It's going to be like movies that has similar concept but made by different studios (A Bug's Life & AntZ, Finding Nemo & Shark Tale) all over again, but in reverse, and questionably intentional.
@@andrewfeistner3384Yeah I’m pretty sure they’re coming out on the same day, that is insane. I cannot be convinced this was intentional, “Alr guys let’s watch some Barbenheimer” “Okay boys let’s head out to watch Saw Patrol” We need some really dark movie to match with FNAF
What Hollywood doesn’t understand is that situations like these can’t be replicated. It’s lightning in a bottle. Every attempt at replicating it will feel forced and fake because it will be.
1. Oppenheimer problabyt cost sabout 250 if you include the budget for marketing. 2. Marketing. You may think you heard about it through a friend, but you didn't, you heard about it through thre marketing channels. There are tens of thousands of youtube channels alone that had something to say about the movie, and yes probably half of them only did it to catch aride on the hype train. 3. Oppenheimer is good if you like Nolan movies. I don't, so I coujld not care less about all the hype and lies spread about it (and there are LOT of lies) Barbie is... well a barbie movie. It's probably fun if you like barbie,... I guess...
@@vinny142 Even if Oppenheimer cost 250 with marketing, that would still be less than Mission Impossible, Dial of Destiny & Little Mermaid without even considering their marketing budgets. Also while you might not hear about a film from a friend, they will certainly tell you if they thought it was bad. Finally the third point is entirely subjective and fair. While I can't argue it, I am curious what lies you were told?
I think you hit the nail right on the head, especially with regards to quality and fatigue. People always say, "Just make a good movie and people will see it" but the reality is far deeper than that.
Mission Impossible is in the crossfire of failure but it really didn't deserve it. It was suspenseful, entertaining, and solidly emotional. Just a shame people aren't as interested in the franchise.
Agreed - I saw it when it came out and I was more entertained and invested than I have been in any James Bond movies in a long time - that's been the case for me and the MI series and any Bond flick since Skyfall, really.
I hope the studios will learn the right lessons from Barbenheimer. But they will not, because they never do. The lesson should be “modestly budgeted well-made and creative movies succeed” the lesson the studios will get from it is “people want movies about toys and World War II/the atomic bomb”
That's exactly right. They always want to follow up with something similar, while in fact the lesson should be: people just want more original stuff. And that's something hard for them to follow.
@@ArifRWinandar Saw Patrol is already a thing they're trying to make work. I think they miss that Barbenheimer took off because both fandoms had mutual respect and agency. A Barbie Fan might not intuitively think to see Oppenheimer, and visa versa, but it's a lot more likely they can appreciate each others films than Paw Patrol and Saw fandoms. Which is bizarre. Everyone growing up knew intuitively that things that were trying hard to be 'cool' or 'with it' were always the lamest things. Studio executives were part of everyone, but they seem to have forgotten this.
The studios learned the lesson not to make modestly budgeted movies (like Oppenheimer) because people stopped going to those movies, even when they were good. Instead, they rewarded giant tent poles with ticket sales, and tiny quality movies with awards. The middle.. well, no one seemed to want the middle anymore. But if more modestly budgeted movies get rewarded, then we might get collectively rewarded with the return of a great type of movie.
Another big issue is inflation, it is really expensive to go to the movies on 4 different weekends in one month on a regular salary. Also, the release schedule, many movies were overstuffed together, M:I 7 was definitely one of my most anticipated movies, and I begged that they change its release schedule to avoid competing against Barbenheimer. Even Tom Cruise was pissed that his movie would only receive one week of IMAX because Oppenheimer would come out a week later.
I saw MI:7 in ScreenX (projector "extends" the movie sometimes) and it was stupid, bottom mention the movie was a preachy, boring mess. It disappointed me so badly that I feel done with the theater.
@@daltonbedore8396 You could probably argue that it's both. Inflation isn't driven by too much money, it's driven by too much money getting into a bidding war on too few goods and services. And right now, the consumers aren't exactly the ones flush with the cash to drive inflation. If anything, I'd be happy with less stuff, that I can actually afford, rather than more stuff that's exorbitantly priced.
Well, they're both Intellectual Properties with decades of built up momentum behind them. It helps that Barbie was both a really creative and interesting film while Mario was . . . honestly I'm not gonna say it was bad because it wasn't . . . But it was basically what it needed to be for the brand to do its job well. I'm not sure a second mario movie, for instance, would do quite so well now that the idea has already been done. Unless it brings something more than competent and well animated to the table.
I’m so tired of that excuse that “theaters are dead after the pandemic.” From No Way Home to Top Gun Maverick and now Barbenheimer, it’s clear that when people want to see a movie, they will see it on the big screen.
People are seeing fewer movies, however. They are just being way choosier now. So top gun night do fantastic business, but there is a real death around it. Part of it is pandemic, but it's more how our habits changed during the pandemic (like streaming taking up way more of our entertainment space)
@@ianwestc Exactly. Plus inflation has made going to the movies pretty expensive for families. Streaming services offer huge competition...basically every movie ever made at home, already paid for.
Excellent analysis. The two things I'd add are: 1) Audiences got used to not going to theaters during the pandemic and arguably haven't gotten out of that mindset. 2) Streaming services. TONS of content there to compete with new releases, since basically all movies & many tv shows from all of history are available all the time now. Contrast this to 10 years ago where you had to either buy a DVD or hope that HBO happened to be playing the movie you want now. When you have all that content at home its hard to justify going to the movies, which could cost you $50+ for a family of 4.
You notice half the flops we have this year could've been solid hits. Fast X did 750 million worldwide but is a loss. Little mermaid, transformers and so many other same cases and now sadly MI 7 is on the way
The Indiana Jones deaging thing lasted *20 minutes??* Good lord. Between this and the strikes, I’m incredibly curious to see where movies go after the next couple years.
I think your point of "when everything's blockbusters, nothing will be" is a good one. All of my friends and I were looking at the upcoming summer release schedule back in april and we were all like "god damn this summer is packed, there's so many things coming out" and it was just too many "YOU HAVE TO SEE THIS" kind of movies all squeezed together. Also, the proliference of part 1s (or in spiderverse's case, part 2/3 ending with to be continued) where you know the story isnt complete. I have a hard time going to the theater to watch something when I know I will have to wait a year to see the whole story play out. Barbie was my most anticipated movie of the year and clearly I wasnt alone in that. At least amongst my friends, the original films are the ones they were most interested in. Asteroid City, Past Lives, Barbie, Oppenheimer, hell even Mario. Curiousity drives interest. I know Dead Reckoning is going to be good. I know Indiana Jones is going to be goofy. I don't know what to expect from Asteroid City, so that's the one I want to catch in theaters.
