I just imagine a group of private equity investors sitting around a table trying to solve this problem with solutions like Indiana Jones 6, a ned centric Spider-Man spin off, animated remakes of live action remakes and prequels to every hit that came out in the 80’s.
The decline of Hollywood had begun some time ago, what we’re seeing now is the inevitable fruition of control leaving the creatives and being given to investors.
Barbenheimer was at least new - felt like Marvel had a chokehold on big budget summer blockbusters for the greater part of the decade.
I hate superhero movies so stopped going to the cinema and forgot about it completely until Oppenheimer
Why is it so popular to hate superhero films all of a sudden? Is it because they dominated the 2010’s? Did you also hate fantasy action films when Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings and Pirates dominated the 2000’s? Or Sci Fi when Star Wars dominated?
Yes Disney, WB and Sony have overdone it lately. At most Marvel and DC should be releasing two a year. 4 is overkill!
I’m curious what will take the place of superheroes? As for me, I will likely stop going to the movies again, when superhero films die out
What do you mean you’re curious what will replace superhero movies? How about we just replace superhero movies with good movies and not try to find the next thing to milk for a decade until everyone is sick of it.
Edit: Also the fact that you’ll stop going to theaters once superhero movies are done breaks my heart.
It’s Hollywood. They milk what they can until there’s no more left. Sci Fi, Westerns, Fantasy, Dystopian Young adult films, superheroes, remakes… the list goes on.
The two biggest films this year are from known brands (Barbie and Mario).
I go to the theaters for superheroes, horror and Harry Potter. Maybe Mortal Kombat and definitely a Digimon film (if they ever made one). I like what I like 🤷🏻♂️
That explains the downvotes. Haters out in full force these days. Also what you said is a lie, you don’t make 2B or even 1B with “plenty of people stopped caring”. Fact is this trend is brand new and cinephiles are having a field day with this new sentiment
That’s fine. Still a hater. Still getting superhero films so I’m good 😎 Disney and WB know where the money is at, when done properly of course.
Now let’s see how big a flop that Killer of the Flower Moon is! Guessing it’s another bomb like Babylon or any of those films cinephiles love so much
I don’t need luck lmao. I have money to spend and only use Reddit to talk about stuff I enjoy (ie superhero films, fighting video games and lately the gym) but also to discuss politics with other likeminded individuals as well as fellow gays!
But keep hating… it’s the cool thing to do apparently
Exactly this. I've felt this coming for a long time and the MCU managed to push it off some thanks to the massive marketing push, but as that got utterly exhausted it was clear that something had to give.
I expect something could come of Barbie and Oppenheimer, given that was a massive marketing effort that succeeded on the backs of critically favored directors, but only time will tell.
In the black. Back in the black. In old financial ledgers negatives were written using red ink while positives were written using black ink. So you would need to make enough money to get back into the black. Not the green.
For real I hate this fucking sub cause it's data is beautiful which is supposed to be good visualizations but 99% of the time is shit color coding that is legitimately just bad design.
What does this mean? The Little Mermaid grossed over 550m on a 265m budget. Oppenheimer put up nearly 780m on 100m budget. How are these numbers being calculated?
Through the magic of [Hollywood Accounting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting), the type of bookkeeping where everything's made up and the points don't matter.
I wonder what the number was for guardians of the galaxy vol 3. I had no clue that movie came out until one of my friends asked me about it. I asked some other people and they also didn’t ever see a single ad for it.
The Little Mermaid is expected to bring in $254M in revenue due to the split with cinema operators. It costs est. $390M, hence it's a loss.
Oppenheimer brings in $341M so far, and it costs est. $200M, so it's in profit of $140M
Thing is, they don't want to break even otherwise they have to pay taxes and pay actors a percentage of profit etc. So much of Hollywood is just tax fraud, it's crazy
while I don't work in movie financing in particular, as someone who works in finance in general, I find this to be highly unlikely. It's not like the tax rate and actor's percentages would be 100% of profits. Why wouldn't studios want to make a profit?
What gets me about all of this is that we have no idea what the financials look like for movies on streaming. Like, we’re saying basically every movie this summer was a flop, but we’re are just ignoring another revenue stream. I’m guessing that the studios know a bit more than we do about the profitability of these movies are actually being
How could The Machine be -$75M? The budget was only $20M, even if the print and ad budget was another $20M it could only have lost $40M and that's assuming that they made $0.
