It’s getting a little boring, writing about all the P2 booty, but a record is a record is a record…
A reported $15.7 million Tuesday is, yes, another record.
Clearly, the only thing keeping Star Wars: Episode III ahead of P2 as the all-time 5-day opener was Fox
http://www.soulduster.com/ on: Friday Estimates by Klady
http://www.rehabsandrentals.com/ on: Friday Estimates by Klady
Joe Leydon on: Weekend Estimates by MacKlady
Abi on: Weekend Estimates by MacKlady
betavaftrar on: 3-Day Estimates By Klady That Made The Clown Cry
Tashie Jackson on: Friday Estimates by Klady
Jeffrey Boam's Doctor on: Weeeknd Estimate Leftovers by Klady
DiggityDawg on: Weeeknd Estimate Leftovers by Klady
David Poland on: Weeeknd Estimate Leftovers by Klady
berg on: Weeeknd Estimate Leftovers by Klady
Weeeknd Estimate Leftovers by Klady
Friday Estimate by MuthaSmurfin’ Klady
4 Day Estimates by Vehicular Klady
Friday Estimates by Green Klady
4 Day Estimates by Wolfpack Klady
Weekend Estimates by Screaming Rio Klady
Friday Estimates by Rio de JaKlady
see all »
[twitter-widget username="DavidPoland" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"][twitter-widget username="MCNTweets" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"]
It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?
So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.
And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.
There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.
I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.
So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.
But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”
My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher
“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.
~ David Simon
-“Smithers I feel like celebrating [the success of Pirates]”
-“What would you like to do, sir?”
-“Hmm. Let’s lay off some employees.”
Johnnny!
He’s looking like the King of Summer right now. Take that, Mr. Cruise.
Glad I am not the only obsessed with these Pirates numbers, DP.
On an earlier thread we got to discussing Disney stock as it relates to Pirates. I posted something about assumptions for the home video market and someone asked what analysts might use to make those assumptions. Here is one view I am familiar with:
Home video revenue equals 1 times domestic box office. Revenue split at home video is 75% sell-through and 25% rental. I’ve seen margin assumptions for home video revenue anywhere from 40-80%.
For POTC, I’d say Wall Street was assuming that BO would be $300 million and profits would be $250 million to $400 million. In that case, intl would be about $350 million for total BO of $650.
At $650, rentals to Disney would be around $325, producing maybe a $75 million profit from the box office run. Pretty damn good compared to most films. Another source of profits is sale of TV rights. I’ve seen estimates that a rule of thumb is 35% of domestic BO. So for a $300 million POTC that would be $100 million. Seems high but remember that would include pay TV, cable, and broadcast in the US and abroad. Let’s say an 80% margin on that revenue and you got profits from the BO and TV rights at $150 million.
If home video revenue matched box office, at a 60% margin you got another $180 million in profit or a total of $330 million. Who knows if these assumption are accurate but that figure does fall smack in the middle of profit estimates I’ve seen.
Before going on remember that Disney uniquely benefits from a successful film like this with merchandise profits and theme park benefits as well as maybe a boost at its cable networks.
So suppose POTC does track to $400/921. An incremental $300 million WW BO raises the profits from the theatrical run to $210 million. TV rights maybe go to $125 million with profits now at $100 million. Home video now goes to $400 million in revenue and $240 million in profits. So total profits at $950 WW are $550 million.
Astounding that is almost double orignal estimates but the marginal profitablity is very high. Even if I am $100 million off, POTC could earn profits for DIS that are as much as $200 million above expectations.
Of course, that is pre-tax and pre-interst on any borrowed funds. Disney’s tax rate has been running about 36% so let’s say $500 million in profits with no financing costs leads to after-tax profits of $320 million. Disney has 2 billion shares so that is 16 cents per share.
But based on $330 million profit figure, the film is worth 11 cents per share. So after all this excitement, the better than expected results for POTC add a nickel to DIS earnings. The stock is trading aobut 20 times earnings so the apparent extraordinary success of the film is worth $1 per share.
This is oversimplistic and probably naive relative to how the film is financied, residuals and participations but it offers a general idea of how Wall Street might look at POTC and how Disney stock has reacted.
Sorry for the length but I am hoping getting this out there will get some responses so that we can firm up the numbers. Lots of you know about this stuff so tell me where I screwed up.
You’re leaving out $150m P&A, D-Wolf.
Rentals would be more like $360… could be a little higher.
And a hidden benefit is that the studio has a very powerful negotiating position for next summer with exhibitors. The Spider-Man 3/Shrek 3 pile-up hurts in that regard, but exhibitors are going to get squeezed hard next May in a way that hasn’t really happened in a while. They could be forced to cough up a couple of hundred million, as compared to the norm, on those three films alone. Paramount is the only one of the three that won’t have a chance to really use the leverage, though they will push for better terms on Transformers, which exhibitors will resist intensely.
