>7TH UPDATE, MONDAY: The takeaway from this weekend is that when a studio tries to reboot a beloved 32-year-old comedy franchise at a $144M production cost, the results shouldn’t be polarizing
>The final opening figure for Paul Feig’s female spin on Ghostbusters is $46 million, exactly where Sony saw it yesterday.
>But as excited as Sony remains about that debut, particularly after weathering online attacks by haters, a majority of executives in town think it’s a lackluster result. >a majority of executives in town think it’s a lackluster result. >a majority of executives in town think it’s a lackluster result. >a majority of executives in town think it’s a lackluster result. >a majority of executives in town think it’s a lackluster result.
This is less of an accomplishment when you realize that the 1984 film was only on 1,339 theaters and the 2016 film was on 3,963 theaters.
Jack Martinez
plus inflation
Ethan Martin
Because they played by the dogmatic social/political rules they set themselves. And they didn't win.
They made a bad movie, but we're certain it would sail high above the "haters," for it would be exactly what they said everyone wanted.
The quandary is reality crashing up through their glass floor.
Charles Kelly
Plus the original cost nowhere near 180 million to make. Probably 25 million if I had to guess.
Hudson Garcia
I think its more like the result isn't a huge success, but its not a fall on its face bomb
hence a quandary of how they make a sequel
David Robinson
Well I'm sure their other films will- >Emoji >Sausage Party Well fuck. How big was their Spider Man paycheck? Because they can't use that as a crutch anymore
Cooper Brown
Remember, this will never be shown in China. They can't count on much overseas money and it's a shit movie so it's not suddenly going to spike up in ticket sales on the second, third, fourth weekends, etc.
I predict it settles with about a 300 million take, which considering the production cost and the marketing cost, is basically making their money back.
Only making your money back on a major Hollywood, summer feature is pretty much a bomb.
Owen Morales
It's more this, they had hoped a successful franchise would have come firing out the gates but that simply wasn't the case. Sony is in a tight spot these days so confirming a sequel to a movie not exceeding expectations is risky and kind of dumb.
Andrew Carter
I would have gone to see it out of simple curiosity, but they've been so abusive to the fan base whenever they are in front of a news camera, so they can just go fuck themselves.
Sebastian James
Who the fuck is planning these movies over at Sony? A run of shitty movies like this is inexcusable
Easton Butler
...
Eli Rogers
But when has Sony ever been known for the quality of their movies? They're more about the technology that the movies are published on.
Logan Johnson
pic related
Henry Morgan
Yeah when?
The truth is that good movies don't sell. You can shit on sony as much as you want, but the fact is that hollywood as a whole is shit and the only they do is remakes and capeshit because it sells
Chase Morgan
So, will this FINALLY convince execs that the SJW market isn't a think and by rebooting geeky properties with female leads, etc isn't a good idea?
Jason King
Let's break it down:
Ghostbusters (1984)
$70 million budget (adjusted for inflation) $30 million (adjusted) opening weekend in 1,339 theaters, i.e. 42% of its budget $684 million (adjusted) world wide gross
Ghostbusters (2016)
$180 million budget $46 million opening weekend in 3,963 theaters, i.e. 25% of its budget
Sony had to spend more than twice as much money and open in significantly more theaters for a much smaller return percentage in the opening weekend. Those are really bad numbers. I'm sure that Sony will just claim that people obviously don't care about Ghostbusters anymore, but they know the truth. They had a really, really weak concept for a Ghostbusters revival, and they managed to piss off everyone who they needed to come see the movie.
Word of mouth for the movie has been dreadful and its second week dropoff will kill any hopes Sony may have once had for not losing a lot of money on this disaster.
If anything Feig will probably never get this much control over a movie again.
Evan Carter
Losing 100 million dollars is about as bad as it gets.
Robert Cruz
Majority executives .... males.... Pay gap
Parker Morris
>caring this much about a shitty movie I will never understand Sup Forumseddit's hard-on for the new Ghostbusters
Austin Collins
It needs 500 million to even make its money back (that includes the marketing costs). Paul Fieg said so.
Aaron Hughes
I don't get why they went with a reboot instead of a sequel. They had to have known that would piss people off.
Brody Richardson
Will this kead to him getting tv gigs instead of films?
Nathaniel Roberts
Also, the 84 movie made $22,400/theater while 2016 made $11,607/theater.
