Disney expects $200 million loss on John Carter

[skydivingninja]

I don't get it.

But yeah I don't think "John Carter" is a name that many people except hardcore early sci-fi nerds would know, and I have seen almost zero advertising for this thing, so yeah, I can see why its losing money. 

Are you serious? Prior to release the advertising on this thing was absolutely insane, it was fucking everywhere.

Really?  I saw a few TV spots and maybe a few ads on Yahoo, as well as an Escape to the Movies video.  Maybe they promoted it more in big cities?

[Nekov]

Nope. Friend works at the local cinema so he's getting me in for free

[AcidLameLTE]

So...it was all right.

[XJDenton]

YOU WOULDN'T LET YOUR AUTOMOBILE DEALER FRIEND LET YOU INTO A CAR.

[Fluffy Lothario]

YOU WOULDN'T LET YOUR AUTOMOBILE DEALER FRIEND LET YOU INTO A CAR.

YOUR ARGUMENT IS INVALID

[El JoNNo]

I didn't mind the movie. It wasn't amazing but I enjoyed it.

[wkiml]

Other than the female lead..she was quite pleasant on the eyes the movie sucked donkey balls .....

[MykeHavoc]

YOU WOULDN'T LET YOUR AUTOMOBILE DEALER FRIEND LET YOU INTO A CAR.

YOUR ARGUMENT IS INVALID

Wait a tick, it was established in Bicycle Race that Freddie was not a fan of Star Wars. Why is Vader not destroying him?

[Fluffy Lothario]

You might want to put that question to the Queen thread, I have no idea. I haven't even listened to Bicycle Race closely enough to hear a mention of Star Wars. Just thought it was a cool picture.

[theseoafs]

You might want to put that question to the Queen thread, I have no idea. I haven't even listened to Bicycle Race closely enough to hear a mention of Star Wars. Just thought it was a cool picture.

You don't have to listen closely at all. He says outright that "Jaws was never his scene and he doesn't like Star Wars".

[Fluffy Lothario]

I probably haven't listened to that song more than five times in my life. And never carefully.

[ReaperKK]

YOU WOULDN'T LET YOUR AUTOMOBILE DEALER FRIEND LET YOU INTO A CAR.

YOUR ARGUMENT IS INVALID

That's just such a weird picture

[antigoon]

The only advertisements I saw here in New York were enormous billboards with weird looking monsters on them. Never saw any commercials.

[MrBoom_shack-a-lack]

I just saw this movie, not bad at all! I didn´t know anything about it before i went other than the trailer for it.

It sure tickled my "let´s take you on a imaginative journey to a another planet that got friendly monsterdogs with warp speed power" sense.

I so want one! 

[jammindude]

Just got back from seeing this movie....and I have to say what a shame it is that this movie was such a colossal belly flop.

That was the most fun I've had at a sci-fi movie in a VERY long time.   Great special effects...great story.   This was *WORLDS* better than Avatar...not even close.   It just hardly seems fair that Avatar will receive drooling fellatio when its inevitable sequel comes out, and this FAR superior product will most likely never have a sequel.

Sometimes life just isn't fair.   

I predict this will be come a HUGE "cult classic"....

[jammindude]

I should add that since the worldwide numbers have come back...John Carter *did*, in fact, actually make money.   (although just barely...it's made $269 million on a budget of $250....maybe once the home video money comes back, we might see a sequel after all...I hope)

[JRundquist]

I should add that since the worldwide numbers have come back...John Carter *did*, in fact, actually make money.   (although just barely...it's made $269 million on a budget of $250....maybe once the home video money comes back, we might see a sequel after all...I hope)

I'm happy to hear this. I thought it was a great movie. I saw it the Friday it came out and loved it. A sequel would be awesome.

[MykeHavoc]

Regardless of how much it makes on DVD/blu-ray, there won't be a sequel. I doubt the 250 mil price tag takes into consideration the marketing. Its widely recognized as a flop and will go down in history as such. They may get lucky and break even at best.