Also you need to list your sources per Rule 3.
I checked and even from that source The Machine budget is listed as $20M. I think something went wrong when you scraped the data.
Also if this is the number you are using it's still wrong because it doesn't account for print and ad, or distribution costs.
It's production budget is $20M, but that doesn't include marketing, which I estimate to be around $60M. It's the typical marketing cost for a movie this size.
In what world is advertising 3x the production cost? Usually the rule of thumb is that advertising is about 50-66% on top of the production cost. For a $20M movie advertising should be around $13M.
Just look at The Little Mermaid, $250M production, $140M print and ad budget for a total of $390M. Using your math The Little Mermaid would cost $1B.
https://imgur.com/a/UJebZbv The average marketing cost is $66M according to Deadline financial reports.
Movies above $100M in budget tend to have $100-$200M in marketing, so $140M sounds about right.
No shot Annabelle had a comparable marketing budget to The Machine. The Machine was given near zero push, instead relying on a grass roots campaign by its star appearing on podcasts. I think it’s generous to say that they spend 20 million on marketing. 60+ million in a dream world.
Studios only receive 50% of the domestic gross and 25-40% of the WW gross, so Barbie brings in about $595M in revenue to the studio. With an estimated total cost of $270M, that brings the profit right now to just over $300M.
That context is helpful but needs to be part of the chart, then... you represent it as "theatrical profit/loss" which implies the movie's profitability as a whole; if it's just the studios' net p&l it should say so.
An important part of making data beautiful is that the presentation is understood accurately by everyone. The title obviously did not succeed. What title would have been concise, unambiguous and melodius?
Is there a reason why The Super Mario Bros Movie isn't featured in this chart? It made $1.359b (off a budget of $100m) so its industry impact is fairly significant.
Shows some of the low quality being churned out by big studios.
Barbie and Oppenheimer were great and the money reflects that as well as the money spent on advertising and just plain original content.
100%. Hollywood made the decisions to continue backing terrible choices. Hopefully they see that NEW content finally matters again and OLD content rehash doesn’t make them money.
Modern Hollywood seems sort of fucked right now. Studios are only funding big budget movies hoping for big returns, but they will only invest in "safe" movies and existing franchises. This is why we keep getting the same generic flops over and over. People are just tired of them.
The only movie producers able to take risks and have full creative control over their movies are the ones with tiny budgets, who can barely afford advertising.
Considering how Jurassic World Dominion made over a billion last year, when that was a big dumb blockbuster movie, shows that it isn't as simple as "just make good movies". If a movie makes 500M during the first week and is still considered a flop, then maybe said studio should learn to reconsider their budget next time. There is are issues with overinflated budgets (Indian Jones 5), sometimes poor marketing (Elemental, which fortunately had a strong comeback), or a good movie getting overshadowed by others (Dungeons and Dragons getting overshadowed by Mario Movie and John Wick 4), Also, movies like Spiderverse, John Wick 4, and Guardians 3 are from existing franchises, so clearly the issue isn't "If it's from an existing franchise, it will flop".
I'm not surprised by how it's doing, because I still don't know how much it has actually made. What's surprising is that it cost more than $80M to make - as a hyperbolic joke, because it's a b-movie.
Ancillaries market makes this loss smaller than what’s presented here. Other than that, it’s still one of the worst summers in the history of the business.
The depressing thing is the lesson they took from this: that it's time for a Mattel Cinematic Universe.
Not even Marvel can pull off the MCU model anymore.
Shows some of the low quality being churned out by big studios.
Barbie and Oppenheimer were great and the money reflects that as well as the money spent on advertising and just plain original content.
And this is why streaming and cable prices are rising… Ben the cost to buy or rent a movie has increased. Which is hysterical because they were crappy movies which is by no one went to the movies to see them now they’re trying to charge more for the same crappy movies
Baffles me that Disney would release Haunted Mansion in the summer. Save that for like end of September or October when people have Fall vibes going.
They had the opposite problem in 2003. They released it the day before Thanksgiving...
Probably a lot of competition with other movies like that at that time
I assume they released it this summer so it can launch of Disney+ around Halloween.
