Is TLK Linked To The Upcoming Hasbro Cinematic Universe?

Discussion in 'Transformers Movie Discussion' started by SilverOptimus, Oct 17, 2016.

  1. Moy

    Moy Constructicons!

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    Posts:
    11,237
    News Credits:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    362
    Likes:
    +6,048
    BenHur didn't surprise me at all but Star Trek did. So did Turtles.
    I'm not a fan of Star Trek, nor have I seen the last film, but that's unfortunate.
    Ninja Turtles 1 was okay, I just wish there was more emphasis in the ninja and the ancient martial arts and not so much clowning around. Which I believe that hurt the second film much. That and those two overgrown beasts.
    I'll have to watch the new Star Trek because Transformers is also about space and not just earth. And if Paramount is nervous about space and TF.. Oh man would I be upset.

    You gotta give it to Marvel though, they're films have the humor I wish Transformers had. Since production studios are copying Marvel, let's hope they copy that too.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Sixshot93

    Sixshot93 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2009
    Posts:
    1,105
    News Credits:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    227
    Likes:
    +1,034
    TMNT:OOTS and Star Trek Beyond were great fun.

    But, man, Paramount has had a BAD 2016 at the box office so far. Even behind the scenes politics aren't helping at all.

    But at least TF:TLK will make Paramount buttloads of money next Summer. Well, every Summer now we have THREE TF movies coming out every. Single. Summer.

    ... Woah.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Moy

    Moy Constructicons!

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    Posts:
    11,237
    News Credits:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    362
    Likes:
    +6,048
    Transformers alone can't do all the work. Paramount needs more unique ideas for movies.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Autobot Burnout

    Autobot Burnout ...and I'll whisper "No."

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Posts:
    45,445
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Location:
    [REDACTED]
    Likes:
    +41,176
    It seems Disney is in the rare position where they're succeeding with Marvel largely because they're willing to take risks in deviating from what they know works or adherence to the original material to the letter (though basically inhumans are the new mutants given Fox still owns X-men). At the same time, this may weirdly be due to the inflexibility of the previous generation entertainment leaders to grasp a changing market and thus they would rather rehash what worked in the past without actually understanding the why, instead of trying to invest in original ideas or reinventions.

    Fox is badly plagued by this after it totally fucked over Almost Human through breaking the episode order to put more action-packed episodes before necessary exposition and development episodes, tanking the ratings and effectively sabotaging their own program. And then there was that asshat who was in charge of their movie division and he made bad decisions one after another, the most promiment being his unchanging stance on refusing to let Reynolds do the Deadpool film for years because it was risky. Once that moron left and the new guy greenlighted the film despite the risks of 4th wall breaking, Deadpool almost instantaneously became Fox's best box office performance in years and possibly is a game changer for R rated films - particuarly advantageous for Fox because R-ratings are a line Disney doesn't want to really cross with the whole 'family' image they generally push and thus only put R rated MCU stuff on Netflix. Fox also could have gotten a far better foothold in the superhero film niche dominated by Marvel/Disney had they done this film a few years prior, but because the jackass they had in charge wouldn't take the risk they really screwed up as a result.

    Warner Bros. is relatively doing fine with films outside of superheroes, AFAIK, so largely it's just DC that is trying to keep up to Marvel and they are rushing to try and close the gap. Unfortunately, while the Nolan Batman films were strong performers, relatively speaking, and DC thankfully made the right choice of not trying to simply retcon in a connection to their new direction, a lot of what they're doing appears more about doing everything they think is working for Marvel, shoving in as many characters as possible to set up more spin-off films, and generally making it up as they go along otherwise. I honestly don't hold optimism they'll manage to get the Justice League set up in time for the projected release at this rate.

