The Batman Box Office Super Early Predictions

[Spider-Fan]

I really question what people are thinking sometimes

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I really question what people are thinking sometimes

Well there's your problem right there, SF. You give people too much credit. A lot more straight up reacting then thinking going on these days.

 

[C. Lee]

I worked on a Kentucky horse farm and took care of race horses for around 10 years. I have heard and said the phrase "cool your horses" many times.

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

So I read earlier today that WW box office was up to $721 million. With the theatrical run getting extended in China, do you guys think that’s enough time to put the total over $800 million? Provided the quarantine gets lifted and everyone is safe? I mean, I would think WB wouldn’t have a reason to extend the run if they didn’t think there was a very good opportunity to make some bank.

 

[onetimeposter]

So I read earlier today that WW box office was up to $721 million. With the theatrical run getting extended in China, do you guys think that’s enough time to put the total over $800 million? Provided the quarantine gets lifted and everyone is safe? I mean, I would think WB wouldn’t have a reason to extend the run if they didn’t think there was a very good opportunity to make some bank.

unlikely, WOM in China isn’t very good with a 7.6/10. The most I could see it do is maybe an extra 20mil. That’s being super optimistic.

It’s looking like 370-380dom and 390-410 international on the optimistic side. It could very well finish lower.

 

[Dr.]

...I would think WB wouldn’t have a reason to extend the run if they didn’t think there was a very good opportunity to make some bank.

The (complicated) revenue split between studios and theaters is on a sliding scale. In the first week of release, studios get around a 60%+ share of the BO. (Some reports say that for certain Big Movies, the studio’s share might be as much as 85%... ) But after a couple/three/four weeks, the revenue sharing between studios and theaters drops to 50/50. Thereafter, it’s the theaters who get most of the BO gross. So even though a movie might have “legs” and get kudos and bragging rights for its accumulating gross dollars, the studio’s net share of those dollars continues to diminish.

Presumably, HBO Max paid a handsome licensing fee to Warner movies for The Batman. True, this money doesn’t show up on Box Office Mojo. But the bean counters are probably happy.

 

[DKDetective]

The (complicated) revenue split between studios and theaters is on a sliding scale. In the first week of release, studios get around a 60%+ share of the BO. (Some reports say that for certain Big Movies, the studio’s share might be as much as 85%... ) But after a couple/three/four weeks, the revenue sharing between studios and theaters drops to 50/50. Thereafter, it’s the theaters who get most of the BO gross. So even though a movie might have “legs” and get kudos and bragging rights for its accumulating gross dollars, the studio’s net share of those dollars continues to diminish.

Presumably, HBO Max paid a handsome licensing fee to Warner movies for The Batman. True, this money doesn’t show up on Box Office Mojo. But the bean counters are probably happy.

Well, HBO Max is owned by Warner, so there is no licensing fee. Warner keeps all of the subscription revenue to itself and is trying to build up its subscriber basis with early releases of its big movies on the platform.

 

[fake]

Well, HBO Max is owned by Warner, so there is no licensing fee. Warner keeps all of the subscription revenue to itself and is trying to build up its subscriber basis with early releases of its big movies on the platform.

There's always a licensing fee. Even when Disney movies are shown on ABC or Disney+, there's a licensing fee. Like when FX paid a record fee for The Simpsons rights.

It's a technique used by studios to get away with showing a loss. Like when FX paid a record fee for The Simpsons, they could show a loss on their balance sheet, and The Simpsons production could also show a loss by overstating the interest fees. In this way, none of the net participants get a penny paid out.

Like 80% of Hollywood accounting is just moving money between different parts of the same studio.

A studio doesn't make a movie - every movie has a separate LLC set up to make it, like The Batman will have a company called "The Batman LLC" to finance it. This company will be attributed all the costs associated with the movie including, and this is where the big grift comes in, distribution and interest expenses i.e. The Batman LLC pays distribution and interest expenses to Warner Bros. for distributing and financing the movie. These are crazily overstated to ensure a movie never makes a profit.

 

[DKDetective]

There's always a licensing fee. Even when Disney movies are shown on ABC or Disney+, there's a licensing fee. Like when FX paid a record fee for The Simpsons rights.

It's a technique used by studios to get away with showing a loss. Like when FX paid a record fee for The Simpsons, they could show a loss on their balance sheet, and The Simpsons production could also show a loss by overstating the interest fees. In this way, none of the net participants get a penny paid out.

Like 80% of Hollywood accounting is just moving money between different parts of the same studio.

