Monday, October 09, 2006

WB: 'Hey We had Cheaper Flops Too!'

Today's Defamer takes a humorous look at an article from today's New York Times about Warner Bros.' awful summer box office, where WB execs, Alan Horn and Jeff Robinov, use some REALLY odd logic when trying to explain why WB is sitting in sixth place for total box office this year, when just months ago they appeared to be primed for a second straight summer of big box office grosses. In the Times story, Robinov and Horn lament that people have harped on their higher-profile disasters, while ignoring all the money they've proudly lost on lower-budgeted projects??

"Studio executives say it will make a profit. But in bringing in only $389 million at the worldwide box office, “Superman Returns” failed to live up to prerelease expectations. If Superman had done twice what it did, the whole summer would havelooked different," said Mr. Robinov. "It's as much about perception as reality.Even with the failure of a movie like 'Poseidon,' we've had much smaller movieswe've lost as much on."

Mr. Horn agreed. "I've seen movies that cost $15 million lose as much as $20 million,he said. "But when event movies don't perform well, it is very high profile."


And IF the Queen had balls she'd be King, Jeff. And what are these guys really saying? That it's easy to lose a bundle on supposed "can't miss" superhero franchise like Singerman, but only a select few individuals like themselves can lose big time on a much lower budgeted film?? With people like this making the call on the Singerman franchise, no wonder we got the film that we did. If you own any Time Warner stock, now might be a good time to sell those babies.

109 comments:

Anonymous said...

Basically WB has invested too much in SR to just kill it now. If the DVD sales are good i am sure they will give Singer another shot and if that fails then that's it for Superman for a long while i guess.

Markus said...

Holy $hit! Looks like it's really beginning now, after the cautiously comments from a few months ago. I bet that before the year 2006 ends WB will fully admit that SR is a failure and rethink their strategy for the sequel.

Anonymous said...

"Basically WB has invested too much in SR to just kill it now. If the DVD sales are good i am sure they will give Singer another shot and if that fails then that's it for Superman for a long while i guess."

Ah, makes sense. "We haven't lost ENOUGH money, so let's give him a SECOND chance to fail miserably".

I certainly hope you aren't a CPA.

Anonymous said...

If they don't they may be out of business. Good thing that universal is sinking so much money into Evan Almighty. So next year we will have the to complain about. Hey SSS after this superman thing dies down make this a permanent site that we can grip on movies that are shoved down our throught like Singerman.

Anonymous said...

oh thats throat....sorry bout that boss came into my cube.

Anonymous said...

Ah, makes sense. "We haven't lost ENOUGH money, so let's give him a SECOND chance to fail miserably".

I certainly hope you aren't a CPA.


Why do you have to be such a dick did i attack you with a juvenile insult. I did not love SR but i am not so stupid to think it will not turn a nice profit for WB. On the BO alone no it will not but most big budget movies do not make big profits on the BO alone. When you factor in the BO, with the eventual DVD sales and the merchandise WB is still going to to make money on this.

Anonymous said...

"Why do you have to be such a dick did i attack you with a juvenile insult. I did not love SR but i am not so stupid to think it will not turn a nice profit for WB. On the BO alone no it will not but most big budget movies do not make big profits on the BO alone. When you factor in the BO, with the eventual DVD sales and the merchandise WB is still going to to make money on this."

Pretty humorous, for a juvenile to call SOMEONE ELSE "juvenile". Son, learn how to write English correctly before you attempt to step-up into the "big people" world.

You have to be some kind of a moron to think this turd-fest will "turn a nice profit". These "Apologists" are pathetic.

Anonymous said...

Oh boy is that backed up by facts give me some numbers my man that will tell me it will not make a profit. It is not just about the BO i already cited the other factors. So come on what do you got lets hear it, not insults i want numbers.

Anonymous said...

395 mil WW it will finish up at, the DVD by the numbers of other movies similiar to it will easily pull in another 200 mil and then there is the merchandise. So uless SR cost WB something like 500 mil to make and market how the hell is it not making a profit.

danmankp37 said...

well i am on record here for saying i loved the movie but yeah it is going to turn a profit. Saying that someone liking the movie means they are kidding themselves about it turning a profit is not a good arguement. Absolutely when everything is added together it will make WB plenty of money. Someone else here made this point and it is a very accurate one, that most big budget films do not turn a profit on the BO alone, since the studios only keep about 55 % of the gross. However when everything else comes in, hence the DVD and merchandise combined with the BO, the profit is there.

Anonymous said...

Ah, you two must be the same type of people who were 100% sure Singerman Peeps was going to do better than POTC2.

You geniuses factored in that the studio does NOT get ALL of the BO, right? That merchandise does not count towards the films "profits"? That the TV rights were sold in advance?

And if you actually think the DVD is going to sell well when, surprise-surprise, POTC2 comes out A WEEK LATER AGAIN, you are even more delusional than you appear.

Anonymous said...