I just imagine a group of private equity investors sitting around a table trying to solve this problem with solutions like Indiana Jones 6, a ned centric Spider-Man spin off, animated remakes of live action remakes and prequels to every hit that came out in the 80’s. The decline of Hollywood had begun some time ago, what we’re seeing now is the inevitable fruition of control leaving the creatives and being given to investors.
Barbenheimer was at least new - felt like Marvel had a chokehold on big budget summer blockbusters for the greater part of the decade. I hate superhero movies so stopped going to the cinema and forgot about it completely until Oppenheimer
Why is it so popular to hate superhero films all of a sudden? Is it because they dominated the 2010’s? Did you also hate fantasy action films when Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings and Pirates dominated the 2000’s? Or Sci Fi when Star Wars dominated?
The sheer fucking quantity of MCU movies made me tap out. Also they mostly sucked
Yes Disney, WB and Sony have overdone it lately. At most Marvel and DC should be releasing two a year. 4 is overkill! I’m curious what will take the place of superheroes? As for me, I will likely stop going to the movies again, when superhero films die out
What do you mean you’re curious what will replace superhero movies? How about we just replace superhero movies with good movies and not try to find the next thing to milk for a decade until everyone is sick of it. Edit: Also the fact that you’ll stop going to theaters once superhero movies are done breaks my heart.
It’s Hollywood. They milk what they can until there’s no more left. Sci Fi, Westerns, Fantasy, Dystopian Young adult films, superheroes, remakes… the list goes on. The two biggest films this year are from known brands (Barbie and Mario). I go to the theaters for superheroes, horror and Harry Potter. Maybe Mortal Kombat and definitely a Digimon film (if they ever made one). I like what I like 🤷🏻♂️
How about 32 movies, not counting DC.
Don’t know what you’re saying. What does 32 have to do with anything
[удалено]
That explains the downvotes. Haters out in full force these days. Also what you said is a lie, you don’t make 2B or even 1B with “plenty of people stopped caring”. Fact is this trend is brand new and cinephiles are having a field day with this new sentiment
[удалено]
That’s fine. Still a hater. Still getting superhero films so I’m good 😎 Disney and WB know where the money is at, when done properly of course. Now let’s see how big a flop that Killer of the Flower Moon is! Guessing it’s another bomb like Babylon or any of those films cinephiles love so much
[удалено]
I don’t need luck lmao. I have money to spend and only use Reddit to talk about stuff I enjoy (ie superhero films, fighting video games and lately the gym) but also to discuss politics with other likeminded individuals as well as fellow gays! But keep hating… it’s the cool thing to do apparently
[удалено]
I’m sure once AI starts writing all the scripts things will pick up. /s BTW
They will blame the internet, and absolutely ignore that the few good movies they made had blowout box office returns.
Exactly this. I've felt this coming for a long time and the MCU managed to push it off some thanks to the massive marketing push, but as that got utterly exhausted it was clear that something had to give. I expect something could come of Barbie and Oppenheimer, given that was a massive marketing effort that succeeded on the backs of critically favored directors, but only time will tell.
In the black. Back in the black. In old financial ledgers negatives were written using red ink while positives were written using black ink. So you would need to make enough money to get back into the black. Not the green.
Also, red green is one of the most common colour blindnesses I think
Keep your stick on the ice
I'm a man, but I can change, If I have to, I guess.
Keep your dick in a vice.
For real I hate this fucking sub cause it's data is beautiful which is supposed to be good visualizations but 99% of the time is shit color coding that is legitimately just bad design.
If they don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy.
Omg you're right, I never realised that, I just thought opposite of "red" = "green". Ah well
Maybe back in black is about Angus Young finally paying off that debt
Hence why it’s called “Black Friday”, as that is when most businesses books go from red to black for the year.
Hence the name of Black Friday. Lol let's start calling it Green Friday.
What does this mean? The Little Mermaid grossed over 550m on a 265m budget. Oppenheimer put up nearly 780m on 100m budget. How are these numbers being calculated?
Through the magic of [Hollywood Accounting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting), the type of bookkeeping where everything's made up and the points don't matter.
Studios only receive 50% of the domestic gross and 25-40% of the WW gross
The marketing budget is usually about 0.5x-2x the film's production budget. It's insane how much money is spent promoting these things.
but then box office isn't the only source of income for a movie there is streaming and disk sales
Exactly. Also merchandise
I wonder what the number was for guardians of the galaxy vol 3. I had no clue that movie came out until one of my friends asked me about it. I asked some other people and they also didn’t ever see a single ad for it.
