Jump to content

Joker 2 to open with 35M+ in the US & 70M+ OS: a catastrophic flop


Lil' Oz

Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, Stunnah said:

Forbes said it needs 500 million to break even. And that's with a conservative 2.5 multiplier. Depends on the the ratio of overseas and domestic gross. 

 

domestic ratio:

 

50% movie theather, 50% studio 

 

overseas ratio: 

 

60 or 70% movie theater (China keeps a higher ratio I think) the rest for the studio 

 

 

That's why it's CRUCIAL for american productions to perform good in the US.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Assassin

    42

  • bjorn

    34

  • Doctor Dick

    29

  • V$.

    22

17 minutes ago, John Slayne said:

the budget is 200 million, that's what the studio paid for it. let's say promotion cost 100 million. for it lose 300 million, they would have to sell 0 tickets. use your brain sister

You clearly don't know how the box office works. 🤦
Theaters take around HALF of the tickets sales revenue domestically and 60-75% worldwide.
Did you think all the money go to the studio?

So if a movie grosses $300M worldwide, the studio gets around $120-150M of that.

Edited by Assassin
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Doctor Dick said:

Probably not but you said it would be the biggest bomb of all time when there's Megalopolis and other films. 

Megalopolis is the bar now? What next? A movie from Bangladesh? 
 

:ryan3:

Edited by Hey Babes
  • Haha 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Assassin said:

You clearly don't know how the box office works. 🤦
Theaters take around HALF of the tickets sales revenue domestically and 60-75% worldwide.
Did you think all the money go to the studio?

So if a movie grosses $300M worldwide, the studio gets around $120-150M of that.

you clearly don't know how math works. and movie that costs 300 million to make and promote literally cannot lose more money than that. 

 

i know very well that not all money goes to the studio, but the studio just simply cannot lose more than it put into the movie. so yes if JFAD grosses 250M the studio will still get around 100M, which would put their losses at 200M and not 300M. 

 

take your patronising tone elswhere, you are dismissed 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few I work with walked out, they said it was terrible 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stunnah said:

This movie will, most likely, go down as the biggest box-office bomb in history. So, while it may not last forever, I'd say there's a good 10-20 years in it until it is surpassed. :flower:

:deadbanana:

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haven't heard anyone walking out of a theater in droves like this since lightyear :deadbanana2:

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, John Slayne said:

you clearly don't know how math works. and movie that costs 300 million to make and promote literally cannot lose more money than that. 

 

i know very well that not all money goes to the studio, but the studio just simply cannot lose more than it put into the movie. so yes if JFAD grosses 250M the studio will still get around 100M, which would put their losses at 200M and not 300M. 

 

take your patronising tone elswhere, you are dismissed 

 

 

Open the schools!

 

Class is now in session. The headline budget, 200 million, excludes lots of things. 

 

Let's take 'The Flash', for example. Another Warner superhero movie, which, funnily enough, had the same production budget. 

 

EXPENSES  
Production Costs 200.0
Prints and Ads 120.0
Residuals and Other Distribution Expenses 25.0
Interest and Overhead 60.0
Participations --
   
TOTAL EXPENSES 405.0

 

Now, let's say FAD grosses 80 million domestically and 120 million overseas. Warner will get half the domestic (40 million) and 40% of the overseas (48 million). That's 88 million in total.

 

We are using the costs of the Flash as an example, since we only know the headline production budget for FAD. 

 

If we subtract 88 million from 405 million, we get 317 million.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Stunnah
  • Thanks 3
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i can't believe i misspelled theater again :chick3:, never beating the illiterate allegations i fear 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Wikipedia page got changed from "The film received negative reviews from critics" to "The film was not well received by critics." :rip:

 

That's gotta be an LM here.

Edited by Capris Groove
  • Haha 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Stunnah said:

Open the schools!

 

Class is now in session. The headline budget, 200 million, excludes lots of things. 

 

Let's take 'The Flash', for example. Another Warner superhero movie, which, funnily enough, had the same production budget. 

 

EXPENSES  
Production Costs 200.0
Prints and Ads 120.0
Residuals and Other Distribution Expenses 25.0
Interest and Overhead 60.0
Participations --
   
TOTAL EXPENSES 405.0

 

Now, let's say FAD grosses 80 million domestically and 120 million overseas. Warner will get half the domestic (40 million) and 40% of the overseas (48 million). That's 88 million in total.

 

We are using the costs of the Flash as an example, since we only know the headline production budget for FAD. 

 

If we subtract 88 million from 405 million, we get 317 million.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

did you pull those numbers out of your ass? The Flash lost 155M on 270M gross. source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_biggest_box-office_bombs

 

assuming JFAD has exactly the same budget as The Flash, how is it going to lose 317M on 200M gross? give it up deelishis

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Stunnah said:

Open the schools!

 

Class is now in session. The headline budget, 200 million, excludes lots of things. 

 

Let's take 'The Flash', for example. Another Warner superhero movie, which, funnily enough, had the same production budget. 