Thank you for this breakdown because you said a lot of stuff that I think it's of the core business wise of why none of this shit is working and needs to be said. I will also add to this that I think the biggest thing about this year is I have no idea why five of these blockbusters which was like half of the years movie Blockbusters season were all put in the same month. It's like of course they're going to all cannibalize each other and make it a giant blur so that otters smaller films or just films that look different like Barbie and up onheimer are going to stand out even more. I have a fear that that's going to repeat in the video game industry in October because right now it looks like a bloodbath and everyone has already determined that Alan wake too is going to fall into the Atlantic trench because of it.
Like you said, all the masterpieces this summer did make a profit. This really shows how much word of mouth matters for movies now. We won’t just follow franchises. I’ve only seen Guardians of the Galaxy 3 and across the spider-verse but both movies deserved to be hits, and they were.
The biggest positive of The Flash bombing, is that it takes the heat off TH-cam filmmaker Ponysmasher aka David F Sandberg, who directed Shazam 1-2 (now the 2nd biggest flop) Dude is talented, he doesn't deserve to be shackled with that 'honor'.
This is a perfect breakdown of everything that's happeneing right now. Every studio should be embarrassed by Oppenheimer and what Nolan achieved with a $100 million budget
It seems to me that a big reason why there's been such a shift in where the box office gravitates now is anticipation. Marvel films are no longer an event because they already achieved what they built up to with Infinity War and Endgame, with all the major characters having their stories completed. Pixar films are no longer an event because they just keep going for the same formula every time now, and it's frankly quite tiring at this point. Yet The Super Mario Bros. Movie was a massive hit because nobody had ever seen an animated movie based on this nostalgic franchise before. Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse was a big hit because the first Spider-Verse was already renowned for its game-changing animation style and this second movie simple one-upped the game. Barbenheimer were both huge event films because no live action Barbie movie like this has ever been made, and with the starkly contrasted Oppenheimer releasing that same day, the marketing plan just wrote itself. Hollywood is getting to an ideal place where they're something in the blockbusters for everyone, regardless of age, gender, race, or personal interest.
Inflation + pandemic precautions/delays increased budgets 20%-30%. That's an extra $40 - $60 million on a big budget movie. And it's not even taking into account the advertising costs.
I think a global pandemic still having shockwaves is part of this. People were afraid to go to the theatres because it was a super-spreader, so studios switched to streaming. Now that things are safer (though not 100% safe), people have been so conditioned to streaming that unless there's something really compelling in a theatrical release, why bother when you can wait?
And that is why Barbenheimer hit. These were things you had to see in theaters and dress up accordingly and go with friends and discuss at work. In the case of Barbie, it is also the hottest music album of the summer and pink is the color of the season, so you can't miss that out. It was an actual event. But all other movies, people really don't care about spoilers anymore, and prefer to wait for streaming. I chose to watch Barbie instead of Spiderverse and I loved Barbie. For Spiderverse I can wait for the Netflix release.
@@jonathanking9954 Technically, the pandemic isn't over. It's just no longer a global health crisis (though that can always change if another lethal variant pops up.) Also, while you might've been comfortable going to the theatre, many people weren't. That doesn't just change with the snap of a finger now that people aren't dying in large numbers.
Also Mission Impossible does not fall into your explanation of how the previous film in the franchise determines its success. Fallout was a series high both critically and commercially. But maybe the extended gap between entries squandered some of that good will
This channel's missing one big point with MI 7 that both parts were filmed in unison so the collective budget is for 2 films, so it will be a success in the long run.
They might screw it up, but I REALLY like the idea of studios trying to release movies that contrast eachother as a trend. It might lead to accidental creativity, as they ask themselves "so what is the actual opposite of that Batman film we were going to release?"
@filmsandstuff Not sure if this channel missed it, but Dead Reckoning part 1&2 were filmed in unison. So the 300+ million dollar budget is covering 2 films, not one. So the likelihood that this project will become profitable in the near future is extremely likely.
The bigger the budget, the less likely the studio is going to take risks. So they decide to "play it safe" and do the stuff that's already worked before.
Hopefully studios learn that franchise by committee is not the way to go. It feels like too many cooks in the kitchen for most of these films all trying to do whatever it takes to hit the 4 quadrants and make a billion dollars. Thank god Barbinhiemer it there to let creators be free(ish). Nolan will undoubtably go on to do another original movie I will look forward to in 3 or 4 years while I fear Mattel will go down the failed route of studio interference and try to make whatever they feel worked for Barbie and cram that into all their other IPs.
This hits the nail on the head, I think. Studio want one big and surefire movie. But that has limits, as it means making movies that have to appeal to all people at once. I heard that part of why Disney fell in love with the Superhero Formula, and viewed it as such a cash cow, was that Super Hero Films, at least the marvel films, were simple and easily digestible across cultural lines. It's the same reason Fantasy gets pushed so hard. Fantasy, at least superficially, can be divorced from 'our' world. I think there is value in universal messages . . . But there are more universal messages than just 'beat up the bad guy' and more ways to tell them. And at the same time, there are worthwhile stories that come from being aimed at a narrower audience. That's how you get things that are so good you want to watch them even if they star doesn't 'look like you' or 'speak your language' even if you don't really 'get' what's happening in the story the first time you see it. It's how you get to the place where you meet a movie halfway, cuz you want to engage in this dialogue that its creators are offering to you. There's value in discovering that which we wouldn't think to be interested in until we find it. And there's value in finding it for ourselves rather than because an algorithm gave it to us.
I get what you were saying and why you said it but it should be mentioned that Spider-Verse is a sequel to a film that came out before No Way Home and the Flash movie has been trying to get off the ground for almost a decade. The later one was definitely influenced by the idea of crossovers and suffered greatly for it but it wasn't made solely because of that.
I think it kind of says something that we now live in an age where Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen and Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides are now glorified as paragons of a once great industry.
One hopes the studios would see this summer full of flops and start giving more up and coming directors and writers smaller budgets but MORE creative freedom to make something impactful.
I never imagined that a movie could be worst than the live-action Green lantern but DC made it! It's a bit impressive! They should get a razzie award for making the biggest comic book movie flop 😂
Barbenheimer hit because it was a cultural moment like Endgame was. These were things you had to see in theaters and dress up accordingly and go with friends and discuss at work. In the case of Barbie, it is also the hottest music album of the summer and pink is the color of the season, so you can't miss out on the party. It was an actual event. But all other movies, people really don't care about spoilers anymore, and prefer to wait for streaming. I chose to watch Barbie instead of Spiderverse and I loved Barbie. For Spiderverse I can wait for the Netflix release.
@@jonathanking9954 I've seen Oppenheimer and let me tell you it was really great, it's really dense and long, not everyone's cup of tea, but it means a major step up in Nolan's filmography, it's a more mature film.
