Comments on: How Summer 2016 Could Rock Hollywood’s Confidence In Franchises & Sequels

By: Wayne Turner

Wayne Turner — Thu, 09 Jun 2016 00:04:00 +0000

The Point Break remake was a really stupid idea,and I’m glad it bombed. The original is a guilty pleasure of mine.

The fact it cost a reported $100 million was dumb too.Whoever/s green lit that should be fired.

Even though I hate remakes,at least cheap horror remakes make sense $ wise.A cheap investment,that more often than that make a profit,and even those that fail turn out NOT to be a big investment.

By: vladdy

vladdy — Mon, 06 Jun 2016 13:27:00 +0000

Saying people have been asking for movies like “Money Monster” and “The Nice Guys” implies that people have been asking for bad movies. I want to see none of the tentpole movies listed in this article. I also don’t want to see “Money Monster” and “The Nice Guys.” Just because they aren’t sequels, remakes or reboots doesn’t automatically make them good or appealing. They both looked terrible.

By: jh

jh — Mon, 06 Jun 2016 12:10:00 +0000

In reply to Agenor Mark. And it keeps earning post-theatrical. It'll make more and more over the years.

By: sly-3

sly-3 — Sun, 05 Jun 2016 13:02:00 +0000

In reply to jh. i was also seeking a deeper dive into the mini-trend, however, all i discovered was a recitation of box office mojo numbers and a quote lifted from scriptnotes. journalism - is it dead?

By: Agenor Mark

Agenor Mark — Sat, 04 Jun 2016 21:37:00 +0000

In reply to blue439. So making a profit just from theatre is considered a disaster these days? When something makes profit it is in no way a disaster. It isn't necessarily a hit, but it ain't a flop either.

By: blue439

blue439 — Sat, 04 Jun 2016 18:58:00 +0000

In reply to Agenor Mark. If the $18M is its budget, that does not include marketing costs, which can be tens of millions of dollars. And the $60M gross is not the amount the studio gets back, it's just the gross which must be shared with exhibitors. The studios gets back roughly half of the gross. So assuming MBFGW2's marketing cost $10M and the studio gets back $30M, that leaves a whole $2M net -- not much of a profit.

By: jh

jh — Fri, 03 Jun 2016 16:29:00 +0000

As someone who’s as sick of the whole pre-awareness IP thing as the rest of you, I wanted to like this article, but I feel it makes some rather sweeping statements (around Money Monster, The Nice Guys, BFGW2, Jason Bourne, Star Trek 3 etc) to justify its existence. Sometimes a more simple ‘movies people want to see, succeed, and ones they don’t, fail’, is enough, without drawing slightly tenuous conclusions to create a headline. But I’m a big fan of the site, so thanks anyway.

By: jh

jh — Fri, 03 Jun 2016 16:17:00 +0000

In reply to Agenor Mark. Yes, that's entirely the case. It did exactly (if not over and above) what was expected of it.

By: cirkusfolk

cirkusfolk — Thu, 02 Jun 2016 23:43:00 +0000

Great article. Seemed to cover all the bases.

By: Agenor Mark

Agenor Mark — Thu, 02 Jun 2016 20:43:00 +0000

I doubt that Universal finds “My Big Fat Greek Wedding 2″ a disaster. It will be very profitable for them. It cost $18 million, and earned $60 million in the US.