$220 Million

>$220 Million
HOLY SHIT. I didn't realize the box office for this was that low. Despite all the articles months ahead to try and get people to see it out of controversial reasons, it still massively bombed whilst a film like Suicide Squad which all critics hated did very well in its first couple weeks.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=w3ugHP-yZXw
youtube.com/watch?v=8IDXpOX0Cp0
youtube.com/watch?v=OG83qBuQ_A8
the-numbers.com/weekly-video-sales-chart
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>marketing $100 million
>studio only gets $110 million of gross
Wew

>mfw their Ghostbusters cinematic universe has been cancelled

no sequel?

Poor Harambe

the greatest sin in hollywood is losing money

Still made its budget back, so it doesn't even enter the list of great flops. Sorry goobergabers

>earns more than II
>considered a flop

Legitimately one of the worst films I have ever seen. It took a film that only nerdy 20+ males like and made it for women.
What a fucking disaster right from the get go.

SJWs BTFO

What is inflation?

>DIRECTOR: "It'll have to make $500m to be considered a success"
>mfw it doesn't make half of that

Oh, and those are 1989 dollars...

Good job. You cucked yourself.

The movie could have been better if they actually tried to make the ghosts scary looking. But instead Feig was too busy trying to make it a funny comedy instead of it having dark moments like Ghostbusters 1 and 2 had (the train scene with the skeleton skulls in Ghostbusters 2 was great).

Pic related is how you do a ghost. No scooby doo CGI, just good old practical make up

> MARKETING $350 MILLION
> CHARITY DONATIONS TO EQUALITY CONCERNS $575 MILLION
> PATRIARCHY TAX / LOGO 3D STYLING $999 MILLION

How can a flick flop so hard?

.....

Please never make movies

> "Muh spooky imp man!!! Oh boy am i scared!"

>Oh, and those are 1989 dollars...

And don't forget:

Ghostbusters II Widest Release: 2,410 theaters
Ghostbusters 2016 Widest Release: 3,963 theaters

On top of that, higher prices for 3D and IMAX.

Just in case this isn't bait:

Budget for Ghostbusters 2: $25m
Gross: $112.5m
Budget for Ghostbusters 2016: $154m
Gross: $220m

It didn't earn nearly as much PROFIT as GB2. In fact, it didn't earn ANY profit because it didn't make more than it cost (once you factor the $150m marketing costs into the equation - it LOST $80m).

If that demon in the webm didnt scare you and you prefer CGI ghosts then seriously wow.

That practical ghost demon is what real nightmares are made of

Studios also make less on ticket sales than they used to. Before, they used to give theaters practically nothing. This stopped when theaters started having to close because they weren't making a profit, making studios lose money in the process.

A white man with sharp teeth, grow up. Watch kairo for ghosts done right.

It was meant to be a comedy. Scary ghosts doesn't make it that much of a better movie unless it's a horror.

They should've made it funny.

Suicide Squad had a much bigger production budget and ad budget, so it still lost about 100 million despite being in one of the top 100 grossing movies of all time. Ghostbusters (2016) lost about 280 million. Basically Suicide Squad needed to have its shit together better so it didn't get panned in reviews so it would have been seen by a broader audience. Ghostbusters needed to not alienate its fanbase before the movie ever even released, but Sony's marketing department are depraved shitheads so, of course they did. The movie also sucked, and in a mediocre unfun way that can't even be so-bad-its-good, its just "meh" that underutilized the source material and rarely breached a 4 out of 10 on the mirth-o-meter.

If they made a 80 million movie with a less deranged director and a less retarded PR campaign it would have been financially successful.

I dunno, it was pretty creepy looking.

>Scary ghosts doesn't make it that much of a better movie unless it's a horror.
How much of a pleb do you have to be?

Why wouldn't they include the marketing cost into overall budget?

>Basically Suicide Squad needed to have its shit together better so it didn't get panned in reviews so it would have been seen by a broader audience.
Blame the bad editing for that. SS to me had the perfecting casting choice, a good plot but the editing is what made it fail.

Exactly. Also it's one thing when someone possibly trying to bait makes posts like but it's even sadder when you see some place like the Mary Sue try too hard to defend the reboot's box office failure by saying something similar (while conveniently omitting all the mentioned facts)

THIS

I have no idea why this cost so much to make.