Xavier Russell
>They had to have known that would piss people off. They did. But they were stupidly under the impression that "hardcore fans will see it regardless" and the feminist push would entice a lot of women and young people to go see it too.
It completely backfired and their core audience was alienated
Michael Sanchez
>The final opening figure for Paul Feig’s female spin on Ghostbusters is $46 million
Please don't be that fag where they go, "LOL SHIT MOVIE! But I'm gonna see it anyways just to see how bad it is!" Let it fail.
Daniel Turner
Pretty much twice as much money per screen as Ghostbusters '16. The new movie failed to achieve anything impressive despite having a massive budget and opening in a lot more theaters.
Say what you will about the Ninja Turtles reboot but it at least managed to catch a massively larger audience than the original film (the sequel, perhaps not as much). And when merchandising is considered, Ghostbusters '16 is making a lot of retailers angry because this is supposed to be a safe brand, and yet they can't give away merchandise of these characters because no-one likes them.
Julian Murphy
you know when I first saw threads about this being in development on Sup Forums I thought it was a troll.
now, after its release i know it is
John Allen
that seems ridiculously high are you telling me they spent three times the money it took to the make the damn movie on marketing it? I call shenanigans
Aiden Howard
One was written by National Lampoon comedic geniuses & the other by the gay who did Bridesmaids.
WHAT WERE THEY THINKING?
Jace Gutierrez
Marketing, distribution, cinema take, etc
William Adams
some american can answer these questions please ?since when sony pictures exists? i only know them for the spiderman franchise but what other franchises they created or had in their lifetime ?
Kevin Campbell
Probably, tv shows have more of a revolving door system of writers and he'd be part of a team. If he can write one funny bit per episode he's worth hiring.
Isaiah Evans
I'll never understand this mentality of "the core fans will see it regardless". If you call the core audience crying piss babies, they're not going to give you money.
Henry Bennett
Fieg himself said it. Maybe it's bad management or Sony really thought the SJW market was profitable enough. With this and Yahoo writing down Tumblr, there really mustn't be.
Kevin Sanders
They thought they had a feel for the "modern audience" and had a guaranteed franchise.
Isaiah King
Dobson please go
Henry Johnson
>that seems ridiculously high It is not the amount to break even, it is the amount the studio would be happy with. Normally that number is a closely guarded secret, but this time Fieg blurted it out in an interview.
Daniel Morgan
>Yahoo writing down Tumblr To be fair, Yahoo are basically Sony tier. They're fucking idiots when it comes to spending money
Hudson Reed
For what I can get of this it leaves the studio in a thought position. It's not a huge succes but is not a complete loss either. They'll maybe... MAYBE, break even. But breaking even is not really big news for a summer blockbuster that was supposed to spawn the next big franchise. Wich also brings the question, will sony play the role of the social advocate and create a sequel for the audience interested in the message of the movie, even if that means working for marginal profits or worse, losses? Have in mind that not making the sequel will be interpreted as a victory for the detractors of the film and a massive defeat for sony and feig. They put themselves in a thought spot, they need the movie to be a massive succes wich at this point is clearly not going to happen, their mistake was playing the social justice card with a superproduction and a beloved IP.
Jordan Ramirez
>Read the book >Watched the movie underrated movie
Lucas Rivera
This. People are fine with mediocrity and only care to be entertained. The majority of movie consumers care very little about being intellectually stimulated and that's why these big movie companies will get away with this shit most of the time.
Jacob Price
Sony royally fucked up by making it a reboot.
All they had to do was have Aykroyd pass the torch in the first 20 minutes and people would have gone nuts for it
The second they told people it was a hard reboot the hardcore fans turned against it
Noah Morales
Honestly the most reasonable explanation is that some Sony executive is defrauding the company. Like the plot of The Producers except with somebody far more talented in making unwatchable garbage.
Jaxson Barnes
No way.
They'll make the animated spin off they planned to as the new tentpole of the franchise and forget about this entirely to avoid sturing the pot
Adam Smith
And let's not forget that this movie won't have the Chinese market to fall back on. I think that more than anything else will kill the hopes Sony had for a franchise.
David Stewart
I would have gone if it was a handoff sequel movie, no doubt. Literally all they had to do was make this a new team taught by the old guys and it would have made bank.
Henry Turner
They won't break even because it's such a poorly made movie. Word of mouth will put the kebash on future earnings.