    As for Paramount, surprisingly their next major film release Arrival appears to be a sci-fi flick of only $50 million that is getting rave reviews across the board and a preliminary RT rating of 100%. The cited reason? The story is evidently lauded by critics as being a well balanced sci-fi narrative and while nothing is mentioned about the quality of the CGI, so far it seems that $50 million can still deliver a good sci-fi story involving aliens. However, in terms of franchises, Transformers is literally the only solid performer they seem to have going in the near future - they're bringing back XXX of all franchises and he's been out of the picture for over a decade! Paramount needs a solid performance out of TF5, which I'd roughly guesstimate should be around the same profitability as the first film as a bare minimum (since assuming another billion dollar maker would be franchise suicide if the trend of decrease in box office set by AoE continues), or else they could just terminate the whole TFCU to cut losses. The early part of establishing any long-term concept is the shakiest as the decision to keep going or not can only be based on insufficent performance information from the initial entries. Transformers has the added flaw of having performed insanely well before this cinematic universe bandwagon got off the ground, so AoE underperforming compared to DOTM is an added strike against it. Diminishing returns in a marketplace where more and more films are reaching that billion dollar box office threshold is not something Parmount would rationally ignore, as it wouldn't be worth the money or time to only make a faction of the budget above breaking even, due to the mass logistics and such of filming these films. Alternatively, if TF5 does prove profitable to a statisfactory degree, then the TFCU will probably be strong enough to Paramount that even slightly underperforming for one film will not be enough to shut it down. Everything rides on TF5 not doing worse than AoE.
     
  5. Hazekiah

    Hazekiah Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Posts:
    3,522
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    217
    Likes:
    +494
    The TF movies have more than doubled their investments every single time.

    Even if one or two of the movies wind up underperforming you can bet they'll still be willing to take another shot at it. In fact, between the writer's room, the TFCU, and the HCU it's pretty much already confirmed that they're committed to seeing things through for at least the next several films, regardless.

    These movies have raked in roughly four billion dollars over the course of only four films so far.

    That's not exactly the kind of potential you give up on casually.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  6. bellpeppers

    bellpeppers A Meat Popsicle

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2008
    Posts:
    27,974
    News Credits:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    412
    Location:
    Somewhere over Macho Grande
    Likes:
    +27,589
    Trek Beyond wasn't that great of a movie. I'm not surprised (and maybe even a little glad) it underperformed.

    Hollywood just needs to remember that the Script Software is more important than the CG software.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Ash from Carolina

    Ash from Carolina Junior Smeghead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Posts:
    15,966
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +3,238
    I think you always have to put everything as tentative plans when it comes to the Hollywood studios. Sony had some pretty big plans about how many movies they were going to be able to spin off of The Amazing Spider Man only to scrap those plans when Sony felt like the domestic and international box office just wasn't good enough. Sony also had big Ghostbusters plans until the new film ended up disappointing the studio at the box office. Even Warner Brothers cut back on their planned releases when Batman v Superman wasn't the monster hit they expected. Fox tried to sound confident about a sequel to Fantastic Four even when the writing was on the wall that it was a box office bomb.

    So right now it's easy for Paramount to say oh yea we are going to do all these Transformers spin off films, we have all these plans for the main series, we are going to get a Transformers movie out every year. But if somehow the films start failing to make back their production budget domestically or international taste shift suddenly then tentative plans might have to change.

    Although I'm not really sure what Paramount's back up plan is when Transformers runs out of steam like movie franchises do.

    The movie business is a fickle thing and you can never really know when the bottom will fall out of a once hot franchise or genre. There was a time in Hollywood when no could have expected the age of the movie Westerns would end. Franchises burning out is why we don't have Jaws 19 like on Back to the Future.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Hazekiah

    Hazekiah Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Posts:
    3,522
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    217
    Likes:
    +494
    Again, at roughly FOUR BILLION DOLLARS over the course of a mere four films and not even a full decade yet, none one of those franchises can really compete with the moneymaking potential already PROVEN by the Transformers franchise.

    They obviously COULD, but they've all wound up overspending and underperforming instead...which is something the TF movies have yet to do.

    And at least ONE of the franchises you cited, the DCEU, is steamrolling on pretty much as planned (albeit with some behind-the-scenes power struggles and added levity) because they can see the money is RIGHT there waiting to be taken, further proving my point.
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2016
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Autobot Burnout

    Autobot Burnout ...and I'll whisper "No."

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Posts:
    45,445
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Location:
    [REDACTED]
    Likes:
    +41,176
    And you didn't read my post because I outright acknowledge that...provided the new system works. TF5 is the first film to come out of the writer's room, so everything rides on that being recieved better than AoE. If it works, then the TF sequels will have enough clout of success to tank one or two underperformers.

    That's only about $400 million per year.

    Tell that to the investors. If TF5 fails to perform to expectations, the investors are going to want to cut losses.

    And yet there was an argument over AoE's launch regarding what its gross domestic box office performance actually was. It doesn't matter what the final number was, the mere fact there was an argument over this raises questions as to why anybody would think those numbers would be faked in the first place.
    No, but a film about sentient corn puffs can kick the TF franchise's ass any day of the week. Or did you forget Minions had a greater total box office than either DOTM or AoE?