A studio doesn't make a movie - every movie has a separate LLC set up to make it, like The Batman will have a company called "The Batman LLC" to finance it. This company will be attributed all the costs associated with the movie including, and this is where the big grift comes in, distribution and interest expenses i.e. The Batman LLC pays distribution and interest expenses to Warner Bros. for distributing and financing the movie. These are crazily overstated to ensure a movie never makes a profit.

Yeah... I'm a commercial lawyer. I know how all that works. I was responding to Dr.'s post that seemed to analyze the situation as though they were unrelated entities acting at arm's length. That is all true that they structure it all as actual transactions between the different corporate entities, but for actually strategic planning, Warner Bros Studios would not be looking at it as though, we got this licensing fee and that is great and that it is end of it. Their internal analysis would be more global and holistic. I was just trying to keep it simple for the laypeople.

 

[Dr.]

Yeah... I'm a commercial lawyer. I know how all that works.

I was responding to Dr.'s post that seemed to analyze the situation as though they were unrelated entities acting at arm's length. That is all true that they structure it all as actual transactions between the different corporate entities, but for actually strategic planning, Warner Bros Studios would not be looking at it as though, we got this licensing fee and that is great and that it is end of it. Their internal analysis would be more global and holistic. I was just trying to keep it simple for the laypeople.

Yeah, I get that it's all one Big Company (Warner Media/Discovery). So, ultimately, money just goes from one pocket into another. But for accounting, business and legal purposes, it would be odd if HBO could just commandeer (and profit from) product that was paid for by other subdivisions of the Company. Instead — and correct me if I’m wrong — there would be a negotiated “fair market value” transaction. Otherwise, the movie subdivision would only ever sell licensing to outside companies (e.g., Disney+ or Netflix) where they could earn actual extra revenue. Yes?

 

[DKDetective]

Yeah, I get that it's all one Big Company (Warner Media/Discovery). So, ultimately, money just goes from one pocket into another. But for accounting, business and legal purposes, it would be odd if HBO could just commandeer (and profit from) product that was paid for by other subdivisions of the Company. Instead — and correct me if I’m wrong — there would be a negotiated “fair market value” transaction. Otherwise, the movie subdivision would only ever sell licensing to outside companies (e.g., Disney+ or Netflix) where they could earn actual extra revenue. Yes?

Yes and no... If they try and use it for internal accounting purposes to reduce taxes, it would have to be given fair market value for IRS purposes. But there is a range of fair market values. The whole point of vertical integration is that it reduces internal costs and maximizes profits. There would be no reason for one of these conglomerates to develop their own streaming service if they it made more financial sense to sell the rights to a third party. The licensing fee will depend on Warner's end goal. If Warner Bros Studios is really profitable and HBO Max is not, the licensing fee will be lower to offset WB's profits and keep the profits in HBO Max since WB will be paying less tax on HBO's profits. The whole point is to move the profits and losses around to the related companies where it makes the most financial sense.

 

[JKKS085]

So I read earlier today that WW box office was up to $721 million. With the theatrical run getting extended in China, do you guys think that’s enough time to put the total over $800 million? Provided the quarantine gets lifted and everyone is safe? I mean, I would think WB wouldn’t have a reason to extend the run if they didn’t think there was a very good opportunity to make some bank.

Unfortunately at this point its’s very unlikely to hit 400M dom or 800ww. It’s looking like it could finish its run in the 760M range. Now those numbers could possibly increase (slightly) if WB decides to extend the 45-days theater exclusive window but that doesn’t look very likely (they started advertising the release of the movie on HBO Max this week) or maybe they will but not by a lot. Still very solid numbers for a reboot with lots of potential for growth for the inevitable sequel.

 

[TheSmoothKnight]

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I was reading some conversations on the Box Office, and how The Batman compares well to Homecoming. Even as it is probably going to come in 100m under it. Then I realized it's because of the lack of Ukraine, Russian and a full China box office. Which, makes sense.

 

[Mysteryman]

MoS went way over budget, was supposed to launch a shared universe and was mildly received.
When you look at the bo numbers they look fine but the dynamic just wasn’t there to start a franchise, let alone a cinematic universe.

The key to launching a viable franchise is still cost control, no matter how valuable you think your ip is and WB has been, and too often still is, unable to find the right balance.

The results for MOS would have been better if WB had not attempted Prematurely to create that universe which you are referring to.
It feels a little bit like Universal’s Dark Universe fiasco.