Jose Jenkins
>hires a guy who doesn't know what to do with the material >needed 500 million to make a profit >only made 46M on opening >beaten by a Toy Story rip-off with animals >no China release >Star Trek and Ice Age sequels next week >Jason Bourne and Suicide Squad after that the very definition of dead on arrival
Levi Jenkins
Bond
Cooper Martin
That feel when they'll spit out a sequel purely to prove the naysayers wrong, copping huge losses in the process. Screen cap this.
Sebastian Wood
Same here. Even with the mediocre reviews their opening weekend would have been padded out by people who just wanted to see Murray/Aykroyd/Hudson for 15 minutes
Isaac Foster
Didn't the leaked Sony emails pretty much say Sony wanted to can this, but development was too far ahead to do so? They fired Amy Pascal over this too, no?
Ryan Walker
This can actually be a clever cop out. An animated film allows them to forsake this movie whitout making it look like a big defeat. ''Since the live action film was so succesfull we decided to make an animated series guys''. They can make a new set of characteres and they can even link it to the originals this time.
Wyatt Bailey
Isn't that what they did with Godzilla?
Gabriel Carter
>has to compete with Ice Age and Star Trek in weekend 2 >has to compete with a Matt Damon movie in weekend 3
You can tell Sony bet everything on last weekend. It only had one other competitor, which was a mid budget Bryan Cranston movie. They didn't expect fucking Secret Life of Pets to beat it, and they really needed the revenue the dog movie got instead.
Second and third weekends are already set. Ghostbusters doesn't stand a chance.
Brayden Barnes
I believe that was the original plan. Anyway, because of muh empowerment and progress they'll make a sequel, at an equivalent or slightly lower budget. It'll make even less than the first. But at least they look good in the process. Suck shit, Sony.
Jordan Anderson
>that tweet
This is some weird-ass logic right here.
Isaiah Rodriguez
I really don't think it would have been that popular, you're overestimating the original fanbase.
What would have got butts in seats would have been a boilerplate copy with a cast of 3 new men and maybe one woman, who happened to either be related to the original cast or just along for the ride, with a couple of cameos. That movie would have sold to original fans and on brand recognition alone, because it knew what it was trying to be.
Instead it was turned into a vehicle for Feig to try and finally get laid by showing how much he cares about women, and blew up in his face.
Henry Edwards
At least this will probably kill off any more hard reboots in favor of soft ones like TFA and Jurassic World which may not be able to please all the fans of the originals or even objectively live up to them, but it's better than a hard reboot if studios are so inclined to make them.
Dominic Nelson
It's fun to watch propaganda fail.
Angel Mitchell
Not if Sony Japan stops them though.
Thomas Collins
Yeah, sometimes when something is right on the fence like this they green light a sequel but make drastic changes to the writing, cast, or budget.
Jaxson Gonzalez
>animated ghostbusters movie >male ghostbusters (maybe one or two girls) >much more successful >twitter fills it's diaper with cries of soggy knees
Anthony Hernandez
I'd rather have a hard reboot. Sure, this one was a complete trainwreck, but that's because the people involved were complete morons.
TFA and Jurassic World were completely forgotten by everyone 2 seconds after leaving the cinema. I'd rather have a movie take a few risks instead of just being a full on rehash.
Jaxon Hughes
Also 1984 Ghostbusters had tougher competition as it was up against Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.
Robert Adams
so how would you do a ghost busters movie if you were forced to do it?
>set in the original universe >original team are stuck in the containment dimension like the comic >story starts of with a team of paranormal hunters >ghostbusters station is the mecca for paranormal hunters world wide >this paranormal hunter team is there to investigate the sudden and mysterious disappearance of the ghostbusters who have been gone for 27 years >they mess around in the basement and accidentally damages the containment unit and all the ghosts escape >bill murray, dan aykroyd and ernie hudson appear out of nowhere >they realize that they are too old to recapture all the ghosts >set out to mentor the paranormal team that released them to become the new ghostbusters >they tell how Rowan tricked them and got themselves accidentally trapped in the containment unit
Oliver Clark
And Star Trek premiering this friday, which many will see out of respect for Anton Yelchin.
And Ice Age Collision Course, which parents will consider a more kid-friendly movie than Ghostbusters.
And that new horror movie that's getting good reviews, so there goes the teen market.
And then there's week 3 to look forward to. Pic related.