    Oh, yeah, and Fast and Furious 8 is scheduled for release next April. Given TF5 releases in June two months later, we'll see how well TFs can compete against a franchise that has done considerably better in its last outing in comparison.

    Remind me how well AoE did in its primary demographic - the domestic box office?

    ...that copying Marvel is the way to go? Because honestly even with its overwhelming negative criticism, BvS at worst performed comparatively to ROTF in the mid-$800 million box office level.
     
  10. Ash from Carolina

    Ash from Carolina Junior Smeghead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Posts:
    15,966
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +3,238
    A factor that is a big unknown until we actually get there is can the Transformers franchise support a film every single year? Could the domestic slide accelerate when there isn't a two or three year break between films? Will the international market be thrilled or bored by a Transformers movie every year? If something doesn't work will Paramount be slow to correct problems because they are too deep into the next film like the problems Warner Brothers has had with course correcting their DC movie universe?

    Things could work out or they could fail spectacularly. That's why the film industry is still such a risky business. I'm sure Paramount was confident going into 2016 only to find that Ninja Turtles, Star Trek, and Ben-Hur didn't go like the studio wanted them to at the box office.

    Plus other than when the director of Ghostbusters let the threshold number slip we don't know where the threshold is for Paramount on their new Transformers plan. Sony pulled the plug on The Amazing Spiderman series after a world wide box office of $708 million so it might not take a complete and total box office bomb for Paramount to panic. For flag ship summer tent pole films sometimes not too bad isn't good enough.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. Moy

    Moy Constructicons!

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    Posts:
    11,237
    News Credits:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    362
    Likes:
    +6,048
    I don't know too many movies from the top of my head that Disney is proud of. I recently learned Priates is once again making it's appearance on the big screen.

    I'm glad Deadpool was successful because now movie studios won't be too nervous with R rated flicks.

    That DC universe is not my thing at all. It's too obvious they're doing what Marvel worked so hard to achieve.

    Now Arrival looks very promising. I'm surprised that has Paramounts name on it. Not a lot of sci fi films out lately that really draw my attention, but this one looks interesting.

    The new Transformers movie has gained my interest lately, with all the neat shooting locations across the globe. I'm expecting TF5 to be one of the best films since TF3.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Hazekiah

    Hazekiah Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Posts:
    3,522
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    217
    Likes:
    +494
    Annnnnd wading through the morass of bullshit from top-to-bottom YET again...

    1. It was overly wordy for what little was said that wasn't already obvious, but YES, I suffered through your entire post. Which means I ALSO saw the part where you undercut its penultimate statement with your closing argument, as you did again in your reply.

    MY point was that they're committed to SEVERAL more films regardless of the box office stats for TF:TLK.

    2. "Only about $400 million a year," lol.

    3. "If TF5 fails to perform to expectations, the investors are going to want to cut losses." Again, you're missing the whole point. They're thinking of the bigger picture and obviously committed to the TFCU and HCU regardless.

    4. "BvS at worst performed comparatively to ROTF in the mid-$800 million box office level." Which overlooks the point that BvS:DoJ was also one of the most expensive movies ever filmed and thusly the mediocre return vs. that of any given TF movie is a blatantly invalid point with respect to this conversation.

    And I'm not worried about a "domestic slide" for TF movies any more than I am for Star Wars movies.

    Every 4th of July the whole world goes to a TF movie and every Christmas the whole world goes to a Star Wars movie.

    Sounds good to me.
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2016
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Autobot Burnout

    Autobot Burnout ...and I'll whisper "No."

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Posts:
    45,445
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Location:
    [REDACTED]
    Likes:
    +41,176
    You have zero proof of this, whereas the failure of Jem illustrates just how far 'commitment' goes as far as Hasbro is concerned.

    Case in point: this bit is from the 2015 Hasbro Annual Investor meeting PDF from February, 2015, I think from Goldner himself:
    In the document, the same speaker goes on about how Jem is the first production of the AllSpark pictures division of Hasbro, so it's kind of a big deal right?

    One year later/last February, in his little spiel to shareholders summarizing 2015 in terms of Hasbro's performance, Goldner says it was overall a good year - amusingly, in part because of how well Jurassic World and Age of Ultron did. Since guess who made the toys for those films.

    Any mention of the absolute and total failure of Jem at the box office, such that it was pulled after only two weeks in theaters as it was estimated the film wouldn't even make back the $5 million budget investment, is not anywhere to be found.

