[deleted]
The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M
251–260 of 323 posts
Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M
#252Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have always assumed those numbers are fudged, and included marketing. I don't really know much about the industry, or what it take to make a film like this, but $100m is enough to pay 1000 people 100k. Did this film take that many people, that long to make? I would imagine CGI is reducing a lot of expensive things (like blowing up aircraft, and expensive location shoots).
Yes. And the equipment. And the studio spaces. And the a-list actors/dir3ctors/producers who took home many millions each. 200million was once an insane budget (Waterworld) but with movies these day grossing into the billions (Endgame et al) 200mil is no longer a stretch.
Well, the total cost was reported as $190 million, so after the 1000 people get 100k, there is still 90mil to account for...
I'm probably not up with the times, but I don't really see many actors in that film that would be classed as A-list (although the definition of that is somewhat loose).
I really like Keanu, and he seems like a great guy, but I don't think he getting paid $20 million a film, although his popularity seems on the rise again (but perhaps that is just on Reddit). He was reportedly paid 2.5mil for some of the John Wick films, and you'd have to imagine he is the top paid in this latest matrix film.
Regardless, I have already said I don't know much about the industry, and I haven't even seen the film, so it is all just speculation on my end. However, I'm willing to bet that a significant percentage of the reported spend went to subsidiaries charging healthy margins, which is common in the industry to help cut into the % of profits the studio would have to share with people as part of their contracts.
Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M
#253Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reasons people seem to be dancing around is censorship. Woke ideology on one side and the CCP on the other. That’s an extremely narrow area to work in. I don’t see this movie as an outlier. TV and Film have been in trouble since BLM and now with China buying AMC, the prospects don’t look good. As as a (former) movie goer I’ve seen nothing but shit for the last 2 years. I now suspect shit is the new normal. I’m no…
What does this have to do with the movie? Even if I could imagine a scenario in which the argument would be relevant, I don't understand what you're specifically attacking here.
Financial struggles… isn’t that what we’re talking about?
It’s simply one in a long line of offerings from Hollywood that is not meeting viewer expectations. I see it as a cumulative effect.
... And my reasons are clear.
Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M
#254Earlier quoted context omitted.
> sinks a movie franchise out of spite? it's not spite. She didn't "sink" it because she was spiteful, she wanted to say something about the films and her work and chose to deconstruct the act of making a sequel to a trilogy after 20 years. It's their art, they can do what they want with it. Their work since Matrix has always been avant-guard (Cloud Atlas is barely a film in any normal sense, a Speed Racer film by an…
> The real question is, how did Warner green-light the script and release knowing that it was going say all those things. Self depreciation is fine for WB. Half the jokes in the new Space Jam are meta self-depreciation. (not funny jokes, but jokes nonetheless)
The new Space Jam is hands down the worst picture I've ever seen.
Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M
#255I saw it twice. I honestly cannot tell if Lana Wachowski hates the Matrix or not. There was this meta montage of "oh we have to make a sequel to the Matrix because the suits wanted it, everybody pile on stupid crap", which was obviously a middle finger to...someone. I laughed out loud at how over the top that blatant F-U was...but given that the movie proceeded to then actually crap on every single thing that was awe…
Yeah at one point during one of tiresome chase scenes that was packed with gun play and slow-motion action, I recall one of the actors said “I hate bullets!” Totally believable to me that the filmmakers just “dialed-it-in” for a pile of money without caring for the story. After all they were already “done” after the first movie. Too bad. Tragically, that same pile of money could have funded a dozen innovative new fil…
Fresh and innovative stories don't sell as well as a known brand. That's why a sequel to an established franchise is always preferable to big studios.
Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M
#256Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the key point is that streaming companies don't think of it as "our customers are paying us a subscription fee and then our catalog is free to them", but rather as "our customers are paying us a percentage of their subscription fee for each thing they watch". In terms of figuring out their own cash flow, most of these sorts of subscription services divvy up the subscription fee from each customer between ever…
It doesn't matter how they gauge the success internally. They never share viewership numbers to the producers, and they don't pay by the actual viewership , they buy the property and do internal P&L on success of the buy as you say. From the producers perspective it only matters how much Netflix paid for a movie.
Hi. I think you may have got the wrong end of the stick, here.
This conversation is about a company that's released their movie to theatres and is simultaneously streaming it via their own subscription streaming service, and trying to figure out how to account for money earned by the movie when some of that money may or may not be coming in via subscription fees on the streaming service.
In that specific case (the one being discussed in this thread), the 'internal' numbers should be fine to use since they're all happening inside a single company -- both the royalties on theatrical ticket sales and the streaming subscription fees.
There's no "sharing viewership numbers" with external parties implied in my comment above, and Netflix is not involved in this situation in any way.
Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M
#257Earlier quoted context omitted.
What kind of person would take something of their own and ruin it like that? Tons of people loved the matrix, just let it be.
It was rumored that WB would have made another Matrix without Wachowski involvement if she had not agreed to it. Who knows how that would have turned out.
Better than this one? It's a pretty low bar.
Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M
#258Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah at one point during one of tiresome chase scenes that was packed with gun play and slow-motion action, I recall one of the actors said “I hate bullets!” Totally believable to me that the filmmakers just “dialed-it-in” for a pile of money without caring for the story. After all they were already “done” after the first movie. Too bad. Tragically, that same pile of money could have funded a dozen innovative new fil…
Fresh and innovative stories don't sell as well as a known brand. That's why a sequel to an established franchise is always preferable to big studios.
You can tell a completely new story under the brand name of The Matrix, she's chosen the lazy way.
Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M
#259Earlier quoted context omitted.
when it was originally written, the most common estrogen pill on the market was red. short answer: the matrix is gender. but it also represents any social construct pretty generically, and that's why there's so much confusion. long answer: duck duck go matrix transgender. also, like, when a creator tells you their work means a thing, just take them at their word. they would know. you can criticize how well or how poo…
> questioning explicit intent is a bit silly. I'm not questioning their intent , I'm questioning whether they successfully expressed that intent in the movie.
You asked how the red pill was like estrogen pills. I don't think the Wachowskis said that part was intended though.
Trans people noticed the parallels. I don't think they intended everyone would. They wanted to do more with it too. Switch's Matrix form was supposed to be male.
Re: The Matrix Resurrections estimated to lose Warner Bros $100M
#260I mean, it was a bad movie. So I'm not terribly surprised.