The only downside for Disney moving to mid-June – which would be a relief for exhibitors, as it would make Transformers less powerful, is that they have Ratatouille in the way and nowhere to go with Underdog opening August.
Thanks, Dave. Are you saying rentals would be $360 on the $650 million. I can see that but certainly not on the $921.
As for P&A, I was thinking that negative plus P&A on this film was $250. Negative of $150 and P&A of $100. Is that off? I thought the two movies combine were being done for $250 to $300 prdn cost?
Also, as long as you are paying attention, any thoughts on the assumptions aobut home video and TV rights revenues and profits? And how aobut residuals? I know they can vary widely from film to film. One model I have assumes 14% of total film revenue to the studio from all windows.
Just to be clear, when I said that rentals would be $325 and profits $75, I was assuming $250 combined in negative and P&A.
Can someone explain the term ‘rentals’ to me as it relates to box office. The theaters don’t rent the prints do they? I assumed box office was split between the exhibitors and the studios with the margin slightly higher for studios. Does the term have some old school meaning? I’ve heard it before and it always confused it with home video rentals.
Production was about $250m, worldwide P&A about $150m.
Rentals, Sey, are the term for what comes back to the studio from the box office, the idea being that the movie theater is renting the film, Right now, the normal deal is 55% flat for almost every film. There are exceptions in art houses and for movies as big as Superman and Pirates, so they may be getting more like 60% back or actually get what used to be the norm, which is higher for the first few weeks and then much lower.
There was a story on IMDb today saying that some analysts are predicting it would go on to beat Titanic‘s numbers, which it won’t, but it’s nice thought I suppose.
Sad that there wont be any other $50mil openers.
If there’s another $50 million opener, it’s “Monster House” – but yeah, it’s unlikely.
Geez, I’m sure it’s been mentioned before, but there are a lot of part 3’s next summer. “Shrek,” “Pirates,” “Bourne,” “Ocean’s,” “Spider-Man,” “Rush Hour”… all “part 3.”
It would be pretty amazing if it got close to Titanic’s numbers…even within $100mil…but that’s a lot of repeat business, and I doubt that’ll happen since the DVD will probably be announced by the end of August/beginning of September…The film could still be sailing on at least one screen in some bigger theaters come September right?
The last film that I recall around here having any sort of legs was Return of the King, which was in the main theater until the week the DVD came out. The Two Towers before that ran for around 5 months too…I think the record, for Langley (outside of Vancouver, BC), is Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. I was working at the theater when it was released and was pleased as punch to be able to see it again (saw it at the Van Filmfest a couple months previous). It still seems funny to think that a foreign language film lasted so long around here. Anyhow…that was a tangent…the point being, until the studios decide to lengthen the theatrical to home video release window, there isn’t a chance for a film to get the repeat business that Pirates will need to crack Titanic’s record (or even come close to).
Yikes, I forgot to say the length of CTHD’s stay, which was 6 months, to the day, if I recall correctly.
I see what you’re saying about $50 million being over for the summer, but “safe to say?” The R makes it tough for “Miami Vice,” but it sure seems like a movie that’s going to grab a lot of adults. The built-for-opening weekend “Snakes?” If it’s good, “Lady in the Water,” maybe (“The Village” did it)? And even though it’s not especially good, “Monster House?”
Comment: It would be pretty amazing if it got close to Titanic’s numbers…even within $100mil…but that’s a lot of repeat business, and I doubt that’ll happen since the DVD will probably be announced by the end of August/beginning of September>>>
Speaking of the DVD and effect on boxoffice, has Robert Iger had anything to say in the last few days about day-and-date releasing on home video? 🙂
Bryan Singer was left speechless by it.
http://us.video.aol.com/video.index.adp?mode=1&pmmsid=1676445
After that rave, I was thinking MIAMI VICE was looking like a possible $50M opening. Needs a boatload of other critics and if it is “the shit” as we used to say, then Universal would be wise to sneak it soon to help build word of mouth. People are starved for summer movies this year, which IMHO is the main reason POTC 2 did the business it did. There is just a dearth of films to choose from and none of the films that opened earlier (MISSION, X-MEN, SUPERMAN) were satisfying that need.
Oh, and Josh – this summer was pretty full of “3’s” too:
MISSION IMPOSSIBLE: 3
X-MEN 3
FAST & FURIOUS 3
SUPERMAN RETURNS (supposedly a retcon of Superman III)
(not to mention that POSEIDON was the third version of that story)
Thanks Dave. Largely from reading you I have learned about the money side of the movies but that specific term always confused me.
