Preview on Fantastic Four part 3
 

http://i12.tinypic.com/4zvwcnq.jpg



Not sure if black panther will take part though. :upsidedow

Is that for real????

wow... who are they?

Guy on the right looks like the Rock.

Found it from another site....are they real or fake? Not really sure... The Rock looks pretty good though as Namor and Danny Devito as Mole Man? Hmmm....

Namor.... The Sub-Mariner!

I've been wondering if they would ever put that character into one of these movies.

The 1st one sucked and didn't even make back production costs. And if this one tanks too then it's kind of stupid to be planning a 3rd one already. It's not like the first one made $300 milion and they had something to go on.

Production budget of FF1 was 100 million, it made $330 million worldwide. You sure it didn't make back production costs?

First of all I was talking US gross. Secondly studios usually on get 55% of the US gross. Assuming that 55% applies worldwide 55% of $330 million is $181.5 million. So that would be at most $81.5 million not counting advertising costs.

Compare to say Spiderman 3 which so far has made $809 million worldwide and a production budget of $258 million. Factoring in the same 55% SP3 has made $187 profit and counting. So yes I'd say Fantastic 4's box office sucked.

damned double post

Am I psychic? Am I god? How was I supposed to know you were talking about US gross?

You stated:
Which of course just isn't true (well, the sucked is true, but the 'didn't even make back production costs' isn't). Worldwide the movie made a little over $330 million, and for a $100 million dollar budget that's not that bad when compared to other movies of the same caliber. Did it have a chance of coming close to Spider-Man? Of course not -- the Spider-Man fanbase is gigantic in comparison to Fantastic Four, nobody should expect it to be in the same league.

If you compare Fantastic Four to say, Daredevil, Hulk or Ghost Rider you will get a much more realistic feeling of how the movie fared.

Fantastic Four: $330 million worldwide with a $100 million budget.
Ghost Rider: $224 million worldwide with a $110 million budget.
Hulk: $245 million worldwide with a $137 million budget.
Daredevil: $179 million worldwide with a $78 million budget.

I'd say FF1 was a financial win.

Studios aren't stupid. (usually) They're not going to make a FF2 and have plans for a third in the works if it tanked the first time.


Personally I liked the first one.

As I said you are assuming studios get the same % of the gross as they do in the US. Usually studios hope to at least break even with the US gross then everything from foreign is profit. FF did NOT break even with it's US gross. that's the whole point. US gross was $156 million.

Now I just found several sources that say that $35 mil is the average spent on movie advertising per movie the last few years. Probably higher for movies like FF, but let's go with that. So $100 mil budget $35 mil advetising for a total of $135 million. Once again the studios made maybe $88 mil from US gross. That's a loss of $52 million. The movie SHOULD have made at least $246 million just to break even in the US. I'd say $156 mil falls well short.

I can guarantee you when the studio signed the $100 mil check they expected a US gross of more than $156 million.

PFFFT I'm assuming fuck all.

Movies today that gross even 50 million clear profit are considered winners, and FF1 clearly made much more than that. End of argument as far as I'm concerned, and the fact that they are planning more sequels says the studio is happy with it's performance.

Okay you're right, I AM assuming, a little. But not the way you think.

I'm assuming that because the studio has made a 2nd one and are already planning a 3rd that they know what the fuck they are doing and are not losing money.

If it brings in a profit of over 100 mill worldwide I'd say it's a win, and worth doing again and again until it's milked for all it's worth.