 

[metaphysician]

The results for MOS would have been better if WB had not attempted Prematurely to create that universe which you are referring to.
It feels a little bit like Universal’s Dark Universe fiasco.

Eh, I would be fair and say, as bad as the DCEU went? It was still much better conceived than the Dark Universe. In part because at least WB *had* a concept, poorly executed as it might have been. Universal didn't really even have that, they just had dollar signs in their eyes.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

On one hand, here goes all the legs. On the other, I get to watch this every single day.

 

[TheVileOne]

I still think DCEU could've been salvaged if they didn't plan everything so poorly and double down on all the elements people hated about the first film. But what's done is done. Even MCU had its growing pains in Phase 1.

 

[DeadlyWest]

I still think DCEU could've been salvaged if they didn't plan everything so poorly and double down on all the elements people hated about the first film. But what's done is done. Even MCU had its growing pains in Phase 1.

Sure but the MCU didn't have the dude who did Incredible Hulk also penned to do The Avengers. Having Snyder direct everything in terms of the main stuff rather than having a Feige style overseer was a bad call. Might have worked if you got a director known for reliable bangers but

it's Zack Snyder.

 

[Mani-Man]

The results for MOS would have been better if WB had not attempted Prematurely to create that universe which you are referring to.
It feels a little bit like Universal’s Dark Universe fiasco.

First test to see if things work and then work with that...but thats not what they did.
I still dont understand how they possibly could thought they needed and could compete with Marvel...that was a incredible dumb idea on WBs part.

Universals Dark Universe is what WB would have gotten if the Snydercult wouldnt have existed.

I still think DCEU could've been salvaged if they didn't plan everything so poorly and double down on all the elements people hated about the first film. But what's done is done. Even MCU had its growing pains in Phase 1.

It could have been yeah, but at this stage i think its dead...too much mess around.
MCU sure had some stumbling blocks, but it had a good foundation that could adapt...feige planned a long future while Snyder was only interested in deconstructing and a big final of a limited arc.

 

[Erzengel]

I still think DCEU could've been salvaged if they didn't plan everything so poorly and double down on all the elements people hated about the first film. But what's done is done. Even MCU had its growing pains in Phase 1.

I feel Phase 1 of MCU's growing pains was more about the state of cbm pre Avengers and that only Spider-Man and Batman could do really well. By the time WB tried again for an expanded universe, the genre has changed. I think that the one month gap between the release of BvS and the start of filming of JL is an issue. However, I'm not sure how different ZSJL was from its original inception before Johns got involved. I'm sure a good story teller could have taken the reigns after BvS and turned it around but you are already handcuffed by a lot of ideas left there.

 

[TheVileOne]

I feel Phase 1 of MCU's growing pains was more about the state of cbm pre Avengers and that only Spider-Man and Batman could do really well. By the time WB tried again for an expanded universe, the genre has changed. I think that the one month gap between the release of BvS and the start of filming of JL is an issue. However, I'm not sure how different ZSJL was from its original inception before Johns got involved. I'm sure a good story teller could have taken the reigns after BvS and turned it around but you are already handcuffed by a lot of ideas left there.

If I was in charge, Batman v. Superman would never have happened as the second movie. And it wouldn't have left things in that state.

Would've just let Zack Snyder do Dark Knight returns as his big standalone extravaganza, let the cards fall where they will there, where he would've been free to indulge into his heart's content. Would not have been connected to anything else.

 

[Blade Hoarder]

Even though I’ve enjoyed the movie, I’ve come to accept the fact that it has made barely a dent in the public zeitgeist. Because as well made as this movie is, it’s still just a standard issue dark/serious Batman movie.

compared to the box office juggernauts it’s sandwiched between, No Way Home and the multiverse of madness*, it feels rather quaint.

it was a nice little movie. Not an event.

*yes. That film is probably gonna blow the roof off of this movie. For better or worse.

 

[TheVileOne]

Even though I’ve enjoyed the movie, I’ve come to accept the fact that it has made barely a dent in the public zeitgeist. Because as well made as this movie is, it’s still just a standard issue dark/serious Batman movie.

compared to the box office juggernauts it’s sandwiched between, No Way Home and the multiverse of madness*, it feels rather quaint.

it was a nice little movie. Not an event.

*yes. That film is probably gonna blow the roof off of this movie. For better or worse.

So of a similar level as Batman Begins.

 

[Blade Hoarder]

This film has possibly sold more tickets than BB (definitely overseas). But I remember a lot more enduring conversation about that film than this.