I do love the Nolan-Bale movies. It was also nice they existed in their own little world.
It helps the first one came pre-Iron Man. Hollywood is as much about copycats and Warner would have screwed the Nolan movies up by trying. If he even still made them in that alt-universe. I can’t see him wanting to have anything to do with something like that.
Right. He could be DC’s Thanos.
Black Adam and Shazam! Fury of the Gods both broke even- barely. The Marvels, Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania both lost money, and several other struggled to break even.
There is later streaming, international sales, and although WB does not actually own any theme parks, quite a few buy licensing rights, and WB just sold Six Flags, but still have a licensing deal with them.
Later MCU films have struggled.
Justice League grossed $229 million in the United States and Canada and $432.3 million in other territories for a worldwide total of $661.3 million.[8] It had a worldwide opening of $278.8 million.[139][140] Up against an estimated break-even point of as much as $750 million,[141] Deadline Hollywood reported that the film lost the studio around $60 million.[142] Due to the film losing the studio money, the movie was deemed a “box office bomb” or “flop”.[143]
But it did well later. So overall it again, barely broke even.
Except for Spider-Man: Brand New Day, which at over $2.5 billion world wide is the third highest grossing movie of all time.
Your cite that Justice League broke even says that it lost a ton of money. Did you meant to quote something else?
In early box office it made $661M. Some people estimated it’s break even @ 750M, but WB disagreed, saying the actual costs were only $300M. However, later money trickled in, so it is likely it made that “guestimate” $750M. But remember, actual costs to make the film were only $300M, not counting marketing.
$661M is the total box office, not “early box office.”
Yes, cost of “only $300M” and grossing $661M at the box office is a movie that lost money.
Overall, Marvel’s casting, especially during the Infinity Saga films, was consistently outstanding. Chris Evans, Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston, Scarlett Johansson, Chadwick Boseman, Bendict Cumberbatch, etc. all truly came to own their roles. (I’ll add Tom Holland to the list, though I’m not sure how much of the choice of him was driven by Marvel/Disney, versus Sony.)
I’m not sure that one can consistently say the same about the DCCU.
Forbes breaks down numerous reasons why “Justice League’s” return on investment will be in the negative for Warner Bros., citing the tentpole’s humungous budget as a major issue. “Justice League” reportedly cost $300 million just to produce, with an additional $150 million spent on marketing. The film would have to make at least $750 million just to break even, but box office tracking suggests it will struggle to even hit $700 million. The film is currently pacing for a domestic haul in the $230 million range, though that could change if the film drops off quicker than anticipated.
That is an estimate, not solid figures.
Marvels duds in the last half decade is are: FF4: First steps, Thunderbolts, Captain America: Brave new world, The Marvels, Ant man and the wasp quantumania, Eternals, Shangi-ta and the legend of the ten rings, Black Widow, it’s a roughly 50/50 hit rate post covid (probably affected by streaming etc). MCU probably survives more from the people it brings to Disney+ though.
So the idea that MCU is doing better than DC, it’s not a straight shot there. DC does tend to do less movies though, but it doesn’t tend to help that its hits listed before are generally regarded as shit, and nobody’s rewatching them…
I’m not sure I understand why a movie that cost 300 million and spent 150 million in marketing needs to hit 750 million to be profitable. What are the other 300 million for?
Exactly. Some film pundits claim you need like twice what it made to make a profit. Very few big films do.
Because when movies are shown in theaters only part of the money goes to the studio, with the rest going to the theaters showing it.
The theaters think they deserve some of the box office revenue.
Exactly this. $750 million in box office (ticket sales) =/= $750 million studio revenue.
Also, studio accounting is an inscrutable thing, as anyone in the industry whose contract includes a percentage of profits knows.
The Studio gets at least half, more on a heavily pushed film. So, say maybe the Studio got $400M, but a lot of merchandising , etc - so they could have made the $450- barely. Rather than Bomb, more like a broke even.
Everything you’ve quoted as a citation on these film breaking even or making money has been the opposite of what you’ve said. Apparently you hope people just don’t read what you link. Maybe you didn’t either and it’s not a deliberate deception I guess.
I agree the writer at Forbes thought that the film would have to make at least $750 million just to break even. But I am not sure about those figures, in any case, the numbers are not terribly far apart.
Was that really a ton of money? They “needed” $750M in Box office, and got $661M, plus whatever in merchandising. So that is where i disagree. The film certainly did not make much profit if any, I agree, and likely lost money. Same year had King Arthur: Legend of the Sword which was a bomb.
Of course, since i am no expert, maybe the writer at Forbes was right, and Justice league lost some money. Sure.
But it is not on this report-
So not a “Big Box Office Bomb”, anyway.
Let us agree to disagree. I see your basic point- it was not a box office success, on that we agree.