Elijah Torres
This kind of shit get's executives fired, but sony is run like shit (as the emails proved), they will just dig themselves deeper in the hole.
Nolan White
They won't break even. Maybe on total revenue when you count DVD sales they'll match the movie budget in gross, but they'll never get back the marketing one, and they'll be about 100 million away from profit.
This movie has zero audience outside of America, all of the female comedians are complete nobodies. Global support for Ghostbusters was never massive in the first place, at best you'll get limited showings with radfem audiences going just because their favorite blog told them to.
Xavier Brooks
>Ghostbusters '16 is making a lot of retailers angry because this is supposed to be a safe brand, and yet they can't give away merchandise of these characters because no-one likes them.
It really is a terrible toy line, already it's going to be niche because it's a female action figure set, plenty of boys won't give a shit and more girls won't even visit the isle to begin with. On top of that who in god's name would want a bloating Melissa McCarthy figure? Not even a single hotglue candidate among them either, fails on all fronts.
>sometimes when something is right on the fence like this they green light a sequel but make drastic changes to the writing, cast, or budget.
Wich is the thoguht decision because this movie is a special case. If they change the cast (i.e. cast 1 or 2 male ghostbusters) or change the director, it'll immediately be interpreted as a defeat to the original message of the movie.
Sony will basically have to choose between ''we stick to out guns and play the role of the social advocate'' or ''we want this shit to make the piles of money''
Brandon Collins
I was never into hotglue stuff, but I would cum all over that figurine.
Nicholas Wright
Doing reboots in general they have to play a fine line between appealing to nostalgia and doing new things. I felt like TFA was a little too much of a rehash, while Jurassic World sufficiently did new things. I liked them both though.
Hard reboots rarely do anything new or improve on the originals at all. It's much better to make a continuation of the story that might not be as good as the original, but it at least exists in the world that you loved from the original. Though ultimately I would prefer them to leave old movies alone.
Nathaniel Martin
It's common. The angry birds movie had a marketing budget that was six times the production budget
Hunter Adams
>temple of doom not being overrated
Robert Parker
not clicking on a guardian link but does that image imply fieg was using user accounts to stir up controversy?
Ryan Torres
>As opening day approaches, Feig can’t help but think about the stakes of making a $150 million movie. “A movie like this has to at least get to like $500 million worldwide, and that’s probably low,” he says. “But the thing I care about most is the industry looking for an excuse to say, ‘See, a tentpole can’t be carried by female leads’” — three of whom are over 40. “I cashed in all my chips,” he says. “I had to use every chip to make this happen. And if this doesn’t work, I will probably have to go back to movie jail.”
What the fuck are you on about? The very fact that it was overrated only proves that Ghostbusters had some tough competition that week.
Carter Watson
Is that screencap faked?
Parker Mitchell
>we got some good press already use the racist ones feig wrote yesterday >racist ones feig wrote
You've gotta be fucking kidding me here.
Luis Stewart
World was completely paint by numbers, but TFA was really something else, not only rehashing an earlier movie almost exactly, but parading out all the old corpses of previous cast members to get the retards on board.
Robocop could have been good if it wasn't PG-13, there were some interesting concepts bubbling under the surface that got shut down to turn it into a lazy action movie. The new Star Trek movies are fine.
I think hard reboots should be about minor nods to the old stuff while subverting expectations. If something happened in the original, maybe it can go a different way this time, and make the movie more interesting. Most soft reboots I've seen seem content to re-do the exact same story, but change a few of the locations and character names.
Daniel Diaz
Do you seriously think that (((they))) didn't pick this monkey (and make it act like the most stereotypical sheboon nigress) to guarantee racists/misogynists would call it a nigger?
This backlash and drama was intentional from the start.
Isaac Allen
>that text you can't make this shit up
Ryan Long
That excuses said fuckwits who jump instantly to screaming NIGGER BITCH at the top of their lungs how exactly?
James Brown
If it's real and not a shoop, doesn't that imply a lot of the posts and comments in the last year attacking Ghostbusters for having female Ghostbusters may actually be coming from him?
Aaron Long
>All they had to do was have Aykroyd pass the torch in the first 20 minutes and people would have gone nuts for it
Uh no... that would have helped, but they'd still have a shitty with the wrong tone and no good humor in it.
The movie would still bomb hard even if the first 15 or 20 minutes was changed to make it a "sequel".