Indiana Jones.

both the flash and indy dont have that many toys i think.

The Flash is weird situation, they could have done way better marketing i think. The same with the toys.

The Flash's budget isn't crazy. I mean it's very high, but it's not insane like Indy's. That's why Indy's going to be a bigger bomb overall.

Farmer John wrote:

The Argonaut wrote:Are they planning to sell a lot of Indiana Jones toys?

As long as they're toys geared towards grown men, because I don't think kids give a shit about Indiana Jones.

One memory that haunts me from my childhood: I was in New York City with my parents, and I'd recently seen the Indiana Jones movies. I was probably twelve or thirteen. In the gift store at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, they were selling this Indiana Jones-style fedora. I wasn't sure I wanted it, but some part of me desperately wanted it. I could've afforded it, but the only reason I didn't get it is because the smallest size hat was still a little too big for my child-size head. I thank God every day my head was too small to fit that fedora. Can you imagine if I'd started wearing a fedora to junior high? yikes