Why The Box Office Doesn’t Matter Anymore

Saturday, April 9th, 2011 at 8:30am
  • 68 Comments
 
Why The Box Office Doesn’t Matter Anymore  

I think it was the news that the follow-up to Tron: Legacy was moving ahead, despite the relative disappointment of last year’s 20-years-after-the-fact sequel, that made me really stop and think: When will we all stop paying attention to the box office?

Here’s the thing: Tron: Legacy barely broke even at the US box office – I think it made $1 million more than it cost – which means that it actually lost money, when you factor in promotion costs. And yet, Disney pretty much had to greenlight the follow-up, because it had already invested so much in the brand (Not just Legacy, but the two separate animated series set to spin-off from it, the remastered reissue of the original on DVD and BluRay and tie-in videogames, comics and other material). Before the release of the movie, executives were talking about Tron being positioned as one of Disney’s major boy-centric brands, and apparently, not even a critically-panned, medium-level success movie can stand in its way.

Don’t worry; Legacy will be fine; it’ll make a reasonable profit now that it’s on BluRay, especially with the 3D BluRay edition. But that’s not anything new; there have been movies that have flopped in theaters but found audiences large enough on home release that a sequel has ended up happening (Why, Boondock Saints, how fetching and yet entirely unwatchable you seem today), enough to make me wonder whether box office even counts as the primary market for movies these days. After all, the longer shelf-life is home entertainment, and with studios already signed up to a premium VoD service sending movies to televisions just 60 days after theater release, that seems to be something that’s become even more the case, rather than going in the opposite direction.

(One of the reasons why so many studios – all of the majors save Paramount – have signed on to Home Premiere, the DirecTV premium VoD scheme is apparently that movies only have, on average, a 56 day lifespan in theaters. Which, let’s face it, isn’t very long at all.)

On top of all of that, looking at the box office as a gauge for success seems even less reliable when you consider two more factors: Multiple ticket prices and inflated demand. With IMAX and 3D in the mix, movies can take the top spot in terms of money earned in a particular amount of time without actually being the most successful movie in the same period, purely because IMAX and 3D tickets cost more… which kind of undermines the entire point of tracking box office take in the first place, surely. Not only that, but on the rare occasion when a movie is a genuine, honest-to-goodness hit, that’s something that can be entirely missed when looking at the weekly box office, because a steady, long-term earner can be eclipsed by the rush to see that weekend’s latest flash in the pan (See How To Train Your Dragon last year, for example).

So with all of these reasons not to focus on box office, what are the odds that the movie industry will look at the bigger picture when it comes to determining success or making decisions? I’d like to believe they’d be pretty good, but then I remember that there’s a third Transformers movie coming out this summer…

Tags: , , , ,
← Older Comments
  • Alex

    Here’s some news.

    1. Promotion costs are covered in the initial budget of a film.

    2. Tron Legacy cost $170 million to make (including promotional cost)
    and they netted just under 400 million at the box office world wide. Do some research.

  • Nickschley

    This article acts as if this is something new. Theatre releases rarely are used for the bulk of the budgetary income of a film. DVD (or now BluRay) has always been the cash cow. Much akin to TPB’s in the comic book market. The Theatre is hoping to make as close to the budget (if not more) as possible. With DVD and/or BluRay being the gravy with little overhead.

    Not really into Tron but it wasn’t a failure by a longshot. It profited at the Box Office and will surely sail skyward on DVD/BluRay

  • http://twitter.com/madpulpbastard Bill Cunningham

    Excellent point – Disney keeping everything in house does give them the advantage in this regard.

  • Anonymous

    The big difference in boxoffice calculation now is BECAUSE there are so many other venues to see a film. Fifty years ago, the only way your could see a film was in the theaters, and then a few years later on television. If a film didn’t make a profit in the theaters, it was a failure, period. There are an long list of classic films that were boxoffice flops.

