"We’re not concerned with the drop. No matter how you slice it, to get to $52 million on any given weekend is an enormous accomplishment. We’re most focused on where we are in total. And our global number is huge," a Warner Bros. spokesman said after last weekend’s 69% box office slide for "Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice." In fairness, the movie will cross $700 million worldwide this week, and will likely hit the magic $800 million marker the $300 million needs to earn to save face. As for $1 billion worldwide? That’s a different question, but it would be naive to think that the studio, watching ‘Batman v Superman’ flop with critics and most audiences, and still reeling from a string of expensive misfires like "Pan," "Jupiter Ascending," and "In The Heart Of The Sea" might not be looking to change the game plan a bit.
THR reports that according to their sources, WB plans to produce fewer films than usual, while putting a greater focus on tentpoles in their DC Films, Lego, and "Harry Potter" franchises. Moreover, it’s apparently becoming trickier to get a green light at the studio at the moment, unless you’re Ben Affleck, Clint Eastwood, Christopher Nolan or Todd Phillips, filmmakers that are valued assets in the WB roster.
Of course, the studio denies there are any such changes taking place and point to the fact they are releasing eighteen movies this year, and nineteen next year. For me, the biggest question is: if your big, expensive movies are flopping or underperforming, why would you double down on more of them? Wouldn’t the solution be to invest in more mid-size, modestly budgeted pictures so you have a more diverse slate? But hey, I just mash a keyboard and don’t run a studio, so what do I know? And investors are probably more dazzled by movies making hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars than otherwise, even if the profit margins are slim.
For now, "Justice League Part One" starts shooting on Monday and the studio is preparing to release "Suicide Squad" this summer (with extensive reshoots reportedly going on right now to course-correct what is apparently a more serious than expected picture). As for changes at WB, I’d pay attention to their upcoming DC Films slate — I can’t imagine it will press on as planned without some retooling, with a priority to get Affleck to suit up in a solo Batman movie. After all, a script is done.
@ Lulz. The marketing budget fir the film is 160 million dollars making the cost of the film 410 million dollars. The theatres take 50% of the sales so for the studio to just break-even they need to make 820 million dollars. So even if they make 1 billion dollars worldwide. Your studio just earns 100 million on a film they sunk 410 million dollars. That\’s just 25% profit. Not a lot if you look at it. So it is a bad return.
To add to what the other posters said, revenue in international markets are not split evenly among countries. China, for example, is known to only give back cents on the dollar, and you also to figure out exchange rates with a currently strong dollar. Also, 250 is the rumored budget, but there have been rumors that it was much, much, much higher. I\’ve heard figures as high as 400 before prints and ads.
Kevin, will you – and everyone else – please give it a rest? And please stop trying to push your opinions as fact. BvS did NOT flop with most audiences – it has a B Cinemascore and a 70% approval rating from fans @ Rotten Tomatoes; that is definitely NOT a flop. Why are some writers utterly OBSESSED with taking this movie down despite the obvious fact that Most (but not all) of the FANS like it? Let them enjoy it for pete\’s sake…these critics and writers need to stop worrying about their own bruised egos because the fans don\’t agree with their opinion on the film. Hell, even Kevin Smith admitted he wasn\’t completely right with his original assessment. Calling the movie a financial disappointment is accurate, but saying it\’s a flop is just wishful thinking among those who disliked it so much. "Pan," "Jupiter Ascending," and "In The Heart Of The Sea" – those are GENUINE flops. "BvS"? Not so much.
Don\’t forget theaters take up to 50% of the gross as well. (20-25% in week one and it grows from there) So past week one, the studios take really, really plummets.
Lulz, the marketing budget pushes the films budget to somewhere between 400-500 million dollar. The international grosses are split between the studios and the distributors. That means in order for the film to BREAK EVEN, it needs to make somewhere around 800 Million dollars, that\’s before it even starts to make a profit. That\’s why it needs to be making more money. Although I\’m sure a huge amount of money has already been made in merchandising.
How strange is it to have your movie make 700+ million on a 250 million + marketing budget and still be considered a flop. Making 3 times your production budget is now a bad return?
Strange given that their most profitable film in the last eighteen months was American Sniper, which was budgeted at $58 million…