And if you actually think the DVD is going to sell well when, surprise-surprise, POTC2 comes out A WEEK LATER AGAIN, you are even more delusional than you appear. -------------------------------------

If it was coming out at any other time during the year I would agree that this could hurt the overall sales...But it's coming out during the holiday shopping season, when every big summer movie that is on the shelves gets bought.

And I'm sorry, but how childish is it to call someone a juvenile because of punctuation and spelling mistakes?

"These "Apologists" are pathetic."
---------------------------------

Yet it's a hater and his followers that have created a site for the sole purpose of slinging mud at a film, the filmmakers and it's stars. But somehow we are pathetic just because we liked the movie?

You need to grow up before you post here again.

Anonymous said...

Fact remains: Singerman Returns got owned this summer.

Anonymous said...

Singer is a FAG and Superman Returns was gay.

Anonymous said...

unfortunately for Singerman there's no IMAX on DVD to save it's rear from total embarrassment this time.
Home video isnt all profit either. There are a lot of overhead costs involved with the DVD's from content, production, distribution, etc.

Anonymous said...

Fact remains: Singerman Returns got owned this summer.

Nobody is disputing this, as every movie got owned by Pirates this summer.

Anonymous said...

"You geniuses factored in that the studio does NOT get ALL of the BO, right? That merchandise does not count towards the films "profits"? That the TV rights were sold in advance?"

Merchandise does not count towards the films profits huh. Where did you get your business degree from Community College. Merchandise is huge for a character like Superman and Batman, you have any idea how much Lucas has made on SW merchandise alone. They don't keep all the BO, i believe another poster already covered that one i guess you can't read too well huh. As far as some other people claiming the DVD will not sell well thanks to Pirates do some research on the subject. You got movies that have bombed at the BO like Cinderella Man and are in the top ten for the year in terms of DVD sales.

Anonymous said...

That merchandise does not count towards the films "profits"?

It might not be in the final BO and DVD numbers but it is still money in the studio's pocket. And we will probably never know how much, since the studios tend to keep that on the down low.

Anonymous said...

LOL, you "Apologists" just keep on "spinning" don't you?

Merchandise is a TOTALLY seperate entity. Jesus. If it wasn't, then you have to ADD the production as well as advertising costs to the budget of Singerman Peeps. And if you did that, it is an even WORSE flop than it already was. So pick your poison, youngsters. If you want to add the "profits" for those horrible toys and clothing, then you have to ADD the costs.

And yes, you ARE pathetic for liking this garbage. It is a disgrace to the history of Superman. I'll take that cheesy "musical" from the 70's over this crapfest. And it is infinitely MORE pathetic to come to this type of site trying to "Defend" this travesty. Losers.

Anonymous said...

"You got movies that have bombed at the BO like Cinderella Man and are in the top ten for the year in terms of DVD sales."

Hey moron, was Cinderella Man up against POTC2? I think not. I can't WAIT to hear the excuse-mongering once Singerman Peeps flops in DVD sales as well.

You bitches will be crying in your Pampers.

Anonymous said...

"You got movies that have bombed at the BO like Cinderella Man and are in the top ten for the year in terms of DVD sales."

Hey moron, was Cinderella Man up against POTC2? I think not. I can't WAIT to hear the excuse-mongering once Singerman Peeps flops in DVD sales as well.

You bitches will be crying in your Pampers.

Anonymous said...

"Hey moron, was Cinderella Man up against POTC2? I think not. I can't WAIT to hear the excuse-mongering once Singerman Peeps flops in DVD sales as well."


preposterous statement not based in reality do some research and then come back and try to state your case. The DVD, sales/rental market is a whole new ballgame. Episode 3 was the biggest movie of 2005 and it was 2nd in DVD sales, number 1 was the Incredibles. I am certainly not saying SR will be the biggest DVD of 2007 i am just saying the biggest movie does not equate to the biggest DVD sales. Rentals are even more unpredictable, the numbers show movies that typically did not fair well at the BO do great in video stores because a lot of people do not think it is worth seeing in theatres. If you do not believe me check out this site it will show you i am right, http://www.imdb.com/boxoffice/rentals There are zero facts that show that SR will fair poorly on DVD other than your own bias of the film.

Anonymous said...

LOL. "Zero factors"? How about the fact that poor word of mouth tanked this shit-fest? The poor BO showing? The Superman box-sets and Superman II: The Richard Donner cut ready to steal it's thunder? And correct me if I'm wrong, but Episode III did NOT make a billion dollars worldwide. Plus, there is no Incredibles-type movie for POTC2 to compete with.

You are seriously deranged if you think there are "zero factors" pointing towards a flop in DVD sales.

Anonymous said...

"I am certainly not saying SR will be the biggest DVD of 2007 i am just saying the biggest movie does not equate to the biggest DVD sales. Rentals are even more unpredictable, the numbers show movies that typically did not fair well at the BO do great in video stores because a lot of people do not think it is worth seeing in theatres. If you do not believe me check out this site it will show you i am right, http://www.imdb.com/boxoffice/rentals There are zero facts that show that SR will fair poorly on DVD other than your own bias of the film."

Great job backing up your statements by facts. I am sure all the haters are going to come down on you anyway but this is a very good post.

