Discussion in 'Transformers Movie Discussion' started by Boneless Pizza, Jun 25, 2017.
Yeah, but I mean $70M more and it matches SM: Homecoming.
That doesn't mean anything.
Umm… the two films are similar in the regards that they both are subject to franchise fatigue and were intended to be the start of an entry into a cinematic universe. Also, they're both summer blockbusters so… obviously they are quite comparable and do in fact, mean "[things]".
You know WHY It doesn't mean anything? Spider-Man Homecoming cost 175 million to produce while Last Knight cost between 217-60 million. And it still made almost 100 million less than Spider-Man Homecoming.
So, it pretty much doesn't mean anything, because when you factor in production costs Homecoming has made approx. 150-200 million more. Anyway, its apples to oranges. Sony Pictures is doing better this year overall than Paramount is. Paramount had a large net operating loss last year, and TLK was the most surefire blockbuster they had after Ghost in the Shell and Baywatch both bombed earlier in the year, but TLK has *massively* underperformed even though it didn't technically bomb, so they will almost certainly be facing another operating loss this year. Next year doesn't look to be any better for Paramount unless Mission Impossible 6 gets at least a billion.
Production+marketing costs don't mean anything in this discussion. I'm solely looking at gross regardless of outside factors. The movies were released in the same season and cater to the same demographics. Both films underperformed, one was generally well received and one was universally not. It's an interesting comparison that can provide valuable insights.
This doesn't matter, but Sony has been doing bad for a longer period of time than Paramount even though this a particularly bad year for Paramount, so in that way the losses in a cumulative period are not drastically different.
Particularly bad year... Paramount has been declining significantly relative to other major competitors for half a decade now. Transformers has been the main thing propping it up lately. And now its underperforming. Also I don't really know how you can compare two films without discussing what they cost. The gross is completely meaningless if you don't account for how much it cost. But then maybe I'm just misunderstanding you somehow because I'm a film industry geek.
Film companies are much more willing to make sequels if they don't cost them much. Spider-Man is almost guaranteed sequels partly because those sequels will not cost them much more than Homecoming did. Transformers films are unusually reliant on special effects, so producing them requires higher upfront cost which translates into more initial investment which translates into more risk for the company, as well as possibly being more difficult to find financing. We will see whether or not Transformers films can be made cheaply or not when the Bumblebee film comes out, as I assume theyre going to try and minimize the budget for it, which is why theyre only having like half a dozen transformers. In short, I don't really understand why you're focusing so myopically on box office gross when there are other factors at play.
Umm... no, Spider-Man: Homecoming was NOT intended to be the start of a cinematic universe. It's part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, which started in 2008.
Also, Spider-Man: Homecoming has made over $150m more domestically than Transformers: The Last Knight, so "franchise fatigue" is not applicable.
It was certainly intended to be Sony's first foray in the MCU. That's really non-debatable. Also, this kick-starts possible things like Sinister Six and the Venom films.
It's not applicable because it made more domestically? What about WW? At least explain your reasoning.
"First foray" into an existing cinematic universe is not the same as starting a new cinematic universe, which is what you originally said.
And yes, franchise fatigue is not applicable because the concept of franchise fatigue means that a movie has a poor box office showing because people are sick of the franchise. Spider-Man: Homecoming has made almost $300m at the domestic box office, therefore, franchise fatigue isn't applicable ($300m is a very good performance at the box office).
No idea why you mentioned Wonder Woman, as that film is not part of a franchise and therefore wouldn't be subject to "franchise fatigue."
(Sorry for doublepost, it wouldn't let me insert quotes in the editor on mobile.)
I believe cum. YoY, Sony has been doing worse than Paramount. Correct me if I'm wrong. It's been proven SM is a property can pull in very close to $1B, so why didn't homecoming? This is, then, the reason I am "myopically" comparing the two. Certain lenses produce certain interesting results, and this is what I was exploring in TF-SM. Wasn't talking about financial viability for future entries, or anything else that is directly reliant on costs related to production, only a very small subset of variables. I don't think we're disagreeing, just talking about different things.
I can see how you could think that, but I meant World wide, lol. It is, for all intents and purposes, the start of the MCU for Sony Pics. And obviously, SM can pull in more than $300 domestically. Why didn't Homecoming?
It will get there in a week or so. It cleared over $8m this past weekend.
Guess we'll have to see how it turns out, then.
It could stop today and still would have made well over double what The Last Knight did. Domestically, of course.
Spider-Man: Homecoming is part of MCU as you pointed out and as the marketing highlighted quite heavily, so it's difficult to judge whether Spider-Man alone suffers from franchise fatigue. Domestically, it's doing $30M better than Amazing Spider-Man, but is $40-100M behind the first trilogy ($100M behind the first movie). Globally, it's doing so-so, so far it's behind every Spider-Man movie, but it has a chance to pass ASM2 and maaaybe ASM.
In foreign markets TLK stands at $454M and SMH at $377M. It's much less than previous installments in the franchise (ASM earned $495 in foreign box office). I'd wager that there is franchise fatigue in both cases and the good domestic run for SMH is a fluke due to involvment of MCU (not to be taken as an insult). Look at yourself, would you see SMH if it wasn't part of MCU? Even with good reviews knowing that it's the same studio that did ASM?
Curiously, none of this year summer blockbusters will pass $1B or even get close to it (DM3 is in the lead with $880M)! The only ones to do that this year were Beauty and the Beast and Fate of the Furious.
If $300m domestic is considered "franchise fatigue," then The Last Knight should be considered "franchise death."
I don't know.
Here's the biggest problem with comparing the international numbers for Spider Man Homecoming with Transformers the Last Knight. Transformers the Last Knight has already had it's run in China and Spider Man Homecoming is still waiting for it's Chinese release. If you leave out the second largest movie market then yea Transformers is going to look better because that would be like the domestic numbers if Spider Man had not been released in places like California and New York yet. Really no good way to compare the international numbers until both films have finished the international run.
I think you also have to factor in expectation on these movies. No one would expect a movie about Doctor Strange to have the same sort of box office as a movie with both Batman and Superman. So Doctor Strange can have a domestic run of $232 million and people say how great that was, Batman v Superman has a domestic box office run of $330 million and people say what bad numbers. With Sony needing to rescue Spider Man to be sitting at $298 million is great news for Sony in their attempt to get their domestic mojo back, for The Last Knight to be sitting at $129 million domestically that's horrible news. Dropping so far out of the billion dollar club and the negative buzz post box office, that's hard to spin as a win for Transformers and Paramount.
I think I was misunderstood. I brought up foreign BO numbers to point out that both franchises are doing worse (so far) than their previous installments. In the case of TF it will be AOE and DOTM and in the case of Spider-Man it's both ASM. I did not compare TF to SM, but how both franchises are doing across all their movies and debating whether there is or isn't franchise fatigue in both (I think that there is in both). Looking at all the data, the domestic BO numbers for SMH looks like an outlier in a downward trend. I'm just talking numbers, which I like, I'm not trying to add to it any emotional investment.
I should mention that Kevin Feige has said that the upcoming Venom film has no ties to Spiderman Homecoming and is not part of the MCU. So I think Venom will be the film that would kick off that cinematic universe.
Guys I can't resist but I think this is the right forum
Spiderman Homecoming was a fantastic movie, that underperfomed
Bay's Transformers has always been shiznit that overperfomed.
Separate names with a comma.