@SmashBrosInitiative Not really. See, if a film is greenlit by the studio and the exhibitor's booker to have more screens available(the current industry term is "prints"), then you can have more showtimes like in the case of Avengers. However, Avengers was not very contested and there was 10plus years of marketing and films to build that success. Additionally, when you know something is gonna smash, you move heaven and earth to get more showtimes( expand ops hours, delete other film's showtimes that lost protected status, etc). Now the comment was made within the context of this summer. Each flopping film was unwanted, mostly riding on dead horses, and competing with bloated budgets for the same money. There weren't as many films to delete, franchise fatigue, and a lot of factors better discussed by the video maker. After all that, a long movie increases the problem. There are many customers who will not sit through 20 minutes of trailers and 2 & 1/2 hours unless it is worth it, and it works with their schedule. These films weren't worth it. Let's expound by using math. A two and a half hour film means I have four showtimes in most ops hours per print. 100 minute gets me 5 or 6. 25-33% in available showtimes multiplied by all screens in America then divided by 2, assuming 1/2 capacity average is a lot of box office.
@@J24-k8f nah bro. When was the last time you missed a movie in theaters cause there werent enough showtimes? Never. You simply went on another day or picked a different time. A 30-40 runtime difference will have no effect on sales unless every single showing was consistently sold out and the person literally could not buy a ticket during the theatrical run.
@@treehavn I missed Indiana Jones 5, The Woman King, and Mission Impossible Fallout due to schedule constraints. The couple days I had available, the showtimes didn't line up with what I had to get done that day. The length of time in a theater isn't the problem. The amount of showtimes and when they are able to be scheduled can leave money on the table. After about 2 hours and 20 minutes, you lose a showtime per day on average operational hours (10:30a to 10:30p). It is a matter of math, my man. Each film has at least 20 minutes of trailers(often more)and most theaters will have at least 30 minutes between each show in a theater for both cleaning and seating needs. That bumps the total time each film takes to over 3 hours, excluding the first film. 12hours/3=4 available times a day. Sure, you only lose 10 customers per screen, but when you multiple that by the 10,000** screens you lose on a 2&1/2 movie, that adds up quickly. Also, when moneymaker films release, exhibitors will cut other films that are not under a protected status by contract with studios. They still want to have these other films play, so often they will do a balancing trick to have a theater share the films. A shorter film is much more forgiving to schedule in an alternating show schedule than a longer film. Fits in more places. ** source: National Associatio of Theatre Owners Total screens in US: 39,007 Assuming average of 3 prints(industry term for the amount of screens) per big release across the country(USA), that leaves us with 13002.33 screens. If you have 4 showtimes per day, that leaves you with 52,009.33 showtimes. 5 and 6 gets you 65,011.66 and 78,014 respectively per day. Now, if you gain 10 customers per screen, which for a lot of locations is less than 10% occupancy, for 5 showtimes that is an increase of 130,023.33 customers at x/ticket and x/popcorn and soda. 6 showtimes has an increase of 260,046.66 customers. If that isn't money left on the table, then I don't know what is. What they need to do is get films that have the pull and aren't riddled with all the baggage and problems exposed in the video essay and bring them in at the 100 to 110 minute mark.
i fear that instead of slowing down the pace of franchise movies, sequels, reboots and whatnot, that what studios will take from Barbie and Oppenheimer is that we need sequels and spin-offs of Barbie and Oppenheimer. And listen, i wouldn't mind a Ken spinoff but also, if there was only the one Barbie movie, it would be more than Kenoug...sorry, enough.
Man For All Points You Raised I Just Want #MissionImpossible7 And #Elemental To Be Considered Profitable In The Long Run By Their Studios. They Are Actually Good Movies Just Caught In The Crossfire Of Audience Fatigue, Saturated Release Schedule And Improper Marketing
All serious points aside, am I the only one that didn’t mind Dial of Destiny? It’s certainly no Raiders or Last Crusade but Indiana Jones has always been light hearted and schlocky. Didn’t think it was the worst but can definitely see why it tanked
To be fair… if the prologue was a beta for the de-aging tech, I don’t see it as much of a loss. The revenue from the movie helps with offsetting the cost of it.
'Not Good Movies v. Bad Movies, but unsustainable movies destroying each other.' - That does sound about right to me. We need the industry to scale back. Break up the the production budgets into smaller, more creative, more targeted projects that can take more risks, and just . . . make enjoyable movies again. Not 'content', god no! Actual movies whose diversity comes organically from being able to take risks on discovering and cultivating new talent from all sorts of different backgrounds. I'm kind of reminded of the Knives Out films. Love or hate Ryan Johnson, there's an audience for his movies. When he has the option to make a RYAN JOHNSON movie. And on a 40 million dollar budget he can tell his scathing and satirical political commentary to the people who actually want to watch something like that. As opposed to a tentpole Star Wars film that has to be iconically Star Wars, but also fresh and original to a massive audience. And that is a solid win-win in my book.
How is it that IJ and the Last Cruzade cost only 48 million USD (for today standards) and has better story and ction scenes than the 320 millon USD ID and the Dial of Destiny?
Part of it, I think, is that major studios have used bloated production budgets as a sort of 'moat' for years. Even if the CGI has started to look kind of shoddy, nobody could do CGI on their scope and scale or with as much direct interaction between the effects and the actors. So they used that to sort of push out smaller films and make themselves the must see tent poles. They literally scream louder than anyone else, because the only thing a big established studio has more of today than anyone else is money to burn. You also see this with Marketing. Spectacle films are much easier to market, because you just slap big shiny set pieces into the trailer. Where it used to be that a trailer's job was to create intrigue to make people want to see what the film was about. Now it's almost a reflection of the Studios desire for a 'sure thing' that will plant butts in seats.
The thing I'm scared of is Mattel being idiots and trying to do the Mattel cinematic universe shit... like how Transformers is trying to segway into G.I. Joe now...
@@Bustermachine Brands and Companies really will see fans doing things and think, "How can we do this, but safe clean and in a way that won't harm brand image?" and then they proceed to make the worst shit ever...
It will just mean more films that are polar opposites will be released at the same time every other week, the studios still don't get that these two films were successful because they offered something different to the usual franchise rubbish
Yeah it actually was a good movie. But I personally had to be sold on it since I figured 'uh Harrison Ford is 81 and they put him in an action movie?'. Probably a lot of people felt that way and would have loved to see that movie 30 years ago
Very funny that Transformers became a franchise based off of a kid’s toy, and Barbie is aggressively it’s own contained movie despite also being a kid’s toy. Hopefully they don’t make a sequel.
