Ghostbusters (2016) (Post-release)
- Thread starter Lear60man
- Start date
- Status
KrangPrime
Master Member
I would like to amend just that first sentence. in GB16s case, 'it's a piece of business'. if they truly wanted to put on something entertaining, they would have found a way to make it work for the original cast one last time. but, they didn't.
this is the entire argument for the 'haters'. we feel they didn't care about the fans, didn't care about the property, didn't care that the actors worked so hard to try and get part 3 done. that was supposedly even greenlit before harold got sick.
all they cared about from the very start was agenda, not entertainment. and that's why we smelled foul from the very moment feig was announced.
made only worse with the email leaks. probably the first time in recent history we got a peak behind the scenes at how down and dirty hollywood really is.
What i want to know is, how many more failures will it take for hollywood to realize, that you can't stray too far from what WORKS. give people what WORKS first, THEN try and branch off into new areas slowly. especially for older properties like star wars and ghostbusters.
they showed it could be done. Extreme Ghostbusters was PC as all get out, but once you got past the fact that garret wouldn't survive day one on the job in the real world...you realized, the people behind the show seemed to care for the brand, AND it had heart. I personally love Eduardo and Kylie's love/hate relationship, and Roland was more my type of personality to look up too. when they gave garret more depth than just brooklyn in the house, i even began to warm up to him.
Hopefully this will show that audiences can smell phony a mile a way. and we just arn't taking it anymore. but i doubt it.
-edit - wait a minute, they DID put the gamergate lady in this thing too? sigh.....what the hell was her part?
double edit - is the back peddling begining?
this article says 'it's OK NOT to like ghostbusters'... but just skimming the entire article, it looks like all it does is rehash the same argument of sexism and at the end says 'It's OK TO like ghostbusters'... what's it going to be, article? maybe it'll make more sense when i read through it..but i doubt it. it seems to be all over the place in 'i don't want to stand firmly anywhere' ground.
http://screenrant.com/ghostbusters-reboot-reviews-sexism/
Last edited:
I'm really, really dubious about these ROI calculations. Granted most films I get to work on are not studio films, and work with external distributors, so they actually take the marketing costs on them, and they do not spend the equivalent of the film's budget in marketing, nowhere near that. I'll have to check a few distributors contracts we have to know their cut for sure though, but it's true that the producers get a bit less than 50% back on a theatre ticket. Now from these gains a lot of people do take their cut too, but not all equally. Some get their cut fast and with a huge % but stop once they get what they invested ( with some interest usually), others have to wait until the movie paid itself first... Also, services like Netflix, Airlines deals and such do not take a cut on the theatre revenues, they buy the rights for their form of exploitation once, then they take their cut on the revenues generated on their distribution platform.
And last : don't trust all the figures you see online, on IMDB or Boxoffice mojo when it comes to budgets and others costs. I can't tell you how many times I saw grossly overestimated figures when I have the actual budget in my hands. Sometimes it was almost 3 times the real budget !
Anyway, all these talks made me actually want to check out the movie in theatre, to judge by myself, so dear haters, good job, now my meager contribution will help the BO a tiny bit.
And last : don't trust all the figures you see online, on IMDB or Boxoffice mojo when it comes to budgets and others costs. I can't tell you how many times I saw grossly overestimated figures when I have the actual budget in my hands. Sometimes it was almost 3 times the real budget !
Anyway, all these talks made me actually want to check out the movie in theatre, to judge by myself, so dear haters, good job, now my meager contribution will help the BO a tiny bit.
KrangPrime
Master Member
reports are coming in that it made 65 million world wide. but, at least in the UK, it opened on a monday. that means they count the entire week as opening weekend. considering it opened at #3 and #2 in some spots..i wonder what day to day totals it made. if 'worldwide' only means the UK, say, average 12 million a day, for 7 days, it could have made less than 35 million on a real weekend, which would account for all those empty theater shots. but i'm not sure how this report is categorizing 'world wide' here since i didn't see a link. and i'm not sure what other parts of the world it's open in yet.
either way, it's going to be interesting to see what it does next weekend. i'm hoping everyone who's wanted to check it out has done so..and word of mouth will take care of the rest.
goldenhawk
Well-Known Member
How the hell did Feigbusters make $46 million dollars? Last time I checked, the theaters were empty and this reboot couldn't even make $46 per showing. The sad thing is that Sony could have and should have made a movie that could have easily made $100 million during the opening weekend. But now we will never know.
Sequel? I thought Sony was making an animated GB flick as the next GB project.
Sequel? I thought Sony was making an animated GB flick as the next GB project.
cboath
Master Member
With the numbers being bandied there, sequel would seem to be premature, no? Regardless of how the split goes, i think the 50/50 ticket split with the studio is fairly accurate. What the studio does with their 50 percent, though, is up to them and can make things worse. Still, seems to be a good baseline for discussion. This had to cost 100M to make, so at a 50/50 split they're still down 65M or so, no? Not that it can't make that up in the next 2-4 weeks, but still. Don't you want to see profit before saying sequel?
I think we all accept that all numbers at this point are at best, rough estimates...but...
the number I keep seeing is 46mil for this weekend, domestic. That they are actually projecting that themselves. And production budget of around 140mil with advertising and distribution budget of another 100.
Which they are calling a win...but if those numbers are even close, it's not a win, it's a disaster. For comparison: Independence day Resurgence was around 160mil prod. budget with an opening weekend of about 41mil.
They call it a win compared to previous Feig films like Bridesmaids, which only opened at 30mil, but that doesn't take into account that Bridesmaids only cost around 32mil to make. So for that movie, 30 on opening weekend is a HUGE win. But for a 140m tent pole...not so much.
