Friday Box-Office: Amazing Spider-Man 2 Drops Big in Second Weekend

[Nowhere Man]

No Spidey means Marvel have had to invest heavily on the rest of their catalog

I think Marvel/Disney may have performed a spectacular master stroke against it's competition. By turning avengers into what amounts to a money printing license along with their B-list characters Marvel has the investors of Sony, DC and Fox scream.. We have better characters... why aaren't we printing money?! Make an avengers style universe quickly!

Goes to prove that it's not necessarily about the characters but what you do with them that counts. Meanwhile all the other studios are playing sloppy catch up.

I never gave a damn about Captain America until the Marvel movies.

 

[Nowhere Man]

Please die already horrible franchise!

I know there's a lot of reactionary folks out there unable to grasp why this production is cancer to the future of cinema, and who might be feeling personally engaged to defend the property of an international conglomerate bent on milking the acquired brands they claim to love, down to the last possible cent; to them I say: remain still, like thick, polluted dark waters, friends, for if you like this abhor, you'll definitely like whatever else comes after. The benefit of not having a particular discernible taste, without any sort of meaningful criteria outside of brand recognition means that you shouldn't have a problem finding something else to sparsely turn your disperse attention and anger towards. Any sort of loud, fast moving special effects bonanza will do the trick. That's one comforting advantage for living a life without any artistic ethical compass. I guess.

Hey look over there! It's Transformers 4 or 5, or whatever!

I have a feeling this is why these kind of blockbuster bonanzas do so well overseas. Not that international movie goers lack taste, I'm NOT saying that in the least. What I'm saying is that they haven't grown as cynical and critical of Hollywood's bullshit as many Americans have. Hollywood knows this and exploits it. Thus huge international marketing for ASM2 and Transformers 4,5,6,7.. And a TMNT that will probably do "meh" numbers domestically but do huge B.O . Everywhere else. I could be wrong though. It's just my theory.

 

[xaszatm]

Yeah, it dropped big. All the way to only being the second most successful movie this weekend. Don't get me wrong, the percentage drop is large, and recalculating the profit projections is a reasonable course of action. But anti-ASM people shouldn't start celebrating yet. It's still making money. It's two weeks in. Give it time before you write it off.

I'm glad to see, also, that we have moved past the dark ages, where people could have differing opinions on something without being looked down on. Now, we can treat those plebes as they deserve to be treated. Opinions? Pah. Everyone knows that if someone else likes a movie they don't, clearly those people need to refine their tastes. The more that like something, the worse it is. *puffs on pipe, attaches monocle*

Actually, it's been a month anywhere than the United States. And while making a profit is still well within ASM2's goal, it might not be enough. A better comparison to this movie would be Man of Steel. Regardless of the split opinion on it, it made back a profit. However, the profit wasn't as large as expected and you can currently see the mess in Batman vs Superman's production. Remember that Sony Pictures is a floundering business. The Amazing Spiderman 2 doesn't just need to be profitable, it needs to make loads of money to justify Sony Picture's existance. A meager (in the corporation sense) profit isn't going to cut it for this movie.

 

[TheMemoman]

I have a feeling this is why these kind of blockbuster bonanzas do so well overseas. Not that international movie goers lack taste, I'm NOT saying that in the least. What I'm saying is that they haven't grown as cynical and critical of Hollywood's bullshit as many Americans have. Hollywood knows this and exploits it. Thus huge international marketing for ASM2 and Transformers 4,5,6,7.. And a TMNT that will probably do "meh" numbers domestically but do huge B.O . Everywhere else. I could be wrong though. It's just my theory.

I am an international moviegoer, and I have thought about your theory. People outside the US have little to no knowledge about movie rights dealings, nor do they care. The masses of uneducated moviegoers, which are the majority, share this in common in the US and abroad. It's just that, in terms of market, "abroad" turns out to be much, much bigger than "US". Most people, all around the world, just want to see a dumb movie for the ritual of going to the cinema on a Friday or Saturday night, without having to care about plot structure, pacing, and all that movie geek stuff the very few of us like to pay attention to. They hear Spider Man, Superman, X-Men, Godzilla, etc., and those are the brands they grew up with, and in some cases, even a decade later than the US, because the respective TV shows and movies were broadcasted, translated in their regional language, quite a few years later. So it's a much fresher brand in their memory.

Truth is, little do they care or appreciate, and since uncaring, unappreciated crap is cheaper to make for mass consumption, us moviegoers who demand a bit more than nothing, are all the ungrateful assholes; and everybody, including Hollywood, is vehemently telling us to go fuck ourselves. That's my theory.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

Winter Soldier budget; $235 million. Projected gross; $687 million.
Amazing Spiderman 2 budget; $330 million. Projected gross; $424 million.
(figures include advertising)

Spidey cost $105 mill more and is expected to come off $240 mill worse.