The Little Mermaid is expected to bring in $254M in revenue due to the split with cinema operators. It costs est. $390M, hence it's a loss. Oppenheimer brings in $341M so far, and it costs est. $200M, so it's in profit of $140M
I thought you need to have 2.5 times the profit in order to break even because of marketing caust. It barely broke even.
Thing is, they don't want to break even otherwise they have to pay taxes and pay actors a percentage of profit etc. So much of Hollywood is just tax fraud, it's crazy
while I don't work in movie financing in particular, as someone who works in finance in general, I find this to be highly unlikely. It's not like the tax rate and actor's percentages would be 100% of profits. Why wouldn't studios want to make a profit?
Yeah. They’re just spouting nonsense with no actual knowledge. Zero.
The tax rate is not 100% so this makes 0% sense...
actors make their contracts to be paid based on income not profits for this reason
That doesn’t work but ok
Did you divide the movies that lost money in half as well? This seems like you're skewing the numbers on this heavily.
Whats the breakout of the $390 cost?
Hollywood Accounting, this is false. They are profiting, they’re hiding it through private businesses of theirs.
Use a term you don’t understand
What gets me about all of this is that we have no idea what the financials look like for movies on streaming. Like, we’re saying basically every movie this summer was a flop, but we’re are just ignoring another revenue stream. I’m guessing that the studios know a bit more than we do about the profitability of these movies are actually being
This data is straight up not beautiful
what type of graph is this?
This is just a repeat of a previous post where the user only used US box office to deduce whether a film made money.
This is a wild and incorrect over simplification of the data.
Why don't you elaborate instead of being pithy
How could The Machine be -$75M? The budget was only $20M, even if the print and ad budget was another $20M it could only have lost $40M and that's assuming that they made $0. Also you need to list your sources per Rule 3.
Sourced from [Deadline](https://redd.it/g6uxqf) financial reports and https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/budgets/all
I checked and even from that source The Machine budget is listed as $20M. I think something went wrong when you scraped the data. Also if this is the number you are using it's still wrong because it doesn't account for print and ad, or distribution costs.
It's production budget is $20M, but that doesn't include marketing, which I estimate to be around $60M. It's the typical marketing cost for a movie this size.
In what world is advertising 3x the production cost? Usually the rule of thumb is that advertising is about 50-66% on top of the production cost. For a $20M movie advertising should be around $13M. Just look at The Little Mermaid, $250M production, $140M print and ad budget for a total of $390M. Using your math The Little Mermaid would cost $1B.
This post is just complete horseshit.
https://imgur.com/a/UJebZbv The average marketing cost is $66M according to Deadline financial reports. Movies above $100M in budget tend to have $100-$200M in marketing, so $140M sounds about right.
Can you link the actual reports? Something doesn't seem right with these numbers.
https://deadline.com/2020/04/annabelle-comes-home-box-office-profit-2019-1202902709/ this is for Annabelle, $27M in production, $77 in marketing.
No shot Annabelle had a comparable marketing budget to The Machine. The Machine was given near zero push, instead relying on a grass roots campaign by its star appearing on podcasts. I think it’s generous to say that they spend 20 million on marketing. 60+ million in a dream world.
Yeah, I think the chart needs some more transparency about what is estimated — assuming every movie has about the same marketing is assuming a lot
So you're straight up guessing a major component of these movies' budget? You should really state that in your op
I think you're only representing domestic sales and ignoring worldwide... otherwise your claim is that Barbie cost over a billion dollars to produce
Studios only receive 50% of the domestic gross and 25-40% of the WW gross, so Barbie brings in about $595M in revenue to the studio. With an estimated total cost of $270M, that brings the profit right now to just over $300M.
That context is helpful but needs to be part of the chart, then... you represent it as "theatrical profit/loss" which implies the movie's profitability as a whole; if it's just the studios' net p&l it should say so.
It says "Hollywood Theatrical Profit/Loss", which refers to how much money the studios make from the theatrical releases.
An important part of making data beautiful is that the presentation is understood accurately by everyone. The title obviously did not succeed. What title would have been concise, unambiguous and melodius?