It can't be the gadgets because GB2 had lots of gadgets and props made and that was only 25 million

Compare the Official Trailer:
youtube.com/watch?v=w3ugHP-yZXw
With a fan made recut:
youtube.com/watch?v=8IDXpOX0Cp0

They spent $150 million on marketing and a FAN made a better trailer, using material from the official trailer. I hope Feig never works in movies again.

CGI is a money pit with diminishing returns. You can spend 300 million on it if you want to on a film.

Evil Dead 2 is a horror movie with comedic elements. It goes in the horror section, not the comedy section. None of the Ghostbusters films goes in the horror section.

The food for McCarthy was 100 million alone.

>Still made its budget back
No. It doesn't get all of the box office. If we're being generous it got half, which means it took a loss of $35m

There's literally no way that CGI is actually worth that amount though. I refuse to believe. It has to be related to the fact that studios are just willing to pay the astronomical sum CGI entails, rather than negotiating or turning people down to get a better deal.

That and studio execs are just plain fucking retarded, who are so out of touch in the field they're working that they just write cheques that are ridiculously large without giving it any thought. The Thing (2011) is a perfect example. They spend God-knows how much on practical effects, then they scrap all the footage and redo everything in CGI.

original Ghostbusters was dry and sarcastic
the new one has this trait that a lot of new comedies seem to have of unfunny semi improve dialogue

They wanted the cuck crowd.

No, the plot was at least half-shit as well. A good story needs good villains and since one of the villains in this movie could be killed by a bomb there is no reason he couldn't have been killed by a surgical strike from a drone or aircraft. This movie was best at tone, but was poorly edited, could have had better action scenes than the ones we were given (fighting CGI power ranger villains in a dark street kinda sucked) and they killed off El Diablo, who was probably the most humanized and best character. Then there's the whole lack-of-Joker-scenes thing.

Suicide Squad is frustrating because there was the potential for an incredible, possibly game-changing movie in there but that is not what we got.

Because it is a sequel to a pure horror film.

>There's literally no way that CGI is actually worth that amount though.
IT'S FUCKING NOT!

I did a film course and people in my college made a CGI castle using green screen and believe me that castle looked pretty fucking good, designed by students... and it all cost NOTHING apart from them using a 1 grand or so CGI software.

Because every actor thinks they can be RDJ now.

>Oh man, if this guy can make up lines in Iron Man all the time I can do improv whenever I want!
>Why do people hate me in this film?!

I forgot to say that they also had a CGI medieval town and some students were walking around in it and it looked really fucking impressive.

CGI costs hardly anything. What does cost though is how long you spend designing something so no doubt in Hollywood, some CGI artists/designers will demand a large sum of money to sit on the computer all day designing things.

>Students doing work for a project
>IT COST NOTHING!
>People who literally do the same thing as a job should also work for free so CGI for films should be free!
I think you're retarded

The extended cut would have made the movie a 10/10

Does RDJ do allot of improv?

Who said anything about free? The point is it's not worth anywhere near the current cost.

All this was cut from the WB edit of the film as well

It really isn't, its a comedy. To say that its a horror because of the first is redundant, the third is total comedy.

>Who said anything about free?
>designed by students... and it all cost NOTHING
You said it.

Can you not see the difference between students working for a school project and people who have to be paid to do the work?

Evil Dead 2 is a comedy man. It is not horror. First one is horror but 2nd is in no way a horror.

>that one image where she looks like gillian jacobs

Except that wasn't my post, and the point he was trying to make by saying it cost nothing is that it's not worth the current cost.

>the third is total comedy.
Yeah, Sam Raimi wanted the 3rd film to be PG 13 (which is why it is the least violent and gory) yet the classification board made it R.

Hell Raimi even reshot the Evil Dead 2 scene of Ash chopping off his hand with no blood shown.

She looked so hot in these glasses

...

youtube.com/watch?v=OG83qBuQ_A8

Now i am become fridge, the destroyer of warm

>Scary ghosts doesn't make it that much of a better movie
Yes, they absolutely do. Pic related was simultaneously terrifying and hilarious, which allows the movie to be enjoyed on multiple levels. It also reinforces the tone the film was going for, which was playing things completely straight and letting the humor be organic based on the situations the characters found themselves in.

