I KNEW the movie would flop

[ro9ue]

That's the most logical conclusion of this, yes. CGI would probably still be made by ILM but the filming would be done in china. The good thing about this film is that you can put a lot of Chinese actors into this without the western audiences realizing it. Nobody will be outraged if the main character is Chinese because Thrall would be CG anyway, that's the same trick they did with Gul'Dan for this film.
If we are honest 160million for a film like this was already too much of a risk in the first place, the 100 they planed for in the early stages would have been more appropriate.
A lot of the other films that failed at the box office in the last month had the same problem of an totally overblown Budget.
Alice Through the Looking Glass, Tmnt2, the BFG, Independence Day failing to get the money in. X-Men: Apocalypse and Now You See Me 2 barely making it into the profit zone .
The Legend of Tarzan potentially being the next candidate to fail.

Incoming:

Warcraft Movie: The Mists of Pandaria

[Vitrino]

All the humans would be Chinese as well since their primary audience speaks the language...

I won't watch such a movie. It's not about racism but about being faithful to the original material. It's like (or better said, the other way around) Scarlet Johansson playing Motoko Kusanagi in Ghost in the Shell's adaptation. I hope that movie fails horribly (GITS) so that Hollywood keeps away from Anime franchises.
If they make Lord of the Clans or any Warcraft's sequel with human main characters being asiatic, I'm done with the franchise.

[Plehnard]

I doubt that all humans would be Chinese, white people are quite an exotic thing for the east Asians and therefore would immerse more into those fantasy lands. ;D
For the average man in china we are basically some kind of elves:
From distant lands, with strange language, a former high culture past it's peak and dwindling numbers in population overall.

[Relapses]

I won't watch such a movie. It's not about racism but about being faithful to the original material. It's like (or better said, the other way around) Scarlet Johansson playing Motoko Kusanagi in Ghost in the Shell's adaptation. I hope that movie fails horribly (GITS) so that Hollywood keeps away from Anime franchises.
If they make Lord of the Clans or any Warcraft's sequel with human main characters being asiatic, I'm done with the franchise.

If the movie is being made specifically for an "Asiatic" audience then I'm fairly certain the filmmakers would be perfectly fine with Western audiences being turned off by it. By the same token, I'm sure there are people in China who don't watch American movies because they dislike Western culture. It's not even racism, it's simply how different our cultures are.

Warcraft's success in Asia prompts a question of whether a Chinese-driven Hollywood entity is a feasible option. For the short term (and the scope of Warcraft's sequels), I don't think it is. But five to ten years down the road, we might see movies with Hollywood-level budgets developed exclusively for Asian audiences. And people will look back and say that Warcraft helped usher it in.

[Nyel]

Incoming:

Warcraft Movie: The Mists of Pandaria

This is the most likely version of a second Warcraft movie lol. And a movie about the Scourge and Arthas would not work in China.

[Nekoyou]

I'm talking break even point. The cost to cover what the movie spent for the last 10 years. Total gross of about 500M.

Not an additional 500M but roughly 500 million total to just reach a break even point. I personally think it will take a bit more than that but people don't want to believe it from the article I posted a few ago. So I go with the age old formula.

On average a movie needs to make twice it's budget and marketing expenditure. Warcraft being 160M + 100M est = 260M x2 = 520M. Just as a good rough estimate. Yes, I think 500M is as good as were going to get till real figures in marketing are out (if they ever get out) but what we know is marketing costs are extremely high these days and they went above and beyond in marketing warcraft. You can bet that 100M average is either close or low for what was actually spent.

Edit: figured out why you said 10 years. We are counting from 2006.

Nevertheless, If the gross total simply needs to hit 500 million I would imagine they will probably hit that with the dvd director's cut sales. They are already at 422 million as of july 4th. So basically they have already made over double the budget of the actual movie now they are trying to cover the gross budget for the marketing. Which people feel they need to make double of so that it is turning a "profit" or at least "breaking even". I guess. I'm not in the movie industry so I can't speak for what they are looking for and where they want to be number wise. However, if they already made double their budget for the movie itself I would think they are pretty happy at this point and are probably considering making another one. I personally think the movie was pretty great and I cannot wait till they make another provided they don't try to dumb down the movie for people who cannot take the time to pay attention to the movie.