Anonymous said...

"Great job backing up your statements by facts. I am sure all the haters are going to come down on you anyway but this is a very good post."

Great job verbally fellating him online without merit, jackass. Do you even know what a FACT is? Moron.

Anonymous said...

The Superman box-sets and Superman II: The Richard Donner cut ready to steal it's thunder?

Do you look up anything before you post your hate filled shit? SR is going to be included in the Superman box set moron. That means that a portion, if not all, of the money from those box sets will go to SR.

Anonymous said...

Great job verbally fellating him online without merit, jackass. Do you even know what a FACT is? Moron.

Well I would say he does since he provided a link that backed up his argument. You on the other hand?

Anonymous said...

"Do you look up anything before you post your hate filled shit? SR is going to be included in the Superman box set moron. That means that a portion, if not all, of the money from those box sets will go to SR."

My god are you ignorant? "If not all of the money". Sorry idiot, it will NOT count towards Singerman's DVD total. Plus, the Donner Cut is being Sold seperately, as well as the Christopher Reeve box-set which will NOT include that shitty "film". How about YOU do some research before you post you fucked-up "spin" here again.

Anonymous said...

his link didnt back up anything. Each movie is a different entity, you cant truely predict it's DVD rentals based on that of another movie, in the same way you can never really predict box office totals either.
Singerman had a disappointing B.O. and no word of mouth. It's one success, IMAX, is a non-facotr on DVD. What leads you to believe it's going to be successful on DVD? The fact that it's bundled in that mega DVD collection that only the most hardcore fans are going to buy?

Anonymous said...

Singerman had a disappointing B.O. and no word of mouth. It's one success, IMAX, is a non-facotr on DVD. What leads you to believe it's going to be successful on DVD? The fact that it's bundled in that mega DVD collection that only the most hardcore fans are going to buy?

No..The fact that it's Superman and the fact that it's being released during the holiday season. This is a big deal. Hell people buy the stupidest movies for gifts during the holidays. Superman Returns will bank at least as much as BB did on DVD. And when it does I'll be sure to laugh myself silly at all the haters.

Anonymous said...

Great logic, although what happened to the fact that it was "Superman" and it came out during the summer blockbuster movie season when people go to the theater to see anything stupid?

Anonymous said...

The fact that it's bundled in that mega DVD collection that only the most hardcore fans are going to buy?

You don't have to buy the mega collection to buy SR on DVD. WB is releasing a bare boned version of it and the special edition version of it. You can buy the mega collection with it included or just buy it on it's own.

Anonymous said...

"his link didnt back up anything. Each movie is a different entity, you cant truely predict it's DVD rentals based on that of another movie, in the same way you can never really predict box office totals either."

Dude did you really look at that link, not just the first page but click around on it. Do you see some of the awful movies that bombed at the BO and are renting well on DVD. His link proves what he is saying is true, the likelihood that SR will bomb on DVD is not good.

Anonymous said...

For god's sake THE LAKE HOUSE which made like 20 mil at the BO is renting well, i can't see SR failing in that area sorry pal.

Anonymous said...

Yep, you "Apologists" are off your fucking rockers. Go take your made-up bullshit somewhere else.

Anonymous said...

do you guys even have a clue as to what "renting well" entails? What kind of dollar figure indicates a good rental rate? The Lakehouse may be the top rental, however that doesnt mean it's doing well. The movies you see at the rental place now were out in like March-April which is a dead area for films during the year.
But I'm sure SR will be fine with all of those IMAX DVD's and I'm sure everyone who didnt go see it in theaters wanted to but they were just really "busy."

Anonymous said...

"do you guys even have a clue as to what "renting well" entails? What kind of dollar figure indicates a good rental rate? The Lakehouse may be the top rental, however that doesnt mean it's doing well. The movies you see at the rental place now were out in like March-April which is a dead area for films during the year."

The totals are on the last line for the time these films have been out. Click around the link and you will clearly see many films that bombed at the BO did very well on DVD both in rentals and sales. SR hardly bombed it is one thing to hate SR, it is another to say it will bomb on DVD, you are wrong the facts say otherwise.

Anonymous said...

The benchwarmers has been out for 68 days and has made 50 mil on DVD rentals but SR is going to bomb, yeah RIGHT in your dreams.

Anonymous said...

"The benchwarmers has been out for 68 days and has made 50 mil on DVD rentals but SR is going to bomb, yeah RIGHT in your dreams."

Oh no watch out this is a factual based arguement, i am sure to be followed by something like, you are a Singer apologist or SR was GAY, or any of the other juvenile crap people sling around here.

Anonymous said...

It is just people are sick of hearing how well this movie did. For months it was wait till it comes out you'll see. Then it will have legs. Now its the DVD sales will rock. Over and over the truth is a mediocre movie made only some money. In two years time, all you lovers of singerman will have SR on the shelf. And when it comes time to pop in a DVD, you will be reaching for spiderman.

Anonymous said...

"Oh no watch out this is a factual based arguement, i am sure to be followed by something like, you are a Singer apologist or SR was GAY, or any of the other juvenile crap people sling around here."

