MovieChat Forums > Star Wars: Episode IX - The Rise of Skywalker (2019) Discussion > It's a FLOP. The movie is gonna lose mon...

It's a FLOP. The movie is gonna lose money.

posted 5 years ago by kuku (3510)
46 replies | jump to latest

Let's do some math.

The official budget was $275 million, but the movie has been reshot to death. As a rule of thumb, massive reshoots increase the budget about %50 (case of World War Z, for example). The real budget should be around $400 million, probably more.

Worldwide marketing. As a rule of thumb, it sums as much as the official budget. Let's be conservative and say $250 million.

With a $650 million cost, you need about $1.3 billion only to break even.

The movie has right now a $800 million box office. It'll probably reach the billion, but not the number required to break even.

It's a flop. It's not gonna make it.

EDIT Companies get roughly 50% of box office, average. That means that if you wanna pay back the 650M, you should make 650M x 2 = 1.3B, that's the break even.

[–] fc31 (5851) 5 years ago

I would not go so far to say it is going to lose money as yet since it is different from TLJ. The fan service should win some audience back.

But looking at the number of TLJ from IMDB:
Budget:$317,000,000 (estimated)
Opening Weekend USA: $220,009,584, 17 December 2017
Gross USA: $620,181,382
Cumulative Worldwide Gross: $1,332,539,889

Let's say the marketing budget is around $250 million, the total cost is around $560 million. Domestic share of box office usually around 65% ($364 million), international share of box office is around 45% ($320 million), Disney side of revenue should be around $684 million. Without counting on DVD/Bluray, toys sales and streaming revenue, the last movie already made more than $100 million.

But from the look of it the box office number of this movie is probably going to be 25% ~ 30% less than TLJ, so you are probably right.

EDIT: Adjusting the Disney box office intake percentage (domestic from 40% to 65% and international from 25% to 45%) and changed TLJ from losing about $100 million to making $100 million.

[–] aavfreak (3366) 5 years ago

Please show your work

"With a $650 million cost, you need about $1.3 billion only to break even."

If it cost $650 million to make and market, how is the break even cost $1.3 billion?

[–] abigolcwock (517) 5 years ago

Marketing figures are usually never recorded, so the best you can do is guess. A rough estimate is marketing + budget = 2x budget, but some movies don't spend anything on marketing while others go crazy. Wouldn't surprise me if marketing cost more than the budget with all the new SW movies, but of course it's anyone's guess

[–] aavfreak (3366) 5 years ago

The OP calculated $250 million for marketing into the $650 million already.

Original budget + 50% cost overrun + marketing = $650M according to the OP.

So, how is $1.3B break even?

"The official budget was $275 million, but the movie has been reshooted to death. As a rule of thumb, massive reshoots increase the budget about %50. The real budget should be around $400 million, probably more.

Worldwide marketing. As a rule of thumb, it sums as much as the official budget. Let's be conservative and say $250 million."

[–] abigolcwock (517) 5 years ago

Alright, didn't read OP's post, and am with you now and don't really know what he's on about

[–] kuku (3510) 5 years ago

So, how is $1.3B break even?

Companies get roughly 50% of box office. If your cost was 650K, then you should make about 650K x 2 = 1.3B box office to pay the cost.

Be aware that this is an average. An US movie makes a higher percentage in domestic (US) and a lower percentage in foreign countries, being China the lowest of all. Check fc31 comment before.

[–] aavfreak (3366) 5 years ago

Ah, okay. That's makes more sense.

Perhaps that could have been added to the calculation?

[–] kuku (3510) 5 years ago

I have edited the opening message to add it.

[–] aavfreak (3366) 5 years ago

Excellent. Good insight, thanks.

[–] fc31 (5851) 5 years ago

International distribution usually goes through local distributors because they are the ones dealing with local cinemas and they usually demand a cut, which is usually around 10% ~ 20% of the box office. That is why Disney will get a lower percentage of international box office.

