Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Movie theaters take a rake of what, 20- to 35- percent of ticket sales depending on the week (less in the opening week, more the longer it stays in theaters), right? So $800M looks like it's already a decent profit, somewhere in the neighborhood of $170M. And that's without figuring in product placements and tax breaks to recoup costs, or merchandising profits.Not after you take out the associated costs and the theater share of ticket sales. Most industry observers say it needs to hit in the $800 million range just to break even, and around $950 to $1 billion to show a reasonable profit.
Admittedly, I forgot to take the theaters' stake into account.Variety reported the $800 million break-even figure, though Warner Bros. claims that number is inflated. The movie is definitely going to make money. I figure it ends up around $1.2-1.4 million when all is said and done, unless it sees a bigger than expected dropoff this weekend. But it definitely didn't break even off ticket sales from its first weekend unless movie industry analysts are worse at guessing these things than you are.
Why 'Batman v Superman' Is Still a High-Stakes Bet
I think we both agree that this movie ends up making a good chunk of money. The only question is how big of a chunk. I think one telling stat will be merchandising. Disney is going to make a mint off Star Wars merchandise. BvS doesn't lend itself to kids asking for the toys next Christmas, though, so it won't bring in nearly as much.Admittedly, I forgot to take the theaters' stake into account.
Saw it again with Wife of Fart over the weekend. It is pure dreck. I will omit details for those who haven't made it to the movies yet.
Someone is bound to make a campy Batman movie in the Cesar Romero/Jack Nicholson vein, and it will be hailed as the next best thing.
I don't want to see any forking superhero with a complex. They are supposed to be better than this.
Batman:
Nicholson chewed a heck of a lot of scenery in that movie, even during "quiet" moments.
I dunno, maybe it was not intended to be campy, but it is just dripping with '80s if you watch it now.
At the time Nicholson was a solid joker. In hindsight - and compared to Ledger - he's closer to the Romero side of things.
As Fart said, totally 80s.