Says the moron "slinging crap"?

And how much of that "50 million dollars" is profit? Do you think DVD's are free to produce and market? And you "Apologists" seem to think that DVD's of crappy movies NOW will tell the story for this crappy movie AGAINST MAJOR COMPETITION? Get real. Wait until POTC2 DESTROYS this turd AGAIN.

Anonymous said...

I don't know how much it costs DVD's to produce but I do remember reading that it only costs 1 to 2 dollars to make and market a CD. So I can't see it being that much more than that for a DVD.

Anonymous said...

And how much of that "50 million dollars" is profit? Do you think DVD's are free to produce and market? And you "Apologists" seem to think that DVD's of crappy movies NOW will tell the story for this crappy movie AGAINST MAJOR COMPETITION? Get real. Wait until POTC2 DESTROYS this turd AGAIN.

POTC 2 can make a shitload of money on DVD and it will, more than SR i am sure. Does not change the fact that SR will do very well on DVD, looking at the figures there is little to no doubt of that.

S.S.S. said...

When you talk about "production cost" for the DVD, we're not just talking about producing the actual physical discs. They're talking about producing the content on it besides the movie which involves filming, editing, producing the documentaries on it, producing and programming the other visual content, etc. There's also a marketing component to take into account as well. In a lot of ways it's similar to producing the movie itself.
On top of that, about half the rental fees go to the places that are renting out the video; Blockbuster, Netflix, etc., similar to how theaters get a cut of the gate during the original showings of the film.
Truely no part of the movie is pure profit for the studio, despite what some would have you believe.

Anonymous said...

"Truely no part of the movie is pure profit for the studio, despite what some would have you believe."

Well nobody with half a brain in their head is going to say that. Even you though SSS would have to admit that the likelihood of SR doing poorly on DVD is not good. There are countless movies that have done poorly at the BO and by that i mean 50 mil or less and have done really well on DVD.

Anonymous said...

"There are countless movies that have done poorly at the BO and by that i mean 50 mil or less and have done really well on DVD."

I guess this guy believes if he keeps repeating this statement, over and over and over, it will come true.

I REALLY can't wait to see the "spin" they try to put on this thing when it ends up falling flat on it's face when it comes out. Let me start off with the excuses right now: It's the marketing's fault, not the movie.

Anonymous said...

I REALLY can't wait to see the "spin" they try to put on this thing when it ends up falling flat on it's face when it comes out. Let me start off with the excuses right now: It's the marketing's fault, not the movie.
------------------------------

you really are ignorant...What do you consider falling flat? Because we know as it passes 50, 100, and 150 million dollars you will change your number.

I find it interesting that us apologists can acknowledge some points you guys make and yet you guys just won't acknowledge the littles point. Such as, even though this movie didn't make what was expected at the BO that it's a certainty to do well on DVD..I'm not saying it's going to break records. Pirates will do that again. But to say it's going to be a failure just because you hate the film is ignorant. Someone has actually linked you to a site that gives numbers out for DVD rentals and sales. And what he is saying that this movie will not be a failure. That's all..He's not saying it will be a record breaker, he's just saying it won't be a failure.

Anonymous said...

First off junior, don't be calling OTHERS ignorant without looking in the mirror. You idiotic "Apologists" are full of excuse after excuse as to why this film FLOPPED.

So, it's a "certainty" that this turd will "do well" in DVD sales? Let's see if you change YOUR story once it doesn't. And what I want to know is, what do YOU think is "doing well"? Give a number, then compare it to films like Star Wars and The Incredibles to see how LOW you set the bar.

Anonymous said...

It looks like X-Men: The Last Stand will end up beating Singerman Peeps in DVD sales as well. FOX was smart to release both the film AND DVD away from heavy competition. WB? Gonna get spanked by both POTC2 AND The Da Vinci Code.

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/news/articles/3027.asp

Anonymous said...

First off junior, don't be calling OTHERS ignorant without looking in the mirror. You idiotic "Apologists" are full of excuse after excuse as to why this film FLOPPED.

--------------------------------

Says the haters who only arguement is "Superman is Gay and Singers a Fag"

A movie that is going to make just under 400 million dollars is not a failure..yes it's a dissapointment but it's not a failure!!!

The funny thing is we are all ignorant because we have no fucking clue what this is going to do in DVD sales. It could end up breaking records..who knows?

But of course you haters won't admit that...It's only your way or the highway.

Anonymous said...

"Says the haters who only arguement is "Superman is Gay and Singers a Fag"

A movie that is going to make just under 400 million dollars is not a failure..yes it's a dissapointment but it's not a failure!!!

The funny thing is we are all ignorant because we have no fucking clue what this is going to do in DVD sales. It could end up breaking records..who knows?

But of course you haters won't admit that...It's only your way or the highway."

Yep, ignoring the NUMEROUS problems pointed out in this film is the idiotic "Apologists" ONLY "Defense".

It's funny how you say "no one knows", but preface it with "It may end up breaking records". LOL. You are off your rocker, junior.