    On slide 143 in this PDF, from that same investor event at Toyfair, almost all of Hasbro's brands are shown - Notably missing aside from GI JOE are two film franchises Hasbro was banking on making toylines of: Battleship and JEM. What a great launch of AllSpark Pictures, where its first entry on the silver screen is absolutely expunged from ever getting mentioned at investor meetings like it totally wasn't a topic of discussion the previous year.

    Are you saying math somehow is biased now? All I did was divide $4 billion by 10. At the same time, that illustrates the equivalent revenue intake for one film a year, to equal a TF film every two or three years in a ten year period. This average will change with the overdose of films in the next three years but don't act like simple math isn't fact.

    You seriously think people are going to want to keep throwing their money into something that does not return satisfactory returns on their investment? The entire reason Goldner, whose only involvement with anything Hasbro before being made CEO was executive producer for the first film, is because the film was insanely profitable for Hasbro. If the films prove to be a bad direction, the board will replace him with somebody else as he's largely responsible for the direction Hasbro as a whole has taken.

    BvS had a budget of $250 million. ROTF was a $200 million budget. Oh, and if you're going to argue over that $50 million as being a major gap, then I'll just mention the former's box office was $873.3 million, to the latter's $836.3 million. That's right, BvS is technically better at the box office than 50% of the TF films to this point.

    You can't ever say one bad thing about the movies themselves, either, no matter how many times you've been asked by me or other people.

    That would be impressive given Transformers is coming out next June and roughly speaking, July 4th would be about the third week which is traditionally when films no matter how strong really start to peter off with the revenue.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Hazekiah

    Hazekiah Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Posts:
    3,522
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    217
    Likes:
    +494
    1. Last year's Jem and the Holograms has no relation whatsoever to THIS year's announcement of the HCU taking root.

    2. The box office failure of the movie, along with its minimal investment, in no way undercuts the point that Hasbro reaped financial rewards producing the toylines for Jurassic World and Avengers: Age of Ultron, nor is there any reason to mention a minor failure at a multibillion dollar investors meeting any more than any of this actually reinforces whatever point you're trying to make. After a false start, Allspark Pictures carries on uninterrupted.

    3. Your guesstimation of projected revenue is NOT a fact, lol. Obviously, they're reaching higher than that. Presumably, giving people more of the thing they're already spending a billion dollars on every few years doesn't mean they'll spend less on it if you give them more of it.

    4. My point was that the films HAVE been insanely profitable and that Hasbro/Paramount et al. have already expressed a commitment to continuing with them for the next several years and films. If they need to weather the storm through a few lean years they seem willing to do so for the sake of future profits from an already proven success.

    5. Batman V Superman May End Up Being Hollywood's Most Expensive Movie - CINEMABLEND

    6. Of course I can, I simply prefer not to reasons already citing in addition to refusing to indulge your incessant pestering on the matter.

    7. These movies have generally been 4th of July movies, which is a HUGE weekend for any major movie, btw, the premiere date has just steadily been moved back earlier in the days leading up to it, just like we now see midnight premieres on Wed. and Thurs. evenings instead of Fridays.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  15. Autobot Burnout

    Autobot Burnout ...and I'll whisper "No."

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Posts:
    45,445
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Location:
    [REDACTED]
    Likes:
    +41,176
    It has every relation to what information is being given to investors - why was Jem not mentioned in the 2015 summary report? You seem to have an answer for everything, so why should the first entry into AllSpark Pictures' portfolio be absolutely absent when it is such a big component OF Hasbro's attempt to throw everything at the wall to see what sticks? Especially when, performance wise, there is a fuckload more importance being carried on the MLP movie, which is NOT part of Hasbro's obsession with films and inadequate toylines

    Right. And other than Ouija 2 later this month, do you even have a clue as to what you imply AllSpark Pictures has been going on with uninterrupted?

    Well, I've finally figured you out.

    You actually believe the Transformers films are legitimately too big to fail. Like a bank. You take it for granted and won't even listen to the suggestion things could go south with the release. So if in the case something does happen, you have absolutely no idea what will happen in the worst case scenario.

    Or basically, why the Great Depression happened.

    Going bankrupt might throw a wrench in those plans. Just ask United Artists. And Hasbro's is in no danger of going belly up but Paramount doesn't have much going for it next year from what I'm seeing - only nine movie releases at the moment and TF5 is the eighth film - between June to the end of the year, the only confirmed film after that is what looks to be a well-timed Friday the 13th reboot to coincide with the actual Friday 13th. Paramount could be in real trouble if it doesn't perform well overall in a rather difficult year, what with Fast 8 in April and a whole slew of both LEGO and Marvel films across the board.