    As video started to come along (especially after people started buyine films on video as opposed to merely renting them), some films became more profitable as the home video numbers came in. But video was still considered icing on the cake; indeed, even overseas sales was a “round two” of money. The mindset was still that boxoffice would be the arbiter of “success” If someone said their film was a hit “once you added in video and international sales”, people would raise their eyebrow in cynical reply.

    Come the 80s and 90s, video sales and international receipts became more and more a requirement to make a film profitable, due mainly to the skyrocketing budgets. We also saw more films greenlighted BECAUSE of video sales. The first Austin Powers film came and went in the theaters, but found its audience on video, to the degree that a sequel was approved, which did quite well indeed. And the budgets went up, and more and more of what used to be considered “extra” money had to be added to the first round of tallying. Nowadays, they add in licensing revenue to “prove” how successful a film is.

    Next we’ll see how the sales on internet streaming sites and VOD services will be added in. And it’ll be interesting how long before the agents realize that much of the money is being made well after the theatrical release, and start making those back-end deal come from more an more sources. Gonegone are the days when the movie comanies could point at paltry ticket sales and claim, “Boy we really took a bath on this one, sorry there’s so little profits to share with you”.

  • Sborband

    Why do most articles on Spinoff always seem laced with the writer’s opinion? It’s like they can’t resist taking a shot at a movie just because it wasn’t to their liking. I liked Tron:Legacy. But to even take the time to knock other flicks like Boondock Saints and Transformers? It seems to me this site exists just for these people to have a platform to write about how much they disliked something. I’m not saying any movie mentioned here was an instant classic, but it always seems to me that the writer is trying to make you feel dumb for simply enjoying them.

  • Bhangraroots

    I agree and will add few points……couple decades ago….movies were considered successful if they could break the $100 million mark (domestically) and get some high marks from major TV stations and newspapers. Now some movies are needing IMAX/3D ticket revenue, overseas revenue, and cable/TV airing rights, social media hype, to offset their mediocre domestic revenue and general public reception. This is even before that movie hits RedBox, NetFlix, special edition and regular DVDBlu-Ray copies. Basically, movie business has more variety of ways to recoup revenue when the traditional domestic take doesnt pan out. That is why Tron will continue, that is why Superman is going to be redone again, and possibly every successive movie with some fan and/or nostalgic base will be made and spawn sequels. At the end of the day, the pride of stating a movie was very profitable and critically accepted, domestically, is not as important during this time period of myriad entertainment venues.

  • Norvandell

    Movies in the theatre any more these days are just adverts for the blu-ray/dvd’s. If studios were more original and stopped rushing remakes to the screen as quickly as they do, movies may have a longer shelf life. On average, the studios retain about 97% of the gross from theatres in the first week, and that percentage goes down slowly with each passing week a movie stays on the screen. Sad thing, is the number of movies that are pumped out, make it almost impossible for theatre circuts to keep anything past 2 to 4 weeks anyways. Longer the movie stays in a theatre, the people working behind the counters get to keep their jobs

    Cut back the number of releases per month, allow a people the chance to see a film or two, and you’d be surprised how much more money could be had from a film. Of course lowering ticket prices so people can afford to see movies, is a whole other matter.

    As for how disappointing or not “Tron” was, is a personal matter. I think too many people go into it with preconceived and high expectations, and not the attitude of just being entertained for the sake of having fun for what it’s worth. I dare anyone to raise the capitol and make a movie for 100 million and see just what people say about it.

    I’m 43, and spent over 22 years in the theatre business. Not saying I know all, and that my tastes in film out weigh others, but my advice is don’t believe anyone elses hype about a movie. Don’t waste you time with film reviews before the movie has even come out. Pay your money, and be entertained. if you like it, great, if not, chalk it up to experience. Could be, that you might not have theatres to go to in the future, and that will be a sad day.

    Sorry for the rant.