[Relapses]

Edit: figured out why you said 10 years. We are counting from 2006.

Nevertheless, If the gross total simply needs to hit 500 million I would imagine they will probably hit that with the dvd director's cut sales. They are already at 422 million as of july 4th. So basically they have already made over double the budget of the actual movie now they are trying to cover the gross budget for the marketing. Which people feel they need to make double of so that it is turning a "profit" or at least "breaking even". I guess. I'm not in the movie industry so I can't speak for what they are looking for and where they want to be number wise. However, if they already made double their budget for the movie itself I would think they are pretty happy at this point and are probably considering making another one. I personally think the movie was pretty great and I cannot wait till they make another provided they don't try to dumb down the movie for people who cannot take the time to pay attention to the movie.

The point of contention is that the movie really hasn't made double what they invested into it. If you factor in the P&A budget (~$100M) which is additive on top of the $160M production budget ($160M + $100M = $260M, x2 = $520M, roughly, which is where the oft-quoted $500M figure is derived). Also, the movie has pretty much ceased making money at the box office at this point. It's opened in all markets and it's being quickly dismissed from theaters in every market which it has opened. I would be surprised if the total box office cume once its finally completely off screens totals more than $450M.

That said, there is merchandising and home entertainment legacy dividends for the film which may help push it into the black. The studio is undoubtedly happy with the film's overall performance but it was an unequivocal dud for domestic audiences. Hollywood has definitely greenlit sequels to shittier movies and even movies which performed worse overall than Warcraft but this is the first time a movie has tanked as badly as Warcraft did with domestic audiences while still managing the appearance of profitability due to its success abroad.

It's a weird situation for a movie franchise to be in, but other major tentpole films have been in similar situations. The first, Disney's John Carter, has all but been completely excised from existence. The other, Pacific Rim, performed twice as well as Warcraft did domestically and its sequel spent years in development hell before being given a 2018 release date without its star director attached.

[BenBos]

i gave it 4/10

IMDB = 7.5 with near 100.000 people voting

Metacritic = 8.5 with near 3000 voting.

I guess you belong to the few "critics" (a handful) who despise Movies made from game franchises.

A minority.



---- At above ----

The STANDARD MOVIE return on initial production costs = X x 2.5 Dude .

LEARN before posting...


Oh and again: 160 million production costs with 2.5 factor (as a common rule to cover MARKETING, DISTRIBUTION, THEATER profits) = 400 million total costs.

SO WARCRAFT the movie already is on profit since 3 weeks ...

The "haters" simply add another (wet thumb invented) 100 million figure which is silly, ridiculous and laughable.

[B]For YEARS, these HATERS come in here to provoke and tease the fans.


- - - Updated - - -

If the movie is being made specifically for an "Asiatic" audience then I'm fairly certain the filmmakers would be perfectly fine with Western audiences being turned off by it. By the same token, I'm sure there are people in China who don't watch American movies because they dislike Western culture. It's not even racism, it's simply how different our cultures are.

Warcraft's success in Asia prompts a question of whether a Chinese-driven Hollywood entity is a feasible option. For the short term (and the scope of Warcraft's sequels), I don't think it is. But five to ten years down the road, we might see movies with Hollywood-level budgets developed exclusively for Asian audiences. And people will look back and say that Warcraft helped usher it in.

The movie was also a HUGE success in the EU, Germany, Russia, not only in China btw. In fact it was 3 weeks number one in Germany (before the European football championship started).

So it was quite successful OUTSIDE the US, the United States btw ... where... clearly its Public Opinion can be manipulated by a few mass media opinion makers.

Welcome to the land of Trump...

The US has to realise they are just another movie market

The Chinese mother production house OWNS practically all theaters too, which makes Warcraft for a HUGE boom in their movie industry, breaking several records.

So when the GLOBAL movie industry sees a HUGE Hit, they will just pass on it because the US critics do not like movies based on games ???

ROFL.

[Cooper]

[/B]GET A LIFE MORONS and simply stop inventing things on the fly. How is it to spread hate among fans ? Satisfied ?