The amount depends on how they negotiate it. Sometimes local distributors pay a fixed amount instead of a percentage.

[–] kuku (3510) 5 years ago

Interesting. Thanks.

[–] TexasJack (12516) 5 years ago

I think you're vastly overestimating the cost of reshoots. Reshoots are done for almost every big budget movie and are factored into the production cost. I think their overall cost of production and marketing is probably closer to $450 million. With a $1 billion total worldwide box office and a 50% margin, they will make at least $50 million before factoring in blu-ray sales and merchandising.

It's a disappointment from their perspective, but not a disaster like Solo. Still, I don't think it will be enough to save Kennedy's job. They didn't buy Star Wars to only make $50 million per movie and they have sustained lasting damage to the future value of the franchise due to her mismanagement.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

All there is go-on are the rumors, which I've seen for anything between 50%-70% of the total film - so we're not talking about normal 10% budgeted for reshoots.

Then there're the issues surrounding new scenes for the Lucas cut, and reshoots for the Kennedy cut, and Iger cut - which I understand ended-up edited in such a way to create three distinctly different stories.

That ain't cheap.

Union labor overtime pay is insanely expensive.

It sounds over the top, but there are plenty of articles that indicate that 70% of Solo had to be shot/reshot after Howard took over as director.

I was guessing $1.2 billion a month ago: [$300MM Production + $300MM Reshoots] x2 for Marketing

Whatever the number is, it isn't the $200MM estimated production on IMDB, the number's big, and it's bad.

[–] kuku (3510) 5 years ago

And the new Star Wars theme parks and hotels are failing even worse.

Disney made a lot of money with live-action remakes and Avengers, and they're sinking it into Star Wars.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Yeah, I saw a couple of vids indicating that Galaxy's Edge is failing.

[–] furiousstyles (4391) 5 years ago

You would have to be very stupid to believe that there’s a Lucas cut and that Disney would sanction an additional 300 million for reshoots, this is very embarrassing to read , the reshoots were less than TFA, do yourself a favour and stay off YouTube sweetie pie.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

. . . the reshoots were less than TFA

You know this how, exactly?

If your answer is that some fucktard PR flack for Disney was quoted in an article you read, then you don't know any more than the rest of us.

They had to fucking shoot or re-shoot 85% of Solo after Ron Howard took over, I think with the production cost coming-in at ~$400 million, so yeah, I don't think it's too far fetched to think they dropped even more cash into RoS.

From Variety:

When Howard came aboard, it was mandated that 85% of Lord and Miller’s “Solo” be reshot, including second unit material. Howard’s work ultimately comprises 70% of the finished film. The shoot would extend four more months, finally wrapping on Oct. 17.

https://variety.com/2018/film/features/solo-a-star-wars-story-directors-reshoots-ron-howard-1202817841/

Arrogant and a dumb-ass, you're the total package.

[–] Sandman81 (1510) 5 years ago

So you're assuming that since they reshot a lot of Solo (which did change directors during production) that Rise of Skywalker would do the same, even though they had the same director thru out. And you knock his source, but meanwhile you provide none of your own. The only sources I've seen that support your point are an article on Reddit, and something called "Doomcock."

And do people not realize that almost every big budget movie goes thru reshoots. Especially action and sci/fi movies with lots of special effects. Studios plan for this and budget for it. So unless there's a major change of direction (like a change of director) then it doesn't add to the overall production cost.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Studios do not budget for +50% reshoots.

From the outcome of that abortion of a movie, it looks like Doomcock & others were closer with their rumors then were the Disney apologists talking shit before it was released.

[–] furiousstyles (4391) 5 years ago

and whats what sources do you have , fucking doomcock!!!! why on earth would Disney sanction 300 million on reshoots? come on you cant be that stupid , i mean im not a fan of TROS but jaysus , i know they arent going to invest all that money in reshoots.