Compare this to "Answer The Call", in which they're constantly trying to force unfunny jokes down your throat and the entire movie has the tone of a really bad SNL skit.

There was too much dancing. The dance scene in the end credits was originally meant to be in the movie itself. Thats three dance scenes

Because the budget for the movie, is the money needed to make the movie. Not to advertise it.

ok but in turn the profits for the movie don't include the profits from licensing toys, soundtracks, confections etc.

But in turn the budget for the movie doesn't include the budget for music, toys, and everything else.

The higher managements actually took more than half of what any CGI studio makes.

To put things into perspective, every 60 seconds CGI filled extravaganza by a hi-tier studio would cost around 1 million. And half of that doesn't go to the creative crew nor the cutting edge hardware.

tbqh I would've given it a chance if the cast and director (plus a shitload of websites apparently on sony's payroll) hadn't gone out of their way to call the original fanbase assholes and accuse critics of being misogynists

Wow, that looks awfully bad, glad i never watched this debacle.

after blu ray sales itll break even
but sony need to leave it for 5 tears and bring it back with funny males

The "progressive" left are completely self-defeating nowadays. They are so lacking in self-awareness that the things they support become associated with obnoxious, sanctimonious and condescending preaching, and those causes inevitably lose popularity as a result.

For evidence of this, look at how they are making Trump a popular presidential candidate just by opposing him. He would never have stood a chance, but then he was opposed by a shamelessly deceitful media and a violent cohort of protestors that (very publicly) dumped water on a guy in a wheelchair, stopped traffic on a highway, egged a defenceless woman and gleefully dismisses every one of their opponents as "bigots" without offering a shred of reasoning or evidence.

If Trump wins it will be because of his enemies, not his supporters.

I bet the Bollywood remake would actually be better with the dancing and cost way less to produce too.

Good, now maybe that self-loathing little bitch Paul Fieg will stop getting directing opportunities.

He will, but the powers that be will select a new hollywood darling to convince us all that white men are the real scum.

Just as long as that darling Leslie Jones has a future. There's nothing funnier than a stereotypical black person routine from 1994.

>they thought this would be a big hit
>they thought they could use all of the muhsoggyknees to make it even more popular
>they thought this could have been a cinematic universe
>they even sequel bait with that Zuul shit.

>after blu ray sales itll break even
The movie needs to make another 135 mil to break even. Look here to see what movies are making on home video sales.

the-numbers.com/weekly-video-sales-chart

It would have needed to be a Star Wars or Jurassic World level hit to bring in that kind of cash. Also keep in mind that the sale figures don't reflect what the studio gets. If the studio sells Walmart copies of the film for $6 per unit and Walmart sells them for $20, the studio only sees that original $6 per unit.

>stop getting directing opportunities
I was thinking "off himself", but I'd settle for the latter.

CGI costs don't come from the software needed to create it, they come from the salaries of all the people who have to work on it which takes countless hours of modelling and animation.

>it could've been directed by someone good, without a political agenda, and made hundreds of millions of dollars profit while not humiliating the sony brand
This must be the thing that stings the most - the opportunity cost of giving it to a feminist propagandist instead of a film-maker.

>1989 dollars

you can basically just double those numbers

She reminds me of Michelle Pfeiffer's Catwoman, ALOT.

>dance scene in a shameless reboot of a comedy

So they went with the Evan Almighty approach

Yeah because cinemas just run it for free you fucking retard, head on down to your local volunteer run cinema and lend a hand.

>$220 Million
>HOLY SHIT. I didn't realize the box office for this was that low.
Yes you do. You post this every day.

Suicide squad had the same production budget and the same marketing budget, it made more money and has much bigger merchandise potential which is where most of a films money is earned, it's positively regarded by normies and still plays to busy theatres. Just because you got blown the fuck out is no reason to inflict your butthurt on everyone else

>declares war on old audience
>caters to a small portion of people
>declares war on men

I'm glad it bit them in the ass.

This trainwreck is the gift that keeps on giving.