[jammindude]

Regardless of how much it makes on DVD/blu-ray, there won't be a sequel. I doubt the 250 mil price tag takes into consideration the marketing. Its widely recognized as a flop and will go down in history as such. They may get lucky and break even at best.

According to Forbes...you're partially right...

BoxOffice Mojo reports that John Carter has grossed $254.5 million, a $4.5 million over its budget—currently not technically a profit, considering its advertising budget, but it’s far better than the epic loss that many had feared.

Unsurprisingly, most of this coin has come from overseas. While John Carter earned over $66 million here in the United States, international markets have pulled in over $188 million. Film Buff Online writes that John Carter was #1 in box office receipts for two weeks in a row in China. This profit will keep increasing, as John Carter has yet to be released in Japan, where it will surely put the movie several million dollars in the black. 

Japan is a huge market, and the numbers aren't back from there yet.  (though it has, since this article, actually opened there)   And since this movie has been so much more popular in the world market than domestically, I think it's safe to say that the movie will make a profit.    Though admittedly, not nearly as much as they had dreamed.

Additionally, if they do their research and find they may in fact have a "cult following" on their hands, they may greenlight a second installment (though probably with budget cuts).   

[ariich]

Yeah it hasn't been released everywhere yet, plus when it comes out on DVD the sales on that are nearly all profit. Good to hear that the movie was fruitful after all!

[Cable]

I should add that since the worldwide numbers have come back...John Carter *did*, in fact, actually make money.   (although just barely...it's made $269 million on a budget of $250....maybe once the home video money comes back, we might see a sequel after all...I hope)

The one problem about what it brought in is that I think the budget almost NEVER includes the marketing. Granted, marketing is not 250 million worth. But it is something to always consider when the two numbers are unbalanced.

However, as others have said, I'm sure DVD and merch sales will help.

[XJDenton]

I think it had about 100 million in marketing on top of the 250 million production budget, though dont quote me on that.

[jingle.boy]

Yeah, not sure on the mktg budget, but $250M was only the production budget.  Still, by all accounts, a flop.  The guy who wrote it did Wall-E and Finding Nemo.  So comparatively speaking, John Carter was a dud.

[Cable]

Yeah, not sure on the mktg budget, but $250M was only the production budget.  Still, by all accounts, a flop.  The guy who wrote it did Wall-E and Finding Nemo.  So comparatively speaking, John Carter was a dud.

Which is really the shame, as I will always value Andrew Stanton highly due to Wall-E. If I had to pick one movie, that would be it for lots of reasons. I wonder if he will venture out into live action stuff again after this (or if anyone will give him a chance).

Based on the responses, I will at least view this at home when it comes out. But the lukewarm response kept me away from theatres on it.

[jammindude]

Still, remember that the numbers from Japan *AND* the home video market has yet to be tallied. 

I betting it makes the marketing budget on home video alone. 

It won't be lucrative....but they aren't going to lose their shirt.

And the approach that *didn't* work for Narnia, could potentially work here.   JC ran over budget in the first place...it was not planned to cost $250 million.   So if a buzz is generated, and the audience is there, you could potentially make a sequel for half the original...and if you're faithful to the original story, you could ride the buzz to a more successful sequel.   

I personally think it could work, but I'd say it's 50/50 as to whether the right people at Disney will agree with me.

[ReaPsTA]

Yeah it hasn't been released everywhere yet, plus when it comes out on DVD the sales on that are nearly all profit. Good to hear that the movie was fruitful after all!

Ehehehmhm

The movie's grossed about 260 million.  The studio will likely end up seeing about $156 million of that.  And, like everyone's been saying, there's the marketing costs, bringing the total cost of the movie to about 350 million.

350 - 156 = 194

About a 200 million dollar loss.