And a film that altogether COST almost $400 million dollars, and makes pretty much the same, IS a FLOP. This was supposed to be a SUMMER BLOCKBUSTER. Anything less than "Blockbuster" numbers is considered a FLOP.

Keep on "spinning" jackass. SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE might be fooled.

Anonymous said...

And a film that altogether COST almost $400 million dollars, and makes pretty much the same, IS a FLOP.

Where did you get 400 million from? At most I'll give you 300 million with marketing included, but 400 million?

And I think it's funny that someone who keeps calling me junior(when I'm actually a bit older) also keeps calling me names like Jackass. You can call me a junior all you want, but it's you that is acting like one..

Anonymous said...

Sorry junior, it is closer to $400 million.

And stop acting like a kid, and don't ASSUME you know how old everyone is here, and people will treat you like a grown-up.

"It might break records". Funniest fucking thing I've read all day.

Anonymous said...

Sorry junior, it is closer to $400 million.

Where are you getting this info? And I think if you go back and look at our little arguement it's not me that is acting like a little kid..After all it seems that you are the one calling people names just for having a different opinion then yours.

Anonymous said...

The facts are out there. We grown-ups do something called "investigating".

And I am calling you names because I enjoy it. Also, you have no reason to be here in the first place, except to try to cause trouble. So I will CONTINUE to call a bitch a bitch.

Bitch.

Anonymous said...

Well I have to tell you that my work mates are loving this...I have people reading every one of your responses and one guy who actually hated the film as much as you guys..But even he is finding it hilarious that you aren't realising how immature you are coming off...

I'm not here to start trouble..I came here to see a different perspective on the film and find that in most cases you guys aren't backing up anything you are claiming..By saying "the facts are out there" is a cop out..you don't know the facts, so you tell me to go waste time and find them myself.

If you know of a website that has actually stated this, a website that has an affiliation with WB's then please point me to the site..But you can't..All you say is go find it yourself...

These are the facts that i've found...Superman Returns production budget is officially listed at 204 million dollars..Now you can add 100 million dollars for marketing you get 304 million...

I guess you are including the failed start up costs of 60million but that doesn't apply to Superman Returns...That is money the WB had to eat before this movie even got off of the ground.

Anonymous said...

Ohh, you want to throw phantom "co-workers" out there, then claim I am being disingenious? Please.

If your "co-workers" had half a brain, they would see I am having fun humiliating you. Of course, they won't laugh at you to your face, but they know I've slapped you around like the 90 pound weakling you really are.

So I say fuck "them", and fuck you too, junior.

But back to MY point, that $100 million for marketing? That is for the DOMESTIC MARKET ALONE. Idiot.

Anonymous said...

"Sorry junior, it is closer to $400 million."

No it is about 300 mil, budget was 204 mil and marketing was roughly 100 mil. The 204 mil number has been confirmed by countless sources over and over. If you are quoting BOM, they included the 60 plus mil in failed attempts to get the franchise going again. Lots of franchises have failed attempts to get projects going again and that number is not tacked on to their budget, why BOM decided to do that for SR i do not know, but the budget is 204 mil.

Anonymous said...

"But back to MY point, that $100 million for marketing? That is for the DOMESTIC MARKET ALONE. Idiot."

Dude provide a link for this info or shut the hell up SR was expensive it was a long way from the most expensive thing ever made.

Anonymous said...

"But back to MY point, that $100 million for marketing? That is for the DOMESTIC MARKET ALONE. Idiot."

In the words of Lex Luthor "WRONG"

Anonymous said...

"Dude provide a link for this info or shut the hell up SR was expensive it was a long way from the most expensive thing ever made."

Dude? Showing your age there, junior.

And it's kind of sad, YOU demand a link, but provide NONE of your own. Back YOUR bullshit up before you start demanding proof. Idiot.

Anonymous said...

"In the words of Lex Luthor "WRONG""

Anyone stupid enough to quote THIS turd of a film AUTOMATICALLY has their statements rendered null and void.

Fuck off, moron.

Anonymous said...

"I guess this guy believes if he keeps repeating this statement, over and over and over, it will come true."

LOL asshole i am the one who posted the link for DVD rentals and sales. I don't have to hope for anything to come true, check the link it is true. If you know how to read, you will clearly see my point is quite accurate.

Anonymous said...

"LOL asshole i am the one who posted the link for DVD rentals and sales. I don't have to hope for anything to come true, check the link it is true. If you know how to read, you will clearly see my point is quite accurate."

LOL, so that link leads to your crystal-ball, huh? You KNOW what Singerman Peeps is going to do already? No, fucktard, you don't.

School must be out, all the morons are on their parents computers.

Anonymous said...

LOL, so that link leads to your crystal-ball, huh? You KNOW what Singerman Peeps is going to do already? No, fucktard, you don't.

You are not too familiar with the term INFER are you, let me help you out. When a film that bombed at the BO like The Benchwarmers is renting and selling well on DVD, what is the likelihood SR a movie that has made 200 mil domestic will bomb in that format? I am not guranteeing anything about the DVD totals i am saying based on research the odds are in their favor, that is all i am saying.