It's one summer. To say that it's some sort of sign that blockbusters are dying is really reaching. Last year did perfectly fine for franchise movies and next year could as well. It's really hard to take such a small sample and make any kind of declarative statement about it. Both Indiana Jones and especially The Flash have gotten overall negative reviews because of problems with those films and not the genre of blockbusters overall. Look at GOTG 3 which did really well at the box office and among critics and fans alike.
@@Bustermachine My point is that we don't have a big enough sample size to prove that it's an overall issue or just two or three bad movie that bombed.
The only problem with your premise is that Fallout was the best Mission film and still Dead Reckoning is doing worse than Sound of Freedom. Although not a franchise, you could argue the exact opposite for Chris Nolan, with how much Tenet sucked not really impacting how well Oppenheimer is doing. It has less to do with quality and more just the absurd manipulation of hype. When movies make money, it turns out they were brilliant and they deserved it. When they flop, weeeell they sucked anyway. With monday's newspaper every commentator seems like a genius.
You guys are being too harsh on Mission Impossible. Yeah, it may not be as great as Fallout or other post MI3 movies of your choice, but it definitely was one of the best action movies of this year, more than Barbie or Oppenheimer. Don't get me wrong, those are great movies too, but MI is the best of its genre this year
You claim Iron Man (2008) cost $140M, which is $80M or 36% less than Flash (2023). But adjusted for 15 years of inflation, Iron Man was only $25M or 11% cheaper...
That entire opening could have been condensed to under 10 minutes. I liked dial of destiny but an Indiana Jones movie should never cost more than $200 million to make. Heck, even $150 should been its capped limit.
Mission Impossible Dead Reckoning is currently at $523 Million worldwide box office on a budget of $291 Million. That is still not enough to make it a success, as it likely needs $750 to $800 Million for a success. Fast X is growing at $719 Mil currently but needs $880 to $850 Mil to make a profit as it was costly at $340 Mil budget, plus marketing etc. so it is under-performing. The studios spend too much making these films.
studios are just big buildings filled with people with even bigger wallets, and people with big wallets never listen to anyone, other than themselves, they''re likely scratching their heads right now trying to figure out why the movies that succeeded did so, not putting two and two together
Cargo culting is a very, very big problem across the business and politics worlds currently. I would provide examples, but it would just kick off an argument... All I'll say is, keep an eye out for it and suddenly you'll begin to see it *everywhere*. Including *your own side* in the political world. Whatever side that may be.
It's strange that studios are still relying on traditional advertising to generate interest. You could accomplish more with less than ten people making and spreading memes than the entire stupid bloated marketing budget these studios slavishly spend millions on. They've been beholden to outdated models of audience engagement for so long that it's cutting into their profits
I'm not entirely sure that's true. Meme's are very VERY prone to survivorship bias and selection that mutates them uncontrollably. It's a lot like trying to catch lightning in a bottle relying on meme based advertising.
@@Bustermachine They're also corporate based. All of social media is corporate owned. If it wants to promote your idea it will if not it will bury you pure and simple. People often forget that its not them making content its the corporation that allows such content to spread and if it doesn't like you it can shut it down at a moments notice no questions asked. You can't even complain since its not your product to use.
Its simple, they have a diversity driven staff, they somehow think they are artists, the best artist. They are given huge projects and budgets, because they deserve it. But theu hate the source material because its not on par with what they like, they don't read at all, so they think think thue can improve on everything. The test screens go super bad and more money needs to spend on reshoots
It’s going to be funny seeing Hollywood try and replicate what’s going on with Barbie and Oppenheimer
They’re already trying to with Saw X and Paw Patrol
Saw Patrol
It's going to be like movies that has similar concept but made by different studios (A Bug's Life & AntZ, Finding Nemo & Shark Tale) all over again, but in reverse, and questionably intentional.
@@andrewfeistner3384Yeah I’m pretty sure they’re coming out on the same day, that is insane. I cannot be convinced this was intentional,
“Alr guys let’s watch some Barbenheimer”
“Okay boys let’s head out to watch Saw Patrol”
We need some really dark movie to match with FNAF
What Hollywood doesn’t understand is that situations like these can’t be replicated. It’s lightning in a bottle. Every attempt at replicating it will feel forced and fake because it will be.
Barbie and Oppenheimer have three things in common:
1. Modest budgets.
2. Good word of mouth.
3. Being good movies.
1. Oppenheimer problabyt cost sabout 250 if you include the budget for marketing.
2. Marketing. You may think you heard about it through a friend, but you didn't, you heard about it through thre marketing channels. There are tens of thousands of youtube channels alone that had something to say about the movie, and yes probably half of them only did it to catch aride on the hype train.
3. Oppenheimer is good if you like Nolan movies. I don't, so I coujld not care less about all the hype and lies spread about it (and there are LOT of lies) Barbie is... well a barbie movie. It's probably fun if you like barbie,... I guess...
@@vinny142whatever dude
since when is 100m a modest budget? geeez. + Barbie was shit and if you disagree you are a tool
@@vinny142 Even if Oppenheimer cost 250 with marketing, that would still be less than Mission Impossible, Dial of Destiny & Little Mermaid without even considering their marketing budgets.
Also while you might not hear about a film from a friend, they will certainly tell you if they thought it was bad.
Finally the third point is entirely subjective and fair. While I can't argue it, I am curious what lies you were told?
Haven’t seen Barbie yet but Oppenheimer wasn’t that good
I think you hit the nail right on the head, especially with regards to quality and fatigue.
People always say, "Just make a good movie and people will see it" but the reality is far deeper than that.
true
How far deep exactly?
"Good" carries that whole sentence.
Problem is, people always overthink things when talking about making good movies.
Mission Impossible is in the crossfire of failure but it really didn't deserve it. It was suspenseful, entertaining, and solidly emotional. Just a shame people aren't as interested in the franchise.
Agreed - I saw it when it came out and I was more entertained and invested than I have been in any James Bond movies in a long time - that's been the case for me and the MI series and any Bond flick since Skyfall, really.
The story wasn’t good tbh
MI:7 had 2 big problems.
1. Bloated budget
2. It lost a lot of theaters to Barbie and Oppenheimer
I'm going to see it this week. F Barbie. Plus, tenet was garbage so I'm not paying to see Oppenheimer.
@jinstinky501 Agreed, Barbie is woke garbage. But you shouldn't skip Oppenheimer. It is WAY better than Tenet.
I hope the studios will learn the right lessons from Barbenheimer. But they will not, because they never do. The lesson should be “modestly budgeted well-made and creative movies succeed” the lesson the studios will get from it is “people want movies about toys and World War II/the atomic bomb”
That's exactly right. They always want to follow up with something similar, while in fact the lesson should be: people just want more original stuff. And that's something hard for them to follow.
