On 2016-08-29 at 8:28 AM, The Unknown Poster said:

STB NEEDS a big China to mitigate losses.  They will lose money no matter what.  But they are possibly looking at upwards of $200MM loss.  Who knows if Trek 4 will even happen.

30+M weekend in China for STB so that should bring it to 315m.

Edited September 5, 20169 yr by FrostyWinnipeg

15 hours ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

30+M weekend in China for STB so that should bring it to 315m.

Probably still going to lose over $150mm before DVD and TV is counted and that will take a long time to make up substantial returns 

Bad Robot Trek could be dead. 

41 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Probably still going to lose over $150mm before DVD and TV is counted and that will take a long time to make up substantial returns 

Bad Robot Trek could be dead. 

How much you think it cost? BOM says 185 and factor in 100m for promotion.

15 hours ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

How much you think it cost? BOM says 185 and factor in 100m for promotion.

I believe thats correct.  But studio's only take in a percentage of the box office and that percentage diminishes the longer its in theaters.  They get more the first few weeks.  In China, they only get 25% I believe.  So as important as China is to film now, the studio still only takes home a smaller percentage.  A film has to make several times its budget in box office revenue to break even.

Paramount goofed in many ways.  That budget being one of them.  Star Trek isnt a summer tent pole action drool fest.

Here's a breakdown I found from a quality poster on a Trek board I frequent:

Total worldwide box office including China is $285,393,322

Budget $185 million
Marketing $120 million
Box Office $142 million (Less Theater take $142)
Total remaining to break even $163 million

Paramount is expected to earn another $8-13 million of a $15-25 million BO, which means they will close with a loss of over $150 million, before home video and TV deals, which are not likely to immediately put this film into the black, much less be considered profitable.

http://lrmonline.com/news/joe-manganiello-confirmed-as-deathstroke-in-ben-affleck-directed-standalone-batman-film

Hmmmm, I like him (Im a True Blood fan) but not sure he has the right acting talents for the role.  I always looked at Deathstroke as an intellectual match for Batman as well as a physical one.  But I guess he's certainly an imposing physical force.

56 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

http://lrmonline.com/news/joe-manganiello-confirmed-as-deathstroke-in-ben-affleck-directed-standalone-batman-film

Hmmmm, I like him (Im a True Blood fan) but not sure he has the right acting talents for the role.  I always looked at Deathstroke as an intellectual match for Batman as well as a physical one.  But I guess he's certainly an imposing physical force.

reboots running out of villians the avg person has not heard of

For any Daniel Craig/James Bond fans.....caught a tweet yesterday that the studio has reportedly offered him 150 million pounds to do 2 more Bond movies....

3 minutes ago, Noeller said:

For any Daniel Craig/James Bond fans.....caught a tweet yesterday that the studio has reportedly offered him 150 million pounds to do 2 more Bond movies....

Calling BS on that. 15 mil maybe.

150m £ is 200m US!

1 minute ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

Calling BS on that. 15 mil maybe.

150m £ is 200m US!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3776182/James-Cash-Bond-Daniel-Craig-offered-staggering-150million-Sony-bosses-two-007-movies.html

 

Daniel Craig has reportedly been offered a staggering $150million to shoot two more James Bond movies. 

The 48-year-old British hunk, who has played the super sleuth since 2006, has yet to confirm his departure from the role yet famously said he would rather 'slash his wrists' than reprise the part. 

Sources tell Radar Online that Sony bosses are desperate to keep Daniel in the picture for a further two films, in order to 'phase in a younger long-term successor'.

 

I heard it was $150 million DOLLARS.  But who knows.  That would be $75m per film.  There have been higher salaries.  Its not out of the realm of possibilities.  There was talk of "passing the torch" that got some people upset as though there would be a transition "in universe" from one Bond to another...which seems very odd for Bond films.

11 minutes ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

reboots running out of villians the avg person has not heard of

I think Deathstroke is pretty well known.  But you dont *need* a previously known villain to tell a good story.

42 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I think Deathstroke is pretty well known.  But you dont *need* a previously known villain to tell a good story.

I'd never heard of him but I hadn't heard of Ra's al Ghul either before Batman Begins and that didn't matter

48 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I heard it was $150 million DOLLARS.  But who knows.  That would be $75m per film.  There have been higher salaries.  Its not out of the realm of possibilities.  There was talk of "passing the torch" that got some people upset as though there would be a transition "in universe" from one Bond to another...which seems very odd for Bond films.

I've never read anyone getting a straight up salary of 75 million dollars per film.   Usually the big time stars get 20 million + box office bonuses.  

The 75 million per flick seems insane.  The few google articles I read said that the rumor is complete bs. 

Ya I don't know why the studio would be so desperate to have him back anyways.  Not like he's been so great as Bond.  #4 best Bond all-time IMO.

Craig = Best Bond....with Connery and Pierce Brosnan in an almost-tie for 2nd....

I don't think he's good or bad as bond. I like him but he's playing a different character than the others. Brosnan was my favourite. 

Brosnan in Goldeneye is outstanding... 

Most realistic Bond. Can we end it at that?

 

1 hour ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

Most realistic Bond. Can we end it at that?

 

But that's just film making. You could cast Brosnan right now and make it realistic. 

I wish they'd have the balls to do the epic where all the old Bonds appear and its revealed that "James Bond" isn't a person but a title. Bring all the old Bonds into canon. And have someone picking them off one by one forcing the surviving ones to work together. 

1 hour ago, The Unknown Poster said:

But that's just film making. You could cast Brosnan right now and make it realistic. 

I wish they'd have the balls to do the epic where all the old Bonds appear and its revealed that "James Bond" isn't a person but a title. Bring all the old Bonds into canon. And have someone picking them off one by one forcing the surviving ones to work together. 

Sounds like a Deadpool story.

Heard the next one will be a female Jane Bond starring Melissa McCarthy

32 minutes ago, Atomic said:

Heard the next one will be a female Jane Bond starring Melissa McCarthy

Directed by Paul Feig.....surefire hit. And if you don't think so, you're a misogynistic *******...

20 hours ago, Noeller said:

Craig = Best Bond....with Connery and Pierce Brosnan in an almost-tie for 2nd....

Craig is the worst.  He's a thug that can't act.  Connery, Moore, Brosnan...the rest are moot.

I find Craig is more of a Jason Bourne-type Bond where it's previously been more of suave stylish character (regardless of who the actor was).  I'm a fan of both styles but just find them completely different takes so it's hard to compare them.