Anonymous said...

"LOL, so that link leads to your crystal-ball, huh? You KNOW what Singerman Peeps is going to do already? No, fucktard, you don't."

Hey buddy let me help you out with something. When you are in an arguement with someone and their arguement is backed up by data and intuitive reasoning. Conversely you just come back at them with child like insults consisting of words that do not exist, that means you just the arguement.

danmankp37 said...

SR is not going to break any records on DVD, Pirates should do great and CARS will sell huge, Pixar movies always do. SR should do well on DVD though, at least Batman Begins type numbers, maybe a little more or less i don't know we'll see.

Anonymous said...

But back to MY point, that $100 million for marketing? That is for the DOMESTIC MARKET ALONE. Idiot.


Where are you getting this number from? Nowhere has anyone reported that it's only 100 million for the US alone....Keep making shit up Junior.

Anonymous said...

Hey buddy let me help you out with something. When you are in an arguement with someone and their arguement is backed up by data and intuitive reasoning. Conversely you just come back at them with child like insults consisting of words that do not exist, that means you just the arguement."

"Just the argument"? What in the fuck does that mean, fucktard?

Since you choose to ignore it, even though it has been stated REPEATEDLY, Singerman Peeps is going to be up against MAJOR competition when it is unleashed on the masses. Benchwarmers ISN'T. You talk as if you KNOW what is going to happen. You don't, you fucking idiot.

Anonymous said...

"Where are you getting this number from? Nowhere has anyone reported that it's only 100 million for the US alone....Keep making shit up Junior."

If I was "making shit up", I would say something like "your mom is attractive".

Anonymous said...

"Since you choose to ignore it, even though it has been stated REPEATEDLY, Singerman Peeps is going to be up against MAJOR competition when it is unleashed on the masses. Benchwarmers ISN'T. You talk as if you KNOW what is going to happen. You don't, you fucking idiot."

Episode 3 was massive competition as was the Incredibles, yet movies like Cinderella Man, Ray and National Treasure faired well on DVD, you are just getting smoked in this arguement PAL.

Anonymous said...

"Episode 3 was massive competition as was the Incredibles, yet movies like Cinderella Man, Ray and National Treasure faired well on DVD, you are just getting smoked in this arguement PAL."

He has been getting smoked for the better part of the last hour. You give him facts and he says, "no you are Gay and so is this movie". I need to get a dictionary to look up the word fucktard because this jackass seems to think it is a word.

Anonymous said...

"He has been getting smoked for the better part of the last hour. You give him facts and he says, "no you are Gay and so is this movie". I need to get a dictionary to look up the word fucktard because this jackass seems to think it is a word."

Now who is making shit up AGAIN, fucktard? Don't even for a second think you are scoring points by claiming I EVER mentioned "Gay". Piece of shit.

And Benchwarmers was up against Episode III and the Incredibles? What fucking planet are you living on, you fucking moron? Don't mention one movie, then ignore it when I blast your "theory" out of the water and bring up ANOTHER.

Jesus you "Apologists" are fucking stupid. Be lucky you have the anonymity of the internet, bitches.

Anonymous said...

"you are just getting smoked in this arguement PAL."

This goes for you, and ANYONE who liked this piece of shit "film":

"Unfortunately for the world, when your mom stuck that coat hanger in her stank meat-flaps, she ONLY pierced your brain. No big loss to you, just to society as a whole."

Anonymous said...

I can settle this easy. Best guess by appologist is 304Million tops. 400M - (50% to theaters) = 200 Million. If the budget was 304 million (inlcuding marketing) 304M - 200M = -104Million. Now that means you have to make at least 200M in DVD sales(due to market, DVD manufacture & production costs, and 1/2 of rental sales).....does everyone feel better now.

Anonymous said...

It needs to make $200 million ABOVE costs to even let WB break even. These morons just think in TOTAL DOLLARS.

Anonymous said...

Jesus you "Apologists" are fucking stupid. Be lucky you have the anonymity of the internet, bitches.

Oh what are you going to come beat me up? LMAO

Anonymous said...

And Benchwarmers was up against Episode III and the Incredibles? What fucking planet are you living on, you fucking moron? Don't mention one movie, then ignore it when I blast your "theory" out of the water and bring up ANOTHER.

You blasted what out of the water. I just gave you 3 other examples of movies that did well in the wake of competition. DVD is different than the BO. The biggest hits are not the only ones that dominate in DVD. You can hate the movie all you want but facts are facts. If you do not want to look at the link i posted then go to google and type in a year and dvd sales/rentals. You will see very clearly that all sorts of movies, big hits, moderate hits and flops faired well on DVD. Based on that it is not being realistic to say SR will bomb on DVD. Those are the facts it is not my fault you are choosing to ignore them.

Anonymous said...

Ok so here is some numbers for ya..

POSEIDON- 32 MILLION IN RENTALS SO FAR..That would be the movie that barely made 50 million and is considered a huge flop.