People using the $450-500 million numbers are citing from industry sources like Variety and Deadline. The one inventing things on the fly is you. So what does that make you?

[Tackhisis]

The best source to movie's failure is inconvenient silence from the Blizzard officials.

[BenBos]

People using the $450-500 million numbers are citing from industry sources like Variety and Deadline. The one inventing things on the fly is you. So what does that make you?

No they don't.

Because the STANDARD RULE of return on investment = Production costs X 2.5 = Point of profit.

http://www.flickeringmyth.com/2016/0...ion-worldwide/

(amongst other sources).

Quote: "However a fantastic campaign outside of the US has pushed Warcraft over the $400 million mark to $412 million. If you go by the industry rule-of-thumb (that a movie needs to do 2.5x its budget in order to turn a profit), Warcraft is now making money. Expect to hear news of a sequel soon."

Since then, the revenue went to 422 million (24 June for China 03 July for US) ... and the movie keeps playing in theaters in the EU...

What these Warcraft haters (the usual suspects) do .... is adding an invented 100.000.000 to the 160.000.000 production costs (which is laughable since that extra cost is already INTO the 2.5 STANDARD factor of a typical Hollywood production.

The real thing about Warcraft though is that in China the production house ALSO owns the distribution chains (and theaters).

So the 2.5 extra costs for the standard Hollywood production is even LESS for the Warcraft movie in that part of the world ...

[Pann]

The best source to movie's failure is inconvenient silence from the Blizzard officials.

In fairness the deal Blizzard made with Legendary may well mean that they have been paid despite the movie's poor box office. Then, again, they might have been stupid enough to go for Monkey Points.

[BenBos]

The best source to movie's failure is inconvenient silence from the Blizzard officials.

Every week the reports are being made dude and Blizzard is not even producing it.

[Pann]

The real thing about Warcraft though is that in China the production house ALSO owns the distribution chains (and theaters).

So the 2.5 extra costs for the standard Hollywood production is even LESS for the Warcraft movie in that part of the world ...

Do you honestly believe that Wanda will divert all the revenue made by their cinemas from showing the Warcraft movie into the movie's accounts?

[Nekoyou]

The point of contention is that the movie really hasn't made double what they invested into it. If you factor in the P&A budget (~$100M) which is additive on top of the $160M production budget ($160M + $100M = $260M, x2 = $520M, roughly, which is where the oft-quoted $500M figure is derived). Also, the movie has pretty much ceased making money at the box office at this point. It's opened in all markets and it's being quickly dismissed from theaters in every market which it has opened. I would be surprised if the total box office cume once its finally completely off screens totals more than $450M.

That said, there is merchandising and home entertainment legacy dividends for the film which may help push it into the black. The studio is undoubtedly happy with the film's overall performance but it was an unequivocal dud for domestic audiences. Hollywood has definitely greenlit sequels to shittier movies and even movies which performed worse overall than Warcraft but this is the first time a movie has tanked as badly as Warcraft did with domestic audiences while still managing the appearance of profitability due to its success abroad.

It's a weird situation for a movie franchise to be in, but other major tentpole films have been in similar situations. The first, Disney's John Carter, has all but been completely excised from existence. The other, Pacific Rim, performed twice as well as Warcraft did domestically and its sequel spent years in development hell before being given a 2018 release date without its star director attached.

Okay, I think I understand what you guys are doing now with the numbers. Actually, I think you guys are mistaken. You don't have to make double your marketing budget to turn "profit" or to "break even". If their marketing budget turned out to be 100 Million then they only need 100 million to cover the cost. That means they do not need to make x2 it to make a profit. In other words if the production cost was 160 M and the marketing cost was 100 M then the formula would be 160 M x 2 + 100 M = 420 M. Not 520 M. Because you don't need to double your Marketing cost to make a profit. Anything over the initial cost for production of the movie plus the marketing cost is a profit. I'm not sure why you guys have been trying to x2 the marketing cost. Is there an actual reason why you guys have been?

Furthermore, shouldn't their "break even" point be at when they actually fulfill the amount they payed for the movie. So if it cost 160 M for production + another 100 M for marketing shouldn't they only need 260 M to "break even"? And then anything above that is profit.