This is why Marvel/Disney should get Spiderman back.

 

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

Yeah, it dropped big. All the way to only being the second most successful movie this weekend. Don't get me wrong, the percentage drop is large, and recalculating the profit projections is a reasonable course of action. But anti-ASM people shouldn't start celebrating yet. It's still making money. It's two weeks in. Give it time before you write it off.

I'm glad to see, also, that we have moved past the dark ages, where people could have differing opinions on something without being looked down on. Now, we can treat those plebes as they deserve to be treated. Opinions? Pah. Everyone knows that if someone else likes a movie they don't, clearly those people need to refine their tastes. The more that like something, the worse it is. *puffs on pipe, attaches monocle*

Actually, it's been a month anywhere than the United States. And while making a profit is still well within ASM2's goal, it might not be enough. A better comparison to this movie would be Man of Steel. Regardless of the split opinion on it, it made back a profit. However, the profit wasn't as large as expected and you can currently see the mess in Batman vs Superman's production. Remember that Sony Pictures is a floundering business. The Amazing Spiderman 2 doesn't just need to be profitable, it needs to make loads of money to justify Sony Picture's existance. A meager (in the corporation sense) profit isn't going to cut it for this movie.

You have a point there, and you're right. I had the dates wrong, and I'll edit my post to reflect that. I didn't realize how much Sony Pictures had put on the movie. That's somewhat of a bad business sense, in my opinion, but that's why I'm not a CEO.

 

[truckspond]

I get the feeling that the utterly bad tie-in game that was released in 2014 but looks and runs like something that would have been called ugly and slow in 2007 has something to do with slump

 

[Tanis]

MovieBob must be salivating over this.
O, wait, that's who's posting this story.

Still, I have hopes that the train wreck will keep on going.
I'm starting to enjoy the drama behind the movies more than the movies themselves.

 

[RealRT]

Good. I hope Garfield's Spidey is over as soon as possible. This guy just doesn't look Spider-Man to me.

 

[ExtraDebit]

I remembered when I was a kid and reading comics, what matter to me most then was the hero got an attractive costume and awesome power and spider-man met all my criteria.

As I grow older I realized that Peter Parker is a very shallow, inconsistent and illogical concept as a character. Case in point the superior spiderman, THAT is what a realistic and interesting Spider-man without a mask should be, and when Peter Parker returned you know what he did? He acted like an irresponsible child and swing around the city looking for petty crimes when the company Doc Ock setup for him is in trouble.

All those talk about power and responsibility seems hypocritical when there are people under your employment depends on you, a company that can do so much good for the world depends on you but you out fighting petty crimes. It seems that Peter Parker can't see that a seat belt can save more lives than stopping a robbery. Maybe Bob was right and these things really are for kids and I'm out growing it.

 

[Colt47]

I'm sort of wondering if any of the movies coming out soon are going to be good. I know I already got low expectations for the Godzilla film, while Days of Future Past could go either way.

 

[Kurt Cristal]

From the article:
Sony is said to have spent over $200 million on TASM2 (before marketing, and either way it's a lowball estimate) and some analysts project that it will have to earn $800 million worldwide just to start turning a profit ... and at this point it's not looking good for the film to even equal the $750 million final take of its (much less expensive) predecessor.

Grasping at straws much? New information as it is given. The 800 was a projected amount, the 755 in this article is more precise. And then the complaint about rounding 71.3% to 72%...... really? We're griping about rounding up fractions? It's not like the article here turned 71.3% into 75 or 80.

1) How is asking for clarification and consistency "grasping at straws"?

2) Yes, I'll gripe about that. So?

It just sounds so nitpicky, you know?

I mean, I really don't even agree with the whole tone of the article, knowing moviebob's current profound hatred for ASM2. Also, I would argue he's being consistent by providing the same information. I mean, the information here is changing ever so slightly. Sure, the actual digits being thrown at the screen are "inconsistent" but I'm not seeing any inconsistency in tone or content. Both the "fix spiderman" editorial and this article convey the same message to a decent degree. Plus, if he DID write both articles the exact same "consistent" way, wouldn't that actually be more boring or lazy?

 

[Gennadios]

Hum, after the movie finished on release night, quite a few spidey geeks in the lobby were agonizing whether to see the movie again to see if it would be better. Nobody could figure out if it was bad or ok.

Guess after sleeping on it most of them didn't rewatch it.

 

[xaszatm]

Amazing Spiderman 2 budget; $330 million. Projected gross; $424 million.
(figures include advertising)
.

So it already turned a profit, while still having several weeks to go in theaters? What is all this doomsaying about then?

From the way some people (including Moviebob) are wording this you'd think it didn't even break even.