TROS entered reshoots in July for a period of 6 weeks , less than TFA , but you go ahead and believe some hater on YouTube , the same hater that said the story involved time travel, then changed his mind and said it was about finding the death stars antenna to broadcast the story of Luke Sykwalker, ahahahahhahahaha , fucking idiot

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

What sources do you have, Shit-For-Brains?

You talked crap for weeks and tried to shut people up before this turd was dropped, and now that it's floating in the toilet bowl, the rumors of it being a turd are confirmed.

You don't know jack about what was going-on behind the scenes, how much of the movie was reshot, how many cuts of the movie there are, or what was spent on it.

One thing's for sure, from the reviews of the movie and box office under-performance, this thing has all the telltale signs of one HUGE clusterfuck of a production behind the scenes.

You don't know, and likely as not you'll never know the full story, any more than we will.

You defended this steaming pile of shit to within an inch of your life the past month, and all you have to show for it is the realization that you defended a pile of shit.

You can't make-up for it by saying 'All the internet rumors weren't true - so I have the high ground.' - own it asshole.

Why don't you head-on down to the dollar store and buy some SW garbage to help Disney, a corporation that couldn't care less that you even exist.

:o)

[–] furiousstyles (4391) 5 years ago

You see the hate you have for these movies has made you deluded, you want it to fail on all levels thus listen to any random bullshitter on YouTube to fuel that hate , i on the other hand im of sane mind, you have no sources and i have no sources, but any neutral party would tell you that the production budgets on these blockbusters are usually correct , i mean 600 million to make a 2hr 30 min movie?? Like i said , you have to be stupid to follow sone of these rumours that are fuelled by hate .

Now go cry me a river dick face.

[–] VodkaPopinski (125) 5 years ago

If it even crosses $1B. It's entering its 3rd weekend still in the $800M range. After dropping almost as much as TLJ in its 2nd week, even with people on Christmas vacations.

I'd say there's still a chance the movie will fail to hit it. And if it does it'll barely scrape past it.

[–] VodkaPopinski (125) 5 years ago

I think we may never know just how much the movies really made or lost, with all the "Disney magic" going on in their accounting department these days.

In the end I believe it will have made money but nowhere near as much as it should have. It would be considered successful for an unknown IP. For Star Wars is it absolutely a flop. A $4B franchise run into the ground. The question of how it all happened would be amazing to investigate but sadly will likely be covered up. We'll all be left to believe our own narratives of choice.

I guess it's the grand culmination of corporate politics, overconfidence, and ineptitude in a "too-big-to-fail" company.

[–] furiousstyles (4391) 5 years ago

It had less reshoots than TFA, the reshoots story is the angry Star Wars fan bhoys making shit up

[–] furiousstyles (4391) 5 years ago

I suppose when you make up the costs to fit an agenda then yes of course it’s a flop , the reality is that it will most likely make profit , but if it makes you feel better let’s call it a flop.

[–] Cry50 (404) 5 years ago

My sources tell me they will make only 30 dollars from this movie

[–] QueenFanUSA (3379) 5 years ago

LOL

Disney is the only studio where costs are so out of control that one of it's films needs to actually MAKE 1.3 BILLION TO BREAK EVEN.

That is truly sad.

[–] sONOMArEturns (1276) 5 years ago

No kidding. What a time we live in where a film can make 1.3 billion and be considered a failure.

[–] QueenFanUSA (3379) 5 years ago

The problem is...this isn't going to make 1.3 billion. It's going to struggle to make 1 billion.

According to the OP's numbers...that's 300 million SHY of breaking even.

[–] alienzen (1931) 5 years ago

It will probably crawl past a billion, making it Disney's 8th biggest release of the year.

[–] QueenFanUSA (3379) 5 years ago

Probably but definitely not a lock.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

oh its a lock and the OP is making up numbers

[–] janelsenor (2048) 5 years ago

Even if the OP's number are correct, that just means Disney spent too much money. It's asinine for any film that hits a billion to lose money.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

OPs numbers are way off he is just trolling