Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Disney says 'John Carter' to lose $