[Cooper]

No they don't.

Because the STANDARD RULE of return on investment = Production costs X 2.5 = Point of profit.

http://www.flickeringmyth.com/2016/0...ion-worldwide/

(amongst other sources).

Quote: "However a fantastic campaign outside of the US has pushed Warcraft over the $400 million mark to $412 million. If you go by the industry rule-of-thumb (that a movie needs to do 2.5x its budget in order to turn a profit), Warcraft is now making money. Expect to hear news of a sequel soon."

Since then, the revenue went to 422 million ... and the movie keeps playing in theaters in the EU...

What these Warcraft haters (the usual suspects) do .... is adding an invented 100.000.000 to the 160.000.000 production costs (which is laughable since that extra cost is already INTO the 2.5 STANDARD factor of a typical Hollywood production.

I know this is pointless, but:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/new...-online-902975

Costing $160 million to make, Warcraft needs to earn $450 million or more to break even.

http://deadline.com/2016/06/warcraft...ce-1201770307/

Industry sources tell Deadline that breakeven is at $500M worldwide.

Those sources are actual Hollywood trade mags reporting $450-$500 million for WarCraft to break even, and where this very website got its information when it itself posted that the movie would need $500 million to break even.

What you quoted was a guy who had no industry sources just making up what he believed to be true.

[Tackhisis]

I'm not sure why you guys have been trying to x2 the marketing cost. Is there an actual reason why you guys have been?

Because both production and marketing are paid by the box office. Domestic gives about 50% of it in revenues, foreign 40% and the Chinese 25%.

[BenBos]

Okay, I think I understand what you guys are doing now with the numbers. Actually, I think you guys are mistaken. You don't have to make double your marketing budget to turn "profit" or to "break even". If their marketing budget turned out to be 100 Million then they only need 100 million to cover the cost. That means they do not need to make x2 it to make a profit. In other words if the production cost was 160 M and the marketing cost was 100 M then the formula would be 160 M x 2 + 100 M = 420 M. Not 520 M. Because you don't need to double your Marketing cost to make a profit. Anything over the initial cost for production of the movie plus the marketing cost is a profit. I'm not sure why you guys have been trying to x2 the marketing cost. Is there an actual reason why you guys have been?

Exactly. That's the "tric" these hater guys make.

The STANDARD formula used in Hollywood is Production Costs X 2.5 = point of reaching Profits. for a Hollywood production.

The standard factor of 2.5 incorporates the MARKETING, DISTRIBUTION and theater PROFITS.

So in the case of Warcraft it is: 160.000.000 X 2.5 = 400 million. = Point of making Profits ....

I would deduct even several millions of that total cost point since the OWNER of the Warcraft movie ALSO is owner of the distribution AND the vast majority of the Theaters ...


So it is pretty clear that adding TWICE a fictive (and invented 100.000.000 for marketing) is ridiculous and NOT in accordance with what the movie industry rule of thumb is ...

[Pann]

Okay, I think I understand what you guys are doing now with the numbers. Actually, I think you guys are mistaken. You don't have to make double your marketing budget to turn "profit" or to "break even". If their marketing budget turned out to be 100 Million then they only need 100 million to cover the cost. That means they do not need to make x2 it to make a profit. In other words if the production cost was 160 M and the marketing cost was 100 M then the formula would be 160 M x 2 + 100 M = 420 M. Not 520 M. Because you don't need to double your Marketing cost to make a profit. Anything over the initial cost for production of the movie plus the marketing cost is a profit. I'm not sure why you guys have been trying to x2 the marketing cost. Is there an actual reason why you guys have been?

The marketing, like the production costs, needs to covered by the money taken at the box office. The cinema will take their share of the box office money before the remainder, which is typically around 50%, goes to the studio/distributer. Thus to cover the costs of $100million marketing campaign the movie would have to take $200million at the box office.

[Soulwind]

Guys, guys, I have a better formula.

X * 2 = Y.

Where X is how much the movie has done and Y how much it needs to break even. That way you won't look dumb by stating it needs to make 400M, only to then say it needs 450M, and then say it needs 500M; it will always be half of what it needs!