    That doesn't change the amount of money it made being more than ROTF.

    You do know that if you actually fucking listed one goddamn problem you have with the films in words for once, instead of dancing around it with vague excuses like you always do, I would stop fucking asking about it, right? You spend more time avoiding answering that one question than it takes to actually give a straight response - almost as if you actually can't speak ill of the films, like I stated originally.

    If you bothered looking at a calendar, you would have seen that TF5 is launching a week before that July 4th weekend - it's OVERSHOOTING it by a large margin. Namely because that's the only week it has a shot - the week before the 23rd has Cars 3 and Kingsman: The Golden Circle, while the week leading into July 4th has Despicable Me 3 which will be riding the coattails of Minions so it's going to be a bloody box office in that critical time frame.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. bellpeppers

    bellpeppers A Meat Popsicle

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2008
    Posts:
    27,974
    News Credits:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    412
    Location:
    Somewhere over Macho Grande
    Likes:
    +27,589
    What happened to this thread?
     
  17. SilverOptimus

    SilverOptimus Movie News Monster Moderator News Staff

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Posts:
    11,509
    News Credits:
    54
    Trophy Points:
    362
    Likes:
    +17,814
    The Marmite Argument: Love It vs. Hate It. :D 
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Ash from Carolina

    Ash from Carolina Junior Smeghead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Posts:
    15,966
    Trophy Points:
    337
    Likes:
    +3,238
    I don't think we can say Paramount is committed to make all the movies they have talked about no matter what happens at the box office and come hell or high water.

    To keep up with the quality of the other studios you are looking at spending over $200 million on the production. The big Paramount movies under the $200 million budget haven't lit up the box office. Then an article 2014 was talking about spending $200 million on advertising so who knows what the ad campaign will run Paramount $200 Million and Rising: Hollywood Struggles With Soaring Marketing Costs . Tack on all the other cost that aren't covered in either the production cost or advertising cost and it's not hard to see how Hollywood executives can get jittery over numbers that sound massive to rest of us.

    What's the magic number to make Paramount happy? What's the number where they will scramble? What's the number to pull the plug? We just don't know because studios almost never talk about those numbers. Studios always sound confident in everything because they think sounding confident in their movie will aid the box office and home release.

    I'm also not sure why you aren't worried about the domestic slide. Revenge of the Fallen was the only Transformers movie to make more domestically than the previous films. We've seen the numbers slide from $402 million with Revenge of the Fallen to $352 million with Dark of the Moon then to $245 with Age of Extinction. Another $50 million drop would mean The Last Night would have a domestic run that was less than the production cost. Sure if you are Star Wars and you had a domestic run of $936 million you aren't too worried about a little slide but Transformers is cutting it close to where you get labeled a flop even with a nice over seas run. Do we even know if the rest of the Hasbro Universe will be as popular as Transformers because GI Joe Rise of Cobra had a domestic run of $150 million and Retaliation had a run of $122 million so not making Transformers money.

    If Paramount gets the numbers they can be happy with then yes I expect we will see the movies they have been talking about. If the numbers aren't good enough then plans can change at Paramount just as easily as at Sony, Fox, or any other studio that didn't feel there plans were sustainable. All we can do is sit back and see if their plan comes together or if their plan blows up in their face. If Paramount had a 100% accurate crystal ball then Star Trek Beyond, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Out of the Shadows, and Ben-Hur would have been scrapped before they went into production. Maybe they are starting the next Marvel Cinematic Universe or maybe they are starting another one of the failed cinematic universes that don't pan out.
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2016
    • Like Like x 2
  19. BumblebeeFan71

    BumblebeeFan71 Loyal Starscream Follower

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2015
    Posts:
    1,529
    Trophy Points:
    197
    Location:
    Wherever Optimus' Trailer disappers to.
    Likes:
    +838
    YouTube (Legacy):
    There's no telling what could happen, I know there was times where something flopped yet it somehow still managed to get greenlit for a sequel. I guess it all depends on the people behind the film and whether they value the money or the franchise.
     
  20. Wolf

    Wolf old school bot

    Joined:
    May 15, 2014
    Posts:
    1,784
    Trophy Points:
    192
    Location:
    Uk
    Likes:
    +597
    Wasn't there those scenes shot a while back with all those kids in them?? Could THESE be the youths mentioned in the article?