The SENTINEL--32.9 MILLION

FRIENDS WITH MONEY---23.7 MILLION (HOW DID THIS HAPPEN)

UNITED 93--26.3 MILLION

RV- 36.6 MILLION(THIS MOVIE BOMBED)

INSIDE MAN--46.5 MILLION

there are more if you want to go here..

http://www.imdb.com/boxoffice/rentals

Oh and FAILURE TO LAUNCH -- 55.1 million....

So if these subpar movies and semi hits and make upwards of 50 million then what is to stop Superman Returns from making at least 50 million in rentals alone?

I'm asking you to divorce yourself from your hatred of the movie and look at it logically..

Anonymous said...

And Batman Begins last reported number from IMBD was 58.9 million for rentals alone...So it's safe to assume that Superman returns will match those numbers.

Anonymous said...

(New to the argument)Youre throwing out dollar figures for movies and assuming $23 million or $32 million is "good" for a movie. Based on a films total box office, what % of it should it make on DVD to be considered suvvessful? I havent seen anyone stating these figures, just throwing out numbers and saying "look what this POS movie did" when in fact for all you know those figures could be average or below average. What's your basis of comparison?

Anonymous said...

do rentals take into account when you buy a movie "On Demand" threough your cable box?

Anonymous said...

Go here..

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/dvdrentals/chart/?wk=2006-10-08&p=.htm

This gives up to date Rental figures along with BO take..I was wrong about some of the box office since I was just guessing when I looked at IMBD..But this is the actual numbers..

do rentals take into account when you buy a movie "On Demand" threough your cable box?

Good question..i have no idea.

(New to the argument)Youre throwing out dollar figures for movies and assuming $23 million or $32 million is "good" for a movie. Based on a films total box office, what % of it should it make on DVD to be considered suvvessful? I havent seen anyone stating these figures, just throwing out numbers and saying "look what this POS movie did" when in fact for all you know those figures could be average or below average. What's your basis of comparison?


There is no basis for comparison..We are just trying to take an educated guess about SR's possible Rental intake...That's why I threw in Batman's take because when all is said and done they are the most comparable in BO.

Anonymous said...

"I havent seen anyone stating these figures, just throwing out numbers and saying "look what this POS movie did" when in fact for all you know those figures could be average or below average. What's your basis of comparison?"

That is tough to say because DVD's are similiar to films in the theatres in the sense that some are more widely released than others. It depends on the company and whether or not they have faith that even though the film did poorly at the BO, that it will fair well on DVD. A film like SR made 200 mil domestic so that certainly warrants a wide DVD release.

Anonymous said...

It is ridiculous just how many people bitch at eachother on this site. I have seen pleny of message boards with people debating topics about SR similiar to these but the people are not as mean and nasty to eachother.

Anonymous said...

thats what happens when you can post anonymously with no restrictions. SSS should make it so you have to register an account on blogger to post here, but then you run the risk of no one posting, so its a tough call.

Anonymous said...

Wow..So somebody actually posted facts in the arguement and I notice that the arguement just died.

Anonymous said...

"Wow..So somebody actually posted facts in the arguement and I notice that the arguement just died."

Naturally that is the norm on this blog. Anyone who posts a Pro-SR arguement is shot down with grade school insults. If they actually present facts to back up their case, they are usually shot down with insults and then ignored.

Anonymous said...

"And Benchwarmers was up against Episode III and the Incredibles? What fucking planet are you living on, you fucking moron? Don't mention one movie, then ignore it when I blast your "theory" out of the water and bring up ANOTHER."

"You blasted what out of the water. I just gave you 3 other examples of movies that did well in the wake of competition. DVD is different than the BO. The biggest hits are not the only ones that dominate in DVD. You can hate the movie all you want but facts are facts. If you do not want to look at the link i posted then go to google and type in a year and dvd sales/rentals. You will see very clearly that all sorts of movies, big hits, moderate hits and flops faired well on DVD. Based on that it is not being realistic to say SR will bomb on DVD. Those are the facts it is not my fault you are choosing to ignore them."

Here is what am i talking about. First post you have a non-sensical rant filled with insults. Second post you have a well thought out arguement backed up by facts. I see the first poster just went away after this, i guess he was out of stupid things to say in the wake of an actual good arguement.

Anonymous said...

Guys, guys, I think we are all losing track of what's important.

Singer is a FAG and Superman Returns was gay.

Anonymous said...

I agree with the above

Anonymous said...

I see the "Apologists" think they somehow "won" against this blog?

These geniuses that think ANY of the money brought in by rentals goes to WB? I guess these guys don't know how the rental game works, but no surprise really. You have to be mid-level retarded to like this "film".

Anonymous said...

These geniuses that think ANY of the money brought in by rentals goes to WB? I guess these guys don't know how the rental game works, but no surprise really. You have to be mid-level retarded to like this "film".

Hate to break this to ya son but they do get a cut...but you are right I guess.. by your standards then Batman Begins was a failure in Rentals... I wonder what such a brilliant boy like yourself thinks what a success on rental really is?

Anonymous said...

Sorry genius, they don't. Maybe you should get yourself informed before spouting your "spin".