~~~~~~
In contrast, the movie itself seems to be getting mostly positive reviews from people who actually saw it. Not glowing, but not bad either. Obviously some still hated it, but most seem to like it...just looking here it seems that most RPF folks who saw it enjoyed it.
So there's a gap in box office and actual movie quality that makes it look like the marketing strat is acting like an anvil around it's neck, weighing down a movie that, on it's own, it sounds like a decent film. The 100million dollar question being: can good word of mouth undo the damage that terrible marketing did and boost second week numbers?
~~~
Also for comparison, according to boxofficemojo.com, in 2016 X-men opened with 65, 6 movies broke 100 opening weekend: Secret life of Pets (104), Finding Dory (135), Cap America Civil War (179), Jungle Book (103), Batman V Superman (166), Deadpool (132)
the number I keep seeing is 46mil for this weekend, domestic. That they are actually projecting that themselves. And production budget of around 140mil with advertising and distribution budget of another 100.
Which they are calling a win...but if those numbers are even close, it's not a win, it's a disaster. For comparison: Independence day Resurgence was around 160mil prod. budget with an opening weekend of about 41mil.
They call it a win compared to previous Feig films like Bridesmaids, which only opened at 30mil, but that doesn't take into account that Bridesmaids only cost around 32mil to make. So for that movie, 30 on opening weekend is a HUGE win. But for a 140m tent pole...not so much.
~~~~~~
In contrast, the movie itself seems to be getting mostly positive reviews from people who actually saw it. Not glowing, but not bad either. Obviously some still hated it, but most seem to like it...just looking here it seems that most RPF folks who saw it enjoyed it.
So there's a gap in box office and actual movie quality that makes it look like the marketing strat is acting like an anvil around it's neck, weighing down a movie that, on it's own, it sounds like a decent film. The 100million dollar question being: can good word of mouth undo the damage that terrible marketing did and boost second week numbers?
~~~
Also for comparison, according to boxofficemojo.com, in 2016 X-men opened with 65, 6 movies broke 100 opening weekend: Secret life of Pets (104), Finding Dory (135), Cap America Civil War (179), Jungle Book (103), Batman V Superman (166), Deadpool (132)
My wife and I went and saw Ghostbusters today. It was fun. It was funny. It was absolutely PG and silly. It was it's own film and was not beholden to a pre-established cast/canon/story. It had sarcastic jabs at the angry internet neck beards that made me giggle. It had cameos that made me giggle. The CGI was tolerable. Kate McKinnon by far was the best part, too. I loved her.
I just try to relax, make peace with the fact that they don't make movies like they did when we grew up because tastes and culture have changed around me, and had a nice two hours watching some cool stuff on a big screen.
I just try to relax, make peace with the fact that they don't make movies like they did when we grew up because tastes and culture have changed around me, and had a nice two hours watching some cool stuff on a big screen.
jettajeffro
Active Member
I believe it's going to be a series now. Ecto Squad or something like that taking place in the future.
goldenhawk
Well-Known Member
Lower than Pixels, that is hilarious.
KrangPrime
Master Member
highly doubtful.
it'd be an interesting task to see if i can review it myself without getting all hateful at the thing, like so many supporters and haters are doing at each other.. but it hasn't hit the $5 matine prices yet.
I never thought i'd feel sorry for a TV critic, but..
http://chicago.suntimes.com/enterta...r-roeper-ive-had-a-dose-of-some-freaky-posts/
It's pretty much a cluster at this point.
you have people who are just against folks not liking this movie going in pre determined to like it.
you have people going to see this movie as some kind of odd political statement.
you have the news media twisting it around to turn it into a political gender war statement. or trying to shame/anger people into seeing it.
you have people on the fence who where determined to give it a fair shot, butthen got turned to trying it instantly because of the 'hate'.
You have people hating it on day one because we just knew it was going to be another non funny man hating paul feig film.
you have people hating on it because of the people hating on the haters.
you have people hating on it because they'd hate on anything and ghostbusters is just their latest target. (making things worse)
you have supporters calling haters every name in the book because most are so filled with hate themselves both sides can't see clearly..
honestly. how did we all get so crazy in 6 short years?
have you taken a head count? there seem to be 5 billion, completely miserable ********, living on this world of ours...
as nien i think said, they could have given us something egb like. they are clearly going more of a real ghostbusters vibe with this thing. I think 90% of folks would have given it FAR more of a slide if that where the case, including me. even if I don't like the actresses, or the director, or the senior VPs at sony. i'd have been willing to go in with a 'wait and see approach, even if i had bad vibes from the trailer. at least it showed they TRIED not to crap on the stuff we love. but when you go in not caring, this and empty theaters show it's doomed from the start.
Can we at least all agree Star Trek Beyond looks terrible?
goldenhawk
Well-Known Member
Neil, Roeper's review was right on target. And leave it to the SJW to make the reboot a social issue is totally ridiculously stupid. It is just a movie.
KrangPrime
Master Member
When i see reviews written like this by women, I want to hug them and say THANK YOU for getting it.
KrangPrime
Master Member
also, something the news media doesn't want you to see.
at least one site i never heard of has balls..
-edit- screen shot. the site seems to be some kind of political site. screen shot probably works better
at least one site i never heard of has balls..
-edit- screen shot. the site seems to be some kind of political site. screen shot probably works better
Last edited:
Er that is the same picture as that one twitter account you posted on page 10. If you read his tweets he is not exactly the bastion of decency.
I'm not sure if IMDB ever had any relevance as far as reviews (I've never heard of anyone using it) but those reviews are pretty disgusting.
I'm not sure if IMDB ever had any relevance as far as reviews (I've never heard of anyone using it) but those reviews are pretty disgusting.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