But making a profit isn't the problem. Man of Steel made a (actually pretty decent) profit and it was still considered a "flop" by the business men. Sony Pictures currently is a floundering business and the company needed to make big bucks (in the corporation sense) to justify its already flimsy existence. That ROI just isn't enough for Sony Pictures.

And remember, Projected Gross isn't the actual gross.

 

[Ruisu]

Amazing Spiderman 2 budget; $330 million. Projected gross; $424 million.
(figures include advertising)
.

So it already turned a profit, while still having several weeks to go in theaters? What is all this doomsaying about then?

From the way some people (including Moviebob) are wording this you'd think it didn't even break even.

But making a profit isn't the problem. Man of Steel made a (actually pretty decent) profit and it was still considered a "flop" by the business men. Sony Pictures currently is a floundering business and the company needed to make big bucks (in the corporation sense) to justify its already flimsy existence. That ROI just isn't enough for Sony Pictures.

And remember, Projected Gross isn't the actual gross.

Man of Steel was not a flop in any sense of the word, no matter who you ask it to. At most, it did not have the completely positive reception WB was expecting, but it wasn't anywhere near a flop.

 

[xaszatm]

Amazing Spiderman 2 budget; $330 million. Projected gross; $424 million.
(figures include advertising)
.

So it already turned a profit, while still having several weeks to go in theaters? What is all this doomsaying about then?

From the way some people (including Moviebob) are wording this you'd think it didn't even break even.

But making a profit isn't the problem. Man of Steel made a (actually pretty decent) profit and it was still considered a "flop" by the business men. Sony Pictures currently is a floundering business and the company needed to make big bucks (in the corporation sense) to justify its already flimsy existence. That ROI just isn't enough for Sony Pictures.

And remember, Projected Gross isn't the actual gross.

Man of Steel was not a flop in any sense of the word, no matter who you ask it to. At most, it did not have the completely positive reception WB was expecting, but it wasn't anywhere near a flop.

OK, you do realized I put the word flop in quotation marks, right? Ironic quotation is usually meant to have a sarcastic bent towards them. Of course Man of Steel wasn't a flop, it had a ROI nearly 3 times the budget. But that wasn't the comparison I was trying to make. My point was that both this movie and probably The Amazing Spider-Man 2 failed horribly to meet expectations. The consequence for Man of Steel is its really weird directing and casting decisions for Batman vs Superman. The possible consequence for The Amazing Spider-Man 2's failed expectations could very well be the dismantling of Sony Pictures.

 

[Marter]

It just sounds so nitpicky, you know?

I mean, I really don't even agree with the whole tone of the article, knowing moviebob's current profound hatred for ASM2. Also, I would argue he's being consistent by providing the same information. I mean, the information here is changing ever so slightly. Sure, the actual digits being thrown at the screen are "inconsistent" but I'm not seeing any inconsistency in tone or content. Both the "fix spiderman" editorial and this article convey the same message to a decent degree. Plus, if he DID write both articles the exact same "consistent" way, wouldn't that actually be more boring or lazy?

Sure. Fair points. You win.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

Amazing Spiderman 2 budget; $330 million. Projected gross; $424 million.
(figures include advertising)
.

So it already turned a profit, while still having several weeks to go in theaters? What is all this doomsaying about then?

From the way some people (including Moviebob) are wording this you'd think it didn't even break even.

Projected. Sony has already revised the number once. Even moneu they will revise it again.

 

[wswordsmen]

Man of Steel was not a flop in any sense of the word, no matter who you ask it to. At most, it did not have the completely positive reception WB was expecting, but it wasn't anywhere near a flop.

Flop might not be the right word, since it isn't used in business circles. The correct phrase is "didn't meet expectations", and meeting or not meeting those expectations is what determines what makes a good film vs. a bad film in business sense.

If a film costs $1 million and is expected to earn $2 million it will be considered a success by the pencil pushers when it makes that 2000001st dollar. It will be considered a major success if it makes $2.5 million.

A film that costs $200 million and is expected to make $800 million will be considered a failure if it only makes $755 million. Even though it made more than 3 times the costs.

The reason expectations are the most important benchmark is stock and bond prices of publicly traded companies (like Sony, WB, Disney, ext.) assume the market's expectations will be met, which usually but not always are the same as what the company announces its expectations of itself are. If they aren't that means the stock was over valued and will go down. Bonds will too but to a much smaller extent for more complicated reasons.

That is why Man of Steel wasn't good for WB/DC and the risk ASM2 runs for Sony. It might have made a lot of money but not enough money.

BTW I am posting this because people on this board talk about the business side of things a lot but don't actually understand any of it, they don't even use the right vocabulary when talking about technical parts of it. So I mean you no disrespect what so ever.