Fortunately, it has its work cut out for it to set a Weds or Thursday record, not sure if it can set a “2nd Friday” record either.
So next summer, we already have (in this order) Spider-Man 3… week off (nothing booked yet!)… Shrek the Third… Pirates 3… Ocean’s 13… Fantastic Four… Evan Almighty… Pixar’s Ratatouille…Transformers…Harry Potter… a slower week… and then the Simpsons and Roland Emmerich’s latest…. Bourne Ultimatum… Alien vs. Predator 2 and Rush Hour 3…and then Judd Apatow’s latest Knocked Up. That’s an INSANE summer. (Good that Indiana Jones isn’t happening, too)
That’s one crazy summer next year.
As for Bryan Singer being left speechless, that’s pretty funny. What exactly did they want him to say?
“We shoulda opened sooner guys!”
They don’t show the actual question asked, but obviously, they asked Kate Bosworth if hse’s competitive with Orlando over their box office.
I saw a new trailer for Lady in the Water last night. The movie was being positioned as a more traditional horror, complete with jump-cut scares, rather than the fairy tale of the earlier trailers. I’m not convinced $50 M is out of reach.
I think I saw the same trailer that Kambie saw for Lady in the Water infront of Superman Returns tonight. Definitely makes me more interested than I was. “How many of you are there?”
This one at least looks original so maybe that will count for something with audiences?
How much of his fan base has Shyamalan lost due to The Village? Personally the Lady in the Water trailer does nothing but make me laugh. It looks bad.
I agree with Stella’s Boy. The trailer I saw last night for Lady in the Water is so, so bad. Who is it supposed to appeal to, the audience or Shyamalan’s ego? Don’t they recognize that Shyamalan’s stock is at an all-time low?
Funny to see Singer’s huge ego getting crushed in that question. He could have been gracious just as Kate and Brandon were, but I think X3 hitting it big and then Supes underperforming and then Pirates…it was just too much for him.
Paul Giammati is a great actor, worthy of all kudos he’s been nominated for…but really is he the box office draw that Bruce Willis and Mel Gibson were? I realize that Night is the draw for most people I guess, but still.
When you combine the lack of a draw (i.e. Gibson or Willis) with the reception of The Village (after the opening weekend at least), I think Lady in the Water could easily bomb in a big way.
And for what it’s worth Jeff Wells says it is, well, very bad.
I think it’s fair to say Shyamalan is the star just as Singer was the star of Superman. BO is mild unless the film packs enough to generate legs.
If the early word is right, this film will have the same legs as The Village, which ended up grossing just over twice its opening weekend…and it won’t open as high
Night is the star of Lake, but Superman is the star of Superman.
At the midnight screening I attended, the big applause during the credits was for Singer.
“And a hidden benefit is that [Disney] has a very powerful negotiating position for next summer with exhibitors.”
David, what exactly happens between studios and exhibitors during these negotiations? Which side has the upper hand on issues such as: release date, number of screens per venue, how many showings per screen?
Or is this one of those, “I’d tell you, but then I’d have to kill you” kind of thing?
If you look up the word “crack” in the English dictionary, you will see a picture of Jeffrey Wells smoking it. Lady in the Water has a few issues, but mostly, it’s a lovely movie… critics have to get over their dislike of “The Village”… this is a different movie and I think audiences will like it a lot more than The Village.
Considering comingsoon’s review history, I have to say I trust Wells a hell of a lot more. Every single mainstream movie gets a positive review on that site. They like everything and I do not trust their opinions on anything. Looks to me like Lady sucks ass and someone else smoked the crack.
Yeah, I am waiting on Poland’s take on the movie since he is a fan of the new book.
Man, that Bryan Singer video. Wow. The social ineptitude at being able to answer that question with any diplomacy, I’m sure is tied into the same wiring that makes him a such a strong filmmaker.
Or has he just been coddled too long?
Kudos to Routh on answering that one like a real pro.
I don’t care what the reviews are of Night’s movie. I’ll see it no matter what. And I gather everyone that comes to MCN will see it to no matter the reviews. He’s review proof now. Ala Spielberg.
Do you mean you like his movies no matter what?
I think enough moviegoers were burned by The Village that this one won’t open nearly as big…which means he is not ‘review-proof’.
Comparing Shyamalan and Spielberg? Yikes. Shyamalan is not review proof anymore, if he ever was. Not after The Village.
Don’t people remember that Signs made over $200mil. I mean, I’m sure Lady in the Water won’t be that huge (I know it won’t), but Signs was a big recovery from Unbreakable. So it’s not completely out of the questions that Lady could be big. That’s like saying nobody wants to Spielberg (because he’s in the discussion) movies anymore because Hook was really bad. Directors recover, ya know.