I hope they get the other wrong lesson instead, that is "people want movie pairs that stupidly contrast each other's tone".
Looking forward to the Ken prequel opening against the Hirohito biopic in 2025
@@ArifRWinandar Saw Patrol is already a thing they're trying to make work. I think they miss that Barbenheimer took off because both fandoms had mutual respect and agency. A Barbie Fan might not intuitively think to see Oppenheimer, and visa versa, but it's a lot more likely they can appreciate each others films than Paw Patrol and Saw fandoms.
Which is bizarre. Everyone growing up knew intuitively that things that were trying hard to be 'cool' or 'with it' were always the lamest things. Studio executives were part of everyone, but they seem to have forgotten this.
The studios learned the lesson not to make modestly budgeted movies (like Oppenheimer) because people stopped going to those movies, even when they were good. Instead, they rewarded giant tent poles with ticket sales, and tiny quality movies with awards. The middle.. well, no one seemed to want the middle anymore. But if more modestly budgeted movies get rewarded, then we might get collectively rewarded with the return of a great type of movie.
Coupled with the strike currently happening, I think we’ll see a resurgence of movies with taboo/violence in them like the 70s
Another big issue is inflation, it is really expensive to go to the movies on 4 different weekends in one month on a regular salary. Also, the release schedule, many movies were overstuffed together, M:I 7 was definitely one of my most anticipated movies, and I begged that they change its release schedule to avoid competing against Barbenheimer. Even Tom Cruise was pissed that his movie would only receive one week of IMAX because Oppenheimer would come out a week later.
stop saying "inflation" when you really mean corporate profit gouging
@@daltonbedore8396 That too.
I saw MI:7 in ScreenX (projector "extends" the movie sometimes) and it was stupid, bottom mention the movie was a preachy, boring mess. It disappointed me so badly that I feel done with the theater.
@@Balthazar2242 bro mi7 was so good tho
@@daltonbedore8396 You could probably argue that it's both. Inflation isn't driven by too much money, it's driven by too much money getting into a bidding war on too few goods and services. And right now, the consumers aren't exactly the ones flush with the cash to drive inflation. If anything, I'd be happy with less stuff, that I can actually afford, rather than more stuff that's exorbitantly priced.
I love how the two biggest films of the year (Barbie will soon be in the top 2) are based off a video game and a toy.
Well, they're both Intellectual Properties with decades of built up momentum behind them. It helps that Barbie was both a really creative and interesting film while Mario was . . . honestly I'm not gonna say it was bad because it wasn't . . . But it was basically what it needed to be for the brand to do its job well.
I'm not sure a second mario movie, for instance, would do quite so well now that the idea has already been done. Unless it brings something more than competent and well animated to the table.
I’m so tired of that excuse that “theaters are dead after the pandemic.” From No Way Home to Top Gun Maverick and now Barbenheimer, it’s clear that when people want to see a movie, they will see it on the big screen.
People are seeing fewer movies, however. They are just being way choosier now. So top gun night do fantastic business, but there is a real death around it. Part of it is pandemic, but it's more how our habits changed during the pandemic (like streaming taking up way more of our entertainment space)
@@ianwestc Exactly. Plus inflation has made going to the movies pretty expensive for families. Streaming services offer huge competition...basically every movie ever made at home, already paid for.
Excellent analysis. The two things I'd add are:
1) Audiences got used to not going to theaters during the pandemic and arguably haven't gotten out of that mindset.
2) Streaming services. TONS of content there to compete with new releases, since basically all movies & many tv shows from all of history are available all the time now. Contrast this to 10 years ago where you had to either buy a DVD or hope that HBO happened to be playing the movie you want now. When you have all that content at home its hard to justify going to the movies, which could cost you $50+ for a family of 4.
You notice half the flops we have this year could've been solid hits. Fast X did 750 million worldwide but is a loss. Little mermaid, transformers and so many other same cases and now sadly MI 7 is on the way
The Indiana Jones deaging thing lasted *20 minutes??*
Good lord.
Between this and the strikes, I’m incredibly curious to see where movies go after the next couple years.
To be fair, SpiderVerse absolutely deserved to cannibalize the Flash's box office.
I think your point of "when everything's blockbusters, nothing will be" is a good one. All of my friends and I were looking at the upcoming summer release schedule back in april and we were all like "god damn this summer is packed, there's so many things coming out" and it was just too many "YOU HAVE TO SEE THIS" kind of movies all squeezed together. Also, the proliference of part 1s (or in spiderverse's case, part 2/3 ending with to be continued) where you know the story isnt complete. I have a hard time going to the theater to watch something when I know I will have to wait a year to see the whole story play out.
Barbie was my most anticipated movie of the year and clearly I wasnt alone in that. At least amongst my friends, the original films are the ones they were most interested in. Asteroid City, Past Lives, Barbie, Oppenheimer, hell even Mario. Curiousity drives interest. I know Dead Reckoning is going to be good. I know Indiana Jones is going to be goofy. I don't know what to expect from Asteroid City, so that's the one I want to catch in theaters.
don't worry asteroid city was really good
Ironically, the only thing I went to see was Elemental. I didn't regret it. Most relaxing saturday I've had in years.
the flash bombing is the feel good story we needed this year
Excellent video and your Kennergy is off the charts
Blockbuster fatigue is definitely what I’d call it , great way to put it.
Thank you for this breakdown because you said a lot of stuff that I think it's of the core business wise of why none of this shit is working and needs to be said. I will also add to this that I think the biggest thing about this year is I have no idea why five of these blockbusters which was like half of the years movie Blockbusters season were all put in the same month. It's like of course they're going to all cannibalize each other and make it a giant blur so that otters smaller films or just films that look different like Barbie and up onheimer are going to stand out even more. I have a fear that that's going to repeat in the video game industry in October because right now it looks like a bloodbath and everyone has already determined that Alan wake too is going to fall into the Atlantic trench because of it.
Nailed my thoughts on blockbusters over the last few years. Bring on more 50-100m originals
Yup
This is why I liked Oppenheimer and I'm really excited for the next films that come after this.
Like you said, all the masterpieces this summer did make a profit. This really shows how much word of mouth matters for movies now. We won’t just follow franchises. I’ve only seen Guardians of the Galaxy 3 and across the spider-verse but both movies deserved to be hits, and they were.
The biggest positive of The Flash bombing, is that it takes the heat off TH-cam filmmaker Ponysmasher aka David F Sandberg, who directed Shazam 1-2 (now the 2nd biggest flop) Dude is talented, he doesn't deserve to be shackled with that 'honor'.
Andy Muschietti is also talented.
This is a perfect breakdown of everything that's happeneing right now. Every studio should be embarrassed by Oppenheimer and what Nolan achieved with a $100 million budget
2022: Morbius comes out, blockbusters are great again.