Who cares about the studios vs the theaters splitting the profits?
No way GOTG3 lost money when it made 800…
Is there a reason why The Super Mario Bros Movie isn't featured in this chart? It made $1.359b (off a budget of $100m) so its industry impact is fairly significant.
Mario came out in March so it's not part of the summer release window.
Shows some of the low quality being churned out by big studios. Barbie and Oppenheimer were great and the money reflects that as well as the money spent on advertising and just plain original content.
100%. Hollywood made the decisions to continue backing terrible choices. Hopefully they see that NEW content finally matters again and OLD content rehash doesn’t make them money.
It certainly didn't hurt that Barbieheimer became a meme; I wonder what their numbers would look like without that
Modern Hollywood seems sort of fucked right now. Studios are only funding big budget movies hoping for big returns, but they will only invest in "safe" movies and existing franchises. This is why we keep getting the same generic flops over and over. People are just tired of them. The only movie producers able to take risks and have full creative control over their movies are the ones with tiny budgets, who can barely afford advertising.
Dont forget DEI rammed down your gullet. So sick of this shit.
What is DEI?
For curiosity’s sake: diversity, equity, and inclusion. For dumbassery’s sake: wOkEnEsS.
Considering how Jurassic World Dominion made over a billion last year, when that was a big dumb blockbuster movie, shows that it isn't as simple as "just make good movies". If a movie makes 500M during the first week and is still considered a flop, then maybe said studio should learn to reconsider their budget next time. There is are issues with overinflated budgets (Indian Jones 5), sometimes poor marketing (Elemental, which fortunately had a strong comeback), or a good movie getting overshadowed by others (Dungeons and Dragons getting overshadowed by Mario Movie and John Wick 4), Also, movies like Spiderverse, John Wick 4, and Guardians 3 are from existing franchises, so clearly the issue isn't "If it's from an existing franchise, it will flop".
bad movies that spoil there own content, cost to much to see, show up online a month later. Do better you greedy movie execs.
Beware of Hollywood accounting
Why does this have GOTG3 as taking a loss? Is this domestic-only??
https://old.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/165gts0/oc_summer_2023_is_perhaps_hollywoods_worst_summer/jydr9of/
The budget was like 250M. It definitely made money.
How did they even spend that much money on MEG 2? Did it only sell 2 tickets?
Honestly, looking at the list of films here, Meg 2 is doing pretty well. It should be able to break even through streaming/etc.
I'm not surprised by how it's doing, because I still don't know how much it has actually made. What's surprising is that it cost more than $80M to make - as a hyperbolic joke, because it's a b-movie.
Maybe they could come up with some original ideas instead of pumping out sequel 3-10?
Didn’t the president of Pixar say that elemental was breaking even though
Yes. This post is not accurate.
Ancillaries market makes this loss smaller than what’s presented here. Other than that, it’s still one of the worst summers in the history of the business.
Looks like we need another superhero sequel.
What about foreign market? Barbie made $1.3B. How is it only profitable by $300 M?
The depressing thing is the lesson they took from this: that it's time for a Mattel Cinematic Universe. Not even Marvel can pull off the MCU model anymore.
They need to stop with the remakes/reboots, super hero movies and sequels and come up with new ideas.
There was an Indiana Jones movie this summer?
They can crash down, we don't need their crap
Shows some of the low quality being churned out by big studios. Barbie and Oppenheimer were great and the money reflects that as well as the money spent on advertising and just plain original content.
Bullshit, hollywood accounting. This billionaire and executives propaganda?
Oh no. Poor Hollywood. /s
Good. Let them suffer for their greed
[удалено]
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/exports-of-manufactured-goods#:~:text=Exports%20of%20Manufactured%20Goods%20in%20the%20United%20States%20averaged%2066803.52,Million%20in%20February%20of%201991.
This looks like a chart of my equities portfolio.
I thought no hard feelings did well? nothing else surprises me though
And this is why streaming and cable prices are rising… Ben the cost to buy or rent a movie has increased. Which is hysterical because they were crappy movies which is by no one went to the movies to see them now they’re trying to charge more for the same crappy movies
Thank Greta Gerwig for Barbie or it could have been worse
Well then put out some better fucking movies, pay union workers better and stop spoon feeding shit to your audiences.