 

EXPENSES  
Production Costs 200.0
Prints and Ads 120.0
Residuals and Other Distribution Expenses 25.0
Interest and Overhead 60.0
Participations --
   
TOTAL EXPENSES 405.0

 

Now, let's say FAD grosses 80 million domestically and 120 million overseas. Warner will get half the domestic (40 million) and 40% of the overseas (48 million). That's 88 million in total.

 

We are using the costs of the Flash as an example, since we only know the headline production budget for FAD. 

 

If we subtract 88 million from 405 million, we get 317 million.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

tbh, we need a proper, standalone thread explaining how box office earnings work, there's a lot of confusion 

 

people still think that if movie that costs 200 million, makes 215 million, takes a 15 million profit 

 

 

Edited by shyboi
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, John Slayne said:

did you pull those numbers out of your ass? The Flash lost 155M on 270M gross. source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_biggest_box-office_bombs

 

assuming JFAD has exactly the same budget as The Flash, how is it going to lose 317M on 200M gross? give it up deelishis

 

 

I didn't know my ass was deadline.com! The Flash made money money from streaming and home rentals. FAD will not, realistically.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, shyboi said:

 

tbh, we need a proper, standalone thread explaining how box office earnings work, there's a lot of confusion 

 

people still think that if movie that costs 200 million, makes 215 million, takes a 15 million profit 

 

 

I agree! Would be really helpful. People get so aggressive about it. It's kinda funny. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Capris Groove said:

The Wikipedia page got changed from "The film received negative reviews from critics" to "The film was not well received by critics." :rip:

 

That's gotta be an LM here.

:bibliahh: It's kinda hilarious, it's like "maybe if I write this in Wikipedia it will change the narrative!" 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Stunnah said:

I didn't know my ass was deadline.com! The Flash made money money from streaming and home rentals. FAD will not, realistically.

 

it will realistically not lose 300M either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, John Slayne said:

it will realistically not lose 300M either. 

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw the film a few minutes ago. It was very good... better than the first one. But the hate is from the concept of what Joker have to do.  I understand.  And Lady Gaga was good, I expect more. If u go and see like a general person with no comics mind is a solid 8.

  • Thumbs Down 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, HERO-JUDAS said:

I saw the film a few minutes ago. It was very good... better than the first one. But the hate is from the concept of what Joker have to do.  I understand.  And Lady Gaga was good, I expect more. If u go and see like a general person with no comics mind is a solid 8.

:rip:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, HERO-JUDAS said:

I saw the film a few minutes ago. It was very good... better than the first one. But the hate is from the concept of what Joker have to do.  I understand.  And Lady Gaga was good, I expect more. If u go and see like a general person with no comics mind is a solid 8.

Imagine saying this to other human beings with eyes and a brain.

:katie:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Doctor Dick said:

Her being the co-lead means it's HER movie but her being the co-lead on DWAS mean it's not her song.

 

The only thing less humiliating for you would be to just stop blaming this failure on the woman and prepare yourself for the draggings and fumes if the LG7 lead shows even the slightest signs of success. Because guess what Narid? You're doing the most and will be getting the most in return :ryan3:

The fact you keep trying to make this about gender is sending me… :bibliahh:Like you monsters don't target women all the time.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NY Post PANS Joker 2 and Gaga/Phoenix:

'Joker' sequel gets the last laugh as critical flop takes box office crown

Quote

The Todd-Phillips-directed psychological thriller, which The Post called "a pointless sequel," is a follow-up to 2019's "Joker," which earned Joaquin Phoenix, who reprises his titular role, an Oscar. It is also a musical — and The Post said Phoenix and his co-star Lady Gaga, who plays his love interest, Harley Quinn, "sing for no reason."

https://nypost.com/2024/10/05/entertainment/last-laugh-joker-folie-a-deux-earns-20m-on-opening-day/

 

DailyMail brings up fans' flop comments

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-13927057/Lady-Gaga-sings-Kath-Kim-theme-song-Joker-Folie-Deux.html

Quote

'I cannot take Gaga seriously with this song hahahaha.' 

Another did not hold back in their criticism of the Poke Face singer with: 'Totally sucks. Another flop of an album from Gaga. She'll probably ruin joker sequel too.' 

Indiana Express pans her acting performance

Joaquin Phoenix and Lady Gaga's awkward interview moment goes viral.

https://indianexpress.com/article/trending/trending-globally/joaquin-phoenix-and-lady-gagas-awkward-interview-moment-goes-viral-watch-9605237/

Quote

Fans online didn't hesitate to poke fun at the film's emphasis on musical numbers. A lot of the buzz centres around Gaga's performance, with many feeling she was chosen more for her singing abilities. Some even argue that the film didn't make full use of her vocal talent.

 

SBs4G.gif

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, piotrert said:

will it even gross $200m worldwide :rip:

I was saying 400M and calling it a flop…now we're talking about 200M 2 days later omg lmao

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.