2023: no Morbius sequel, whole summer bombs
It seems to me that a big reason why there's been such a shift in where the box office gravitates now is anticipation. Marvel films are no longer an event because they already achieved what they built up to with Infinity War and Endgame, with all the major characters having their stories completed. Pixar films are no longer an event because they just keep going for the same formula every time now, and it's frankly quite tiring at this point.
Yet The Super Mario Bros. Movie was a massive hit because nobody had ever seen an animated movie based on this nostalgic franchise before. Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse was a big hit because the first Spider-Verse was already renowned for its game-changing animation style and this second movie simple one-upped the game. Barbenheimer were both huge event films because no live action Barbie movie like this has ever been made, and with the starkly contrasted Oppenheimer releasing that same day, the marketing plan just wrote itself. Hollywood is getting to an ideal place where they're something in the blockbusters for everyone, regardless of age, gender, race, or personal interest.
Inflation + pandemic precautions/delays increased budgets 20%-30%. That's an extra $40 - $60 million on a big budget movie. And it's not even taking into account the advertising costs.
I think a global pandemic still having shockwaves is part of this. People were afraid to go to the theatres because it was a super-spreader, so studios switched to streaming. Now that things are safer (though not 100% safe), people have been so conditioned to streaming that unless there's something really compelling in a theatrical release, why bother when you can wait?
And that is why Barbenheimer hit. These were things you had to see in theaters and dress up accordingly and go with friends and discuss at work. In the case of Barbie, it is also the hottest music album of the summer and pink is the color of the season, so you can't miss that out. It was an actual event. But all other movies, people really don't care about spoilers anymore, and prefer to wait for streaming. I chose to watch Barbie instead of Spiderverse and I loved Barbie. For Spiderverse I can wait for the Netflix release.
It really depended on your area. I went to the theaters many times during the pandemic.
@@jonathanking9954 Technically, the pandemic isn't over. It's just no longer a global health crisis (though that can always change if another lethal variant pops up.) Also, while you might've been comfortable going to the theatre, many people weren't. That doesn't just change with the snap of a finger now that people aren't dying in large numbers.
@@CaptainRaccoonWhitly well also tbf I wasn’t afraid of Covid like a lot of people were.
Great breakdown of the summer movies and all. But I think the sequel we all really want is the story of how them biceps were built! 💪
Also Mission Impossible does not fall into your explanation of how the previous film in the franchise determines its success. Fallout was a series high both critically and commercially. But maybe the extended gap between entries squandered some of that good will
This channel's missing one big point with MI 7 that both parts were filmed in unison so the collective budget is for 2 films, so it will be a success in the long run.
The entire summer can be summarized at 2:40 and with one word/sound: OOOOHHHHHHHH
They might screw it up, but I REALLY like the idea of studios trying to release movies that contrast eachother as a trend. It might lead to accidental creativity, as they ask themselves "so what is the actual opposite of that Batman film we were going to release?"
Great video! I don’t see ur content much, but this was really compelling.
Great video as always. I’ve seen some really good short films lately further demonstrating that huge budgets do not automatically equal quality.
This is such a good video that I'm using it as inspo for a college presentation. God bless ya
@filmsandstuff Not sure if this channel missed it, but Dead Reckoning part 1&2 were filmed in unison. So the 300+ million dollar budget is covering 2 films, not one. So the likelihood that this project will become profitable in the near future is extremely likely.
Wonderful video, man.
The bigger the budget, the less likely the studio is going to take risks. So they decide to "play it safe" and do the stuff that's already worked before.
Hopefully studios learn that franchise by committee is not the way to go. It feels like too many cooks in the kitchen for most of these films all trying to do whatever it takes to hit the 4 quadrants and make a billion dollars. Thank god Barbinhiemer it there to let creators be free(ish). Nolan will undoubtably go on to do another original movie I will look forward to in 3 or 4 years while I fear Mattel will go down the failed route of studio interference and try to make whatever they feel worked for Barbie and cram that into all their other IPs.
I do not want a mattel cinematic universe
This hits the nail on the head, I think. Studio want one big and surefire movie. But that has limits, as it means making movies that have to appeal to all people at once. I heard that part of why Disney fell in love with the Superhero Formula, and viewed it as such a cash cow, was that Super Hero Films, at least the marvel films, were simple and easily digestible across cultural lines.
It's the same reason Fantasy gets pushed so hard. Fantasy, at least superficially, can be divorced from 'our' world.
I think there is value in universal messages . . . But there are more universal messages than just 'beat up the bad guy' and more ways to tell them. And at the same time, there are worthwhile stories that come from being aimed at a narrower audience. That's how you get things that are so good you want to watch them even if they star doesn't 'look like you' or 'speak your language' even if you don't really 'get' what's happening in the story the first time you see it.
It's how you get to the place where you meet a movie halfway, cuz you want to engage in this dialogue that its creators are offering to you.
There's value in discovering that which we wouldn't think to be interested in until we find it. And there's value in finding it for ourselves rather than because an algorithm gave it to us.
This is fr the best analysis on this summers blockbusters
I get what you were saying and why you said it but it should be mentioned that Spider-Verse is a sequel to a film that came out before No Way Home and the Flash movie has been trying to get off the ground for almost a decade. The later one was definitely influenced by the idea of crossovers and suffered greatly for it but it wasn't made solely because of that.
Releasing the Flash when the series was on the air didn't help Flash Overload? And of course Ezra Miller being a d..k didn't help
Putting the overall revenue aside. What is the overall number of movie tickets or people going to see these movies?
10:00 genuinely the most literal “weird flex but okay”
I think it kind of says something that we now live in an age where Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen and Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides are now glorified as paragons of a once great industry.
Barbenheimer is gonna get replicated for all the wrong reasons…real fast
One hopes the studios would see this summer full of flops and start giving more up and coming directors and writers smaller budgets but MORE creative freedom to make something impactful.
Great video, though I disagree with the idea that Nolan himself is a franchise
I'd argue I have franchise fatigue from watching movies nowadays. Things do not feel fresh anymore.
Just like Cassian said "Nobody's listening!!"
To be fair, Summer 2023 had juggernaut successes as well. Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse, Oppenheimer, and Barbie, for example.
I never imagined that a movie could be worst than the live-action Green lantern but DC made it! It's a bit impressive! They should get a razzie award for making the biggest comic book movie flop 😂
Barbenheimer hit because it was a cultural moment like Endgame was. These were things you had to see in theaters and dress up accordingly and go with friends and discuss at work. In the case of Barbie, it is also the hottest music album of the summer and pink is the color of the season, so you can't miss out on the party. It was an actual event. But all other movies, people really don't care about spoilers anymore, and prefer to wait for streaming. I chose to watch Barbie instead of Spiderverse and I loved Barbie. For Spiderverse I can wait for the Netflix release.
