Actually, it did. Its domestic gross does not cover the production costs, but if you add the foreign gross, you get $229M (production budget: $144M). (Source: BoxOfficeMojo)
Foreign gross is only good for bragging rights. The studio doesn't actually get that money.
Licenses for international distribution are sold and whatever they take above and beyond the license fee is all money in the bank.
The bottom line is, is that if you don't cover production cost, plus a certain percent with domestic revenue, the movie is a financial flop. At that point, the writer, director and producer are heavily scrutinized. It could be career ending.
New Ghostbusters? I have no opinion. Didn't see it because I: 1) didn't really have the time, 2) didnt care to get involved in the social brouhaha.
However, the best commentary and review I heard was that:
The VFX and the casting were good.
It fell flat becasue the script was terrible and the actesses had little to work with, likely a result of poor direction.
Secondarily, the movie completely ignored the first two. That's not a sequel, it's a reboot. Reboots are fine, just don't market it as a sequel if that's the case.
usually it takes 3x the production cost to actually turn a profit after marketing and the theaters taking their share. Major blockbusters usually need 4x since the marketing budgets are usually as large as the production cost.
I dunno. I thought it was the perfect spiritual successor to the original. And if you're gonna complain because it had a political agenda, then you probably don't like the original Ghostbusters much either.
▼
deleted
· 7 years ago
At least they were subtle about it
deleted
· 7 years ago
At least the black guy wasnt a fucking joke so much that they starred it in the trailer
Everything is gonna have a political agenda. The problem comes with how hard they push it onto the movie to where you can see its blatantly political agenda and then that agenda is 99% of the advertising vs a story with a message like all movies have
I didn't like how even though they were scientists the women still talked like idiots. It's like the producers thought stupidity was the only way to make comedy. The original guys weren't dumbasses but it was still hilarious but these ladies were just so stupid!
Licenses for international distribution are sold and whatever they take above and beyond the license fee is all money in the bank.
The bottom line is, is that if you don't cover production cost, plus a certain percent with domestic revenue, the movie is a financial flop. At that point, the writer, director and producer are heavily scrutinized. It could be career ending.
New Ghostbusters? I have no opinion. Didn't see it because I: 1) didn't really have the time, 2) didnt care to get involved in the social brouhaha.
However, the best commentary and review I heard was that:
The VFX and the casting were good.
It fell flat becasue the script was terrible and the actesses had little to work with, likely a result of poor direction.
Secondarily, the movie completely ignored the first two. That's not a sequel, it's a reboot. Reboots are fine, just don't market it as a sequel if that's the case.
Movie was terrible and the only thing worse that it was CinemaSins analysis of it.