Assuming the studio made 20 dollars in net profit off of every DVD they sold (impossible), they'd need to sell 10,000,000 DVD's to break even.  This is the amount of DVD's sold by Avatar, the highest grossing movie ever.

Disney's going to lose tons of money on this.

[ariich]

Yeah it hasn't been released everywhere yet, plus when it comes out on DVD the sales on that are nearly all profit. Good to hear that the movie was fruitful after all!

Ehehehmhm

The movie's grossed about 260 million.  The studio will likely end up seeing about $156 million of that.  And, like everyone's been saying, there's the marketing costs, bringing the total cost of the movie to about 350 million.

350 - 156 = 194

About a 200 million dollar loss.

Assuming the studio made 20 dollars in net profit off of every DVD they sold (impossible), they'd need to sell 10,000,000 DVD's to break even.  This is the amount of DVD's sold by Avatar, the highest grossing movie ever.

Disney's going to lose tons of money on this.

Wait, why have you decided that the studio will only see $156m, and why have you assumed a marketing budget of $100m?

[jammindude]

I believe he's right about the marketing budget.   I believe that he's being pessimistic about the amount of the loss.   

The box office numbers worldwide are not all back yet, and the number he's using is from the article I posted which is almost a month old.   I don't think the final tally will be as bad as he thinks. 

[ZirconBlue]

Not all of the gross receipts go back to the studio.  Some portion goes to the theaters.  The longer a movie stays in theaters, the larger percentage goes to the theaters.  That's why studios want movies that make a lot of money in the first few weeks.  A movie that starts small and grows sees most of the money going to the theaters instead of back to the studio.

[Orbert]

Not all of the gross receipts go back to the studio.  Some portion goes to the theaters.  The longer a movie stays in theaters, the larger percentage goes to the theaters.  That's why studios want movies that make a lot of money in the first few weeks.  A movie that starts small and grows sees most of the money going to the theaters instead of back to the studio.

That's wacky.  I had no idea that that's how it works.  Is it because the contracts divide things up differently as the movie enters a second week, third week, etc., or is it because there are fixed costs up front in landing the movie, and if the movie stays longer, then percentage-wise, more of the take stays in the theater?  Or maybe some other formula?

[ReaPsTA]

Wait, why have you decided that the studio will only see $156m, and why have you assumed a marketing budget of $100m?

The marketing budget being 100 million is what I've heard pretty much everywhere.

When movies are first released in theaters, the studio takes about 90% of the ticket gross.  This number shoots down drastically after the first week.  The rule of thumb is that studios get about 60% of the total gross for the movie.  To avoid complication, I applied that to John Carter.

[ZirconBlue]

Not all of the gross receipts go back to the studio.  Some portion goes to the theaters.  The longer a movie stays in theaters, the larger percentage goes to the theaters.  That's why studios want movies that make a lot of money in the first few weeks.  A movie that starts small and grows sees most of the money going to the theaters instead of back to the studio.

That's wacky.  I had no idea that that's how it works.  Is it because the contracts divide things up differently as the movie enters a second week, third week, etc., or is it because there are fixed costs up front in landing the movie, and if the movie stays longer, then percentage-wise, more of the take stays in the theater?  Or maybe some other formula?

That's the kooky contract that's been negotiated.  Unfortunately, it creates an incentive to focus on movies that are going to have a big opening weekend over movies that might have to slowly build a following through word-of-mouth. 

[Cool Chris]

ReaPsTa: please post more often. Where you been?

The marketing budget being 100 million is what I've heard pretty much everywhere.

To paraphrase James LaBrie "Someone sure pocketed a lot of money…”

How the hell did they spend more than $10,000 marketing this movie? I think I saw 1 commercial on tv. That’s it.

[Sigz]

Really? I saw commercials all over the place. They were terrible, but still there.

[Nick]

Really? I saw commercials all over the place. They were terrible, but still there.

As I said way back, I saw a TON of adverts and such for this.