I haven’t seen either. And the only one I will see is oppienhimer
@@jonathanking9954 I've seen Oppenheimer and let me tell you it was really great, it's really dense and long, not everyone's cup of tea, but it means a major step up in Nolan's filmography, it's a more mature film.
@@jesustovar2549 yea. It’s not that I don’t want to see it I’m a huge history buff but I just haven’t had the time
Also, longer movies means less showtimes. Less showtimes means less box office tickets available.
Fewer showtimes, and it's not really relevant for cash because the ticketprice reflects the length of the movie.
@SmashBrosInitiative Not really. See, if a film is greenlit by the studio and the exhibitor's booker to have more screens available(the current industry term is "prints"), then you can have more showtimes like in the case of Avengers. However, Avengers was not very contested and there was 10plus years of marketing and films to build that success. Additionally, when you know something is gonna smash, you move heaven and earth to get more showtimes( expand ops hours, delete other film's showtimes that lost protected status, etc).
Now the comment was made within the context of this summer. Each flopping film was unwanted, mostly riding on dead horses, and competing with bloated budgets for the same money. There weren't as many films to delete, franchise fatigue, and a lot of factors better discussed by the video maker. After all that, a long movie increases the problem. There are many customers who will not sit through 20 minutes of trailers and 2 & 1/2 hours unless it is worth it, and it works with their schedule. These films weren't worth it.
Let's expound by using math. A two and a half hour film means I have four showtimes in most ops hours per print. 100 minute gets me 5 or 6. 25-33% in available showtimes multiplied by all screens in America then divided by 2, assuming 1/2 capacity average is a lot of box office.
@@vinny142 Does the theater charge more based on the length of the film where you are?
@@J24-k8f nah bro. When was the last time you missed a movie in theaters cause there werent enough showtimes? Never. You simply went on another day or picked a different time. A 30-40 runtime difference will have no effect on sales unless every single showing was consistently sold out and the person literally could not buy a ticket during the theatrical run.
@@treehavn I missed Indiana Jones 5, The Woman King, and Mission Impossible Fallout due to schedule constraints. The couple days I had available, the showtimes didn't line up with what I had to get done that day. The length of time in a theater isn't the problem. The amount of showtimes and when they are able to be scheduled can leave money on the table. After about 2 hours and 20 minutes, you lose a showtime per day on average operational hours (10:30a to 10:30p). It is a matter of math, my man. Each film has at least 20 minutes of trailers(often more)and most theaters will have at least 30 minutes between each show in a theater for both cleaning and seating needs. That bumps the total time each film takes to over 3 hours, excluding the first film. 12hours/3=4 available times a day.
Sure, you only lose 10 customers per screen, but when you multiple that by the 10,000** screens you lose on a 2&1/2 movie, that adds up quickly.
Also, when moneymaker films release, exhibitors will cut other films that are not under a protected status by contract with studios. They still want to have these other films play, so often they will do a balancing trick to have a theater share the films. A shorter film is much more forgiving to schedule in an alternating show schedule than a longer film. Fits in more places.
** source: National Associatio of Theatre Owners
Total screens in US: 39,007
Assuming average of 3 prints(industry term for the amount of screens) per big release across the country(USA), that leaves us with
13002.33 screens. If you have 4 showtimes per day, that leaves you with 52,009.33 showtimes. 5 and 6 gets you 65,011.66 and 78,014 respectively per day. Now, if you gain 10 customers per screen, which for a lot of locations is less than 10% occupancy, for 5 showtimes that is an increase of 130,023.33 customers at x/ticket and x/popcorn and soda. 6 showtimes has an increase of 260,046.66 customers.
If that isn't money left on the table, then I don't know what is.
What they need to do is get films that have the pull and aren't riddled with all the baggage and problems exposed in the video essay and bring them in at the 100 to 110 minute mark.
i fear that instead of slowing down the pace of franchise movies, sequels, reboots and whatnot, that what studios will take from Barbie and Oppenheimer is that we need sequels and spin-offs of Barbie and Oppenheimer. And listen, i wouldn't mind a Ken spinoff but also, if there was only the one Barbie movie, it would be more than Kenoug...sorry, enough.
Man For All Points You Raised
I Just Want #MissionImpossible7 And #Elemental To Be Considered Profitable In The Long Run By Their Studios.
They Are Actually Good Movies Just Caught In The Crossfire Of Audience Fatigue, Saturated Release Schedule And Improper Marketing
Failed to mention Top Guns modern tone compared to post modern/Meta modern tone.
Can’t believe you didn’t let Mickey Plainview finish that quote
Great video!
All serious points aside, am I the only one that didn’t mind Dial of Destiny? It’s certainly no Raiders or Last Crusade but Indiana Jones has always been light hearted and schlocky. Didn’t think it was the worst but can definitely see why it tanked
Yes, it was very enjoyable.
None of Dial of Destiny felt filmed on location. It all looked green screened CGI.
When every movie is the biggest movie of the year, no movie is the biggest movie the year.
I have a racer friend who calls himself Flash and literally thinks he the Flash and not even he saw the movie
It may be time to start making something other than comic book movies...
This is a masterpiece 🏆
To be fair… if the prologue was a beta for the de-aging tech, I don’t see it as much of a loss.
The revenue from the movie helps with offsetting the cost of it.
Song at 8:56?
Across the spider-verse crushed it in the theaters and that's all I care about.
'Not Good Movies v. Bad Movies, but unsustainable movies destroying each other.' - That does sound about right to me.
We need the industry to scale back. Break up the the production budgets into smaller, more creative, more targeted projects that can take more risks, and just . . . make enjoyable movies again.
Not 'content', god no! Actual movies whose diversity comes organically from being able to take risks on discovering and cultivating new talent from all sorts of different backgrounds.
I'm kind of reminded of the Knives Out films. Love or hate Ryan Johnson, there's an audience for his movies. When he has the option to make a RYAN JOHNSON movie. And on a 40 million dollar budget he can tell his scathing and satirical political commentary to the people who actually want to watch something like that.
As opposed to a tentpole Star Wars film that has to be iconically Star Wars, but also fresh and original to a massive audience. And that is a solid win-win in my book.
Canned myself after that flex, well executed sir.
That was HILARIOUS
300M movies started canabailzing each other like how all those pay to win live service grin fest games did.
How is it that IJ and the Last Cruzade cost only 48 million USD (for today standards) and has better story and ction scenes than the 320 millon USD ID and the Dial of Destiny?