And it's sad you think RENTALS will make this "film" a success. Keep hoping that this "film" will EVER be considered anything more than a DISAPPOINTMENT.

"You have to be mid-level retarded to like this "film"."

Anonymous said...

Actually, I'll correct myself. At the large corporate video rental stores, i.e. Blockbuster and Hollywood Video, the studios get 40% of the rentals. Not much.

But at the independent video rental stores, the studio get ZERO. The owners purchase the DVD for between $60-$80, then every dollar that comes from renting said DVD is THEIRS. I know 3 different owners of rental locations, so I KNOW this to be true.

Anonymous said...

So the Video store owners pay 60 to 80 for a copy of the DVD...That all goes to the studio I'm guessing. so if each store buys at least 10 copies(and we know the big stores buy more) that's still a nice profit for the studio..My guess it probably evens out what they don't get from the rentals...

Anonymous said...

LOL. Sorry, but if you think they ONLY make $60-$80 for rentals, you're NUTS. They OWN it. It will be there's to rent for YEARS. Not too bright, are you?

And you can at least admit when you are WRONG. Don't try to change it to you somehow being "right".

Anonymous said...

Oh, and the "big stores" DON'T buy ANY. The reason they give the studios 40% is so they don't have to pay $60-$80 per copy. They pay pennies.

Anonymous said...

LOL. Sorry, but if you think they ONLY make $60-$80 for rentals, you're NUTS. They OWN it. It will be there's to rent for YEARS. Not too bright, are you?


You misconstrued my meaning..I was talking about the studios getting the 60 to 80 bucks per DVD from the little stores since you said they don't split anything(Which I admit I didn't know)

And Why do you have to attack every time you make a point? I was trying to be civil when I responded to what you said..I wasn't trying to shove anything down your throat..I was just guessing about something.

Anonymous said...

I can settle this easy. Best guess by appologist is 304Million tops. 400M - (50% to theaters) = 200 Million. If the budget was 304 million (inlcuding marketing) 304M - 200M = -104Million. Now that means you have to make at least 200M in DVD sales(due to market, DVD manufacture & production costs, and 1/2 of rental sales).....does everyone feel better now. I reposted this because all the apolgists ignored it. READ IN ORDER TO BRAKE EVEN YOU NEED TO MAKE MORE THEN $200 Million in VIDEO SALES. HELL EVEN IF MY NUMBERS ARE WAY OFF IT WILL BE A FLOP IF IT MAKES LESS THEN $120 MILLION.....YOU LOSE

Anonymous said...

Hey genius SR has made 390 mil WW not, 200 mil. What you did not know the international gross counts too.

Anonymous said...

"Hey genius SR has made 390 mil WW not, 200 mil. What you did not know the international gross counts too."

Hey moron, read what he wrote again BEFORE you type your idiocy.

The theater owners get just short of 50% of the profits. In fact, the last month it was in theaters they were getting 75% of the take. That's how it works.

You "Apologists" are incredibly dense.

Anonymous said...

Theatre's do not get 50% of the gross....When a movie is out in the theatres for the first couple of weeks it's a 90 to 10 split in favor of the studio. So when Superman Returns made the bulk of it's money WB's was getting the bulk of the profits. Now after the first couple of weeks i'm not sure how it splits but I know it goes down 10% at a time when it does start to adjust..

I used to work at United Artists theatres and my boss explained it to me during the first weekend of ID4 because we were so jammed and I said that we must be making a fortune..He said"Yeah in concessions" and then he explained it for me...

It's impossible to know exactly how much the theatres are getting for SR's..

Anonymous said...

Regardless, if you read my post in full I take about another 80 Million off saying that it needs to make at least 120M to brake even. So even with the broad strokes of my brush it will brake even or most likely be in a hole. Listen I know your upset the movie didnt perform. You can still like it. Hell I love Killer Klowns From Outer Space and the movie is a train wreck. So unless the public changes you mind look forward to a reboot like the Hulk.

S.S.S. said...

Over the theatrical life of a film, the studio sees on average about 55% of the total take.

Anonymous said...

WoooWHHHooooo!!!! I am awesome. Thanks SSS for the support.

Anonymous said...

"Over the theatrical life of a film, the studio sees on average about 55% of the total take."

That is true but that also means that their has got to be a lot we do not know about how a movie makes it's money. I mean really with that 55% take crunch the numbers of all kinds of big budget movies. Once you factor in the budget, with the marketing of the film, a lot of movies with big budgets are in the red or barely breaking even. It can't be as cut and dry as just a 55% take because almost every big budget movie, say 200 mil or over would have to make like 600 mil WW to really turn a profit.

Anonymous said...

Movie economics will NEVER be 100% clear. Until studios open their books to the public, you will never know how well, or how bad, a film does.

WB says Batman (89) still has NOT made a profit. I think we all know that cannot be accurate.

Anonymous said...

yeah if we followed what the studio says then no movie has ever made a profit unless it was a small movie with no stars in it..They try and hide what they make because they usually have percentage point deals with actors and the like. So the less the report, the less they have to split up.