  • Mdhdjdh

    Why are you using an indie financial gap-model for a major studio like Disney? I can guarantee you that Disney did NO foreign pre-sales…based solely on their brand, they don’t have to. You need some friends at the big D, to explain to you exactly how they work…its quite fascinating.

  • Sborband

    Hear! Hear! That’s a nice rant I think. And you do have a point. Just how long will theatres be around so we can enjoy the big screen? Don’t take them for granted, because that’s when they’ll disappear.

  • JMC

    If we’ve learnt anything from this article it’s this:

    Don’t rile up Tron fans because they get very emotional (backs away cautiously)

  • Ray A

    My young son and daughter both loved the movie (and their father kind of dug it too), love the toys, and were left wanting more… I’m sure they’re not alone, and I’m sure Disney has gotten similar feedback. No, it’s not going to be Star Wars, and not even Pirates, but they realize that got a property with some long-term potential across a variety of media.

    Box office is only important to a degree. Why do you think they keep making Hulk movies, with him coming back in the Avengers? Because they sold a load of Hulk Hands, t-shirts, action figures, etc. etc., and they will again.

  • EL FRANCO

    If this is true, then why can’t we get Serenity / Firefly up again with a sequel? Browncoats are willing to give good money away to see a feature film again!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QKN5MHOI6VUFOYCTV5REK7M7A4 Jacob

    TO be honest, the only reason Serenity exists is because Fox decided it was worth the gamble. There was no logical reason to do it other than “Maybe the fans will actually come out and see it.” And then they didn’t, and that’s why no Serenity 2.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QKN5MHOI6VUFOYCTV5REK7M7A4 Jacob

    *tackles* I WAS PROVOKED! YOU ALL SAW IT.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QKN5MHOI6VUFOYCTV5REK7M7A4 Jacob

    Start checking the byline. It’s always the same guy. Everybody else reports news. He does editorials. His mood is constantly set to “Bitch.”

  • http://www.facebook.com/david.schmitt#!/ David R. Schmitt

    Boondocks Saints unwatchable? Glad I don’t see it though your eyes.
    And Graeme, HELLO! Foreign box office? The world does not end at the U.S./Mexico and U.S./Canada border you know. Your opinion pieces kinda shows what uninformed opinions you develop.

  • Dan

    This article takes a pretty short sighted point of view. For all intents and purposes, Disney was launching a brand new franchise.

    And from a business standpoint, there are still a whole mess of reasons to look at Box Office. Try launching a franchise off a movie like Sucker Punch, which just bombed at the box office. While it may not be the main factor like it once once, the Box Office is still the springboard for the life of the movie, due to the fact that so many deals/ decisions are made off of box office performance.

  • JMC

    I did the opposite – I saw the film (had never even heard of Firefly), loved it, then went back and watched the series, had a cry when I realised it’d been cancelled, and then read the comics when they came out.

    It was an emotional ride, but worth it.

← Older Comments
 

Recent Articles

Has <i>Star Trek</i> Changed Its Mission?  
  •  

Has Star Trek Changed Its Mission?

Sunday, May 19th, 2013
Movies
 
  •  

Will Ferrell and Co. Stay Classy in New Anchorman 2 Teaser Trailer

Sunday, May 19th, 2013
Movies
Disney Reverses Merida Makeover, But Still Seems to Miss the Point  
  •  

Disney Reverses Merida Makeover, But Still Seems to Miss the Point

Saturday, May 18th, 2013
Animation, Movies
Three Great Young-Adult Novels <br />That Should Become Films  
  •  

Three Great Young-Adult Novels
That Should Become Films

Friday, May 17th, 2013
Movies
Samuel L. Jackson Teams With <br />Hailee Steinfeld in <i>Barely Lethal</i>  
  •  

Samuel L. Jackson Teams With
Hailee Steinfeld in Barely Lethal

Friday, May 17th, 2013
Movies

Contributors

Kevin Melrose

TJ Dietsch

Terri Schwartz

Katie Calautti

Keri Luna

Anna Pinkert

Kiel Phegley