Part of it, I think, is that major studios have used bloated production budgets as a sort of 'moat' for years. Even if the CGI has started to look kind of shoddy, nobody could do CGI on their scope and scale or with as much direct interaction between the effects and the actors. So they used that to sort of push out smaller films and make themselves the must see tent poles.
They literally scream louder than anyone else, because the only thing a big established studio has more of today than anyone else is money to burn.
You also see this with Marketing. Spectacle films are much easier to market, because you just slap big shiny set pieces into the trailer. Where it used to be that a trailer's job was to create intrigue to make people want to see what the film was about. Now it's almost a reflection of the Studios desire for a 'sure thing' that will plant butts in seats.
You're great!
The thing I'm scared of is Mattel being idiots and trying to do the Mattel cinematic universe shit... like how Transformers is trying to segway into G.I. Joe now...
Wait, they're actually doing that?
O_O
There's some things that are magical . . . But only when they stay as fanfiction.
@@Bustermachine Brands and Companies really will see fans doing things and think, "How can we do this, but safe clean and in a way that won't harm brand image?" and then they proceed to make the worst shit ever...
The flash was probably the best super hero movie this year. Im sad that the flash was the movie that had to flop.
Barbenheimer is either save the industry or just sink us into a new bad trend, no inbetween
It will just mean more films that are polar opposites will be released at the same time every other week, the studios still don't get that these two films were successful because they offered something different to the usual franchise rubbish
Good video
Indiana Jones was great. An old fashioned adventure movie in a sea of superhero movies
Yeah it actually was a good movie. But I personally had to be sold on it since I figured 'uh Harrison Ford is 81 and they put him in an action movie?'. Probably a lot of people felt that way and would have loved to see that movie 30 years ago
Very funny that Transformers became a franchise based off of a kid’s toy, and Barbie is aggressively it’s own contained movie despite also being a kid’s toy. Hopefully they don’t make a sequel.
I’ve always wondered how Ezra Miller became such a commodity in Hollywood. I don’t understand what people saw in him and his goofy ass run.
It's one summer. To say that it's some sort of sign that blockbusters are dying is really reaching.
Last year did perfectly fine for franchise movies and next year could as well. It's really hard to take such a small sample and make any kind of declarative statement about it.
Both Indiana Jones and especially The Flash have gotten overall negative reviews because of problems with those films and not the genre of blockbusters overall. Look at GOTG 3 which did really well at the box office and among critics and fans alike.
I think a lot of people agree that a shakeup is needed. That's not the same thing as thinking cinema is 'doomed'. Just that it needs to change.
@@Bustermachine My point is that we don't have a big enough sample size to prove that it's an overall issue or just two or three bad movie that bombed.
It's a pity, because it's better than most of Marvel's Phase 4.
The only problem with your premise is that Fallout was the best Mission film and still Dead Reckoning is doing worse than Sound of Freedom. Although not a franchise, you could argue the exact opposite for Chris Nolan, with how much Tenet sucked not really impacting how well Oppenheimer is doing.
It has less to do with quality and more just the absurd manipulation of hype. When movies make money, it turns out they were brilliant and they deserved it. When they flop, weeeell they sucked anyway. With monday's newspaper every commentator seems like a genius.
You guys are being too harsh on Mission Impossible. Yeah, it may not be as great as Fallout or other post MI3 movies of your choice, but it definitely was one of the best action movies of this year, more than Barbie or Oppenheimer. Don't get me wrong, those are great movies too, but MI is the best of its genre this year
I'm waiting for Oppenheimer sequel. JFK😊
Flash would've made 600 mil easy if it had released in 2018 0r 19. But at this point in 2023 audiences have had it with dceu.
You claim Iron Man (2008) cost $140M, which is $80M or 36% less than Flash (2023). But adjusted for 15 years of inflation, Iron Man was only $25M or 11% cheaper...
Indiana didn’t deserve to bomb imo but that ruinous budget can’t be justified. Deaged Indy didn’t look good enough to justify the expense imo.
That entire opening could have been condensed to under 10 minutes. I liked dial of destiny but an Indiana Jones movie should never cost more than $200 million to make. Heck, even $150 should been its capped limit.
Mission Impossible Dead Reckoning is currently at $523 Million worldwide box office on a budget of $291 Million. That is still not enough to make it a success, as it likely needs $750 to $800 Million for a success. Fast X is growing at $719 Mil currently but needs $880 to $850 Mil to make a profit as it was costly at $340 Mil budget, plus marketing etc. so it is under-performing. The studios spend too much making these films.
I appreciate you not thrashing on transformers, It's still getting back on its feet after the damages Bay did to the franchise
studios are just big buildings filled with people with even bigger wallets, and people with big wallets never listen to anyone, other than themselves, they''re likely scratching their heads right now trying to figure out why the movies that succeeded did so, not putting two and two together
How is Top Gun Maverick "a masterpiece"?
I wouldn't say a masterpiece. But it came out a time when people were really Jonesing for something like it.
@@Bustermachine 100% agree
...but we all know there will be a disappointing sequel to Barbie one day!
Flash is really bad. These badly written movies shouldn't being successful no matter the marketing.
I like what the Barbenheimer double feature was able to achieve but I believe studios will take the absolute worst lessons from it.
Cargo culting is a very, very big problem across the business and politics worlds currently. I would provide examples, but it would just kick off an argument... All I'll say is, keep an eye out for it and suddenly you'll begin to see it *everywhere*. Including *your own side* in the political world. Whatever side that may be.
@@Drekal684 we're talking about movies. You didn't need to bring up some cryptic message about politics.
I enjoyed the flash movie… it was better than anything marvel has put out as of late
Guardians 3 was fantastic though
@@ryanbollinger1759 true… I forgot about that one…
Lol modest budget ahahhaha
Barbie HYPE
It's strange that studios are still relying on traditional advertising to generate interest. You could accomplish more with less than ten people making and spreading memes than the entire stupid bloated marketing budget these studios slavishly spend millions on. They've been beholden to outdated models of audience engagement for so long that it's cutting into their profits
I'm not entirely sure that's true. Meme's are very VERY prone to survivorship bias and selection that mutates them uncontrollably. It's a lot like trying to catch lightning in a bottle relying on meme based advertising.
@@Bustermachine They're also corporate based. All of social media is corporate owned. If it wants to promote your idea it will if not it will bury you pure and simple. People often forget that its not them making content its the corporation that allows such content to spread and if it doesn't like you it can shut it down at a moments notice no questions asked. You can't even complain since its not your product to use.
It was still a decent movie.
Didn’t realize we’re tocayos
Its simple, they have a diversity driven staff, they somehow think they are artists, the best artist. They are given huge projects and budgets, because they deserve it. But theu hate the source material because its not on par with what they like, they don't read at all, so they think think thue can improve on everything. The test screens go super bad and more money needs to spend on reshoots