HOME ALL THAT CHAT ATC WEST COAST SHOPPIN' RUSH BOARD FAQS

LOGIN REGISTER SEARCH THREADED MODE

not logged in

Threaded Order | Chronological Order

$50M in 2002 was probably considered a failure

Posted by: dramedy 06:47 pm EDT 04/02/14
In reply to: re: Frank Wildhorn ruins another classic - MockingbirdGirl 05:56 pm EDT 04/02/14

It costs $35M to make the movie but they probably spent tens of millions on advertising. It was a Jan release, so the studio had little faith in the movie. I don't think i saw the movie and i see about 70 a year in the movie theaters.


reply to this message |
Actually, it was considered a hit

Posted by: MockingbirdGirl 07:01 pm EDT 04/02/14
In reply to: $50M in 2002 was probably considered a failure - dramedy 06:47 pm EDT 04/02/14

$20 above budget is a good take... plus it made another $20 million internationally. Out of the 479 movies released in 2002, it ranked #48 in domestic box office gross.

TV viewers may also be familiar with the story from a more recent source: it was the basis for the current hit series Revenge.


reply to this message |
re: Actually, it was considered a hit

Posted by: keikekaze 08:00 pm EDT 04/02/14
In reply to: Actually, it was considered a hit - MockingbirdGirl 07:01 pm EDT 04/02/14

I hope you're remembering the difference between movie grosses and movie net receipts. Producers and distributors of films never pocket the whole gross--they're lucky to get 50 percent of it, and it can be a lot less. Theater owners get the rest. I haven't looked up Count's box-office, but just as a hypothetical example, if a film costs $50 million to produce and it grosses $70 million, it's not making a $20 million profit. It's probably losing about $15 million, and that doesn't even factor in prints and advertising, which can run to many millions and is a separate item from production costs.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Actually, it was considered a hit

Posted by: MockingbirdGirl 09:11 pm EDT 04/02/14
In reply to: re: Actually, it was considered a hit - keikekaze 08:00 pm EDT 04/02/14

I haven't looked up Count's box-office, but just as a hypothetical example, if a film costs $50 million to produce and it grosses $70 million, it's not making a $20 million profit. It's probably losing about $15 million

Monte Cristo cost $35 million to produce and grossed $75 million, and was considered a modest hit at the time. A movie marketing budget is typically 50% of production's costs... but even if Disney spent $20 million on marketing, the movie would still have made $20 million -- a tidy sum. The claim that it was "probably considered a failure" is untrue.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Actually, it was considered a hit

Posted by: keikekaze 01:52 am EDT 04/03/14
In reply to: re: Actually, it was considered a hit - MockingbirdGirl 09:11 pm EDT 04/02/14

I'm afraid this is wandering off topic, but the figures you're giving me don't add up as you say, unless by "grossed $75 million" you mean "netted $75 million." If Monte Cristo cost $35 mil and grossed $75 mil, that means Disney netted, maybe, $37.5 mil on the production, but advertising costs, etc., would have more than wiped out the tiny apparent profit of $2.5 million. So, not a success from a box-office p.o.v.


reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Actually, it was considered a hit

Posted by: chrisampm 10:07 pm EDT 04/02/14
In reply to: re: Actually, it was considered a hit - MockingbirdGirl 09:11 pm EDT 04/02/14

Please check the e-mail above yours. Using your stats, the movie would have cost $55 mill. And, with the typical 50% take of gross, would have taken in only $37.5 mill. A $15+ mill loss that may have been covered later by ancillaries.


reply to this message | reply to first message


All That Chat is intended for the discussion of theatre news and opinion
subject to the terms and conditions of the Terms of Service. (Please take all off-topic discussion to private email.)

Please direct technical questions/comments to webmaster@talkinbroadway.com and policy questions to TBAdmin@talkinbroadway.com.

[ Home | On the Rialto | The Siegel Column | Cabaret | Tony Awards | Book Reviews | Great White Wayback Machine ]
[ Broadway Reviews | Barbara and Scott: The Two of Clubs | Sound Advice | Restaurant Revue | Off Broadway | Funding Talkin' Broadway ]
[ Broadway 101 | Spotlight On | Talkin' Broadway | On the Boards | Regional | Talk to Us! | Search Talkin' Broadway ]

Terms of Service
[ © 1997 - 2014 www.TalkinBroadway.com, Inc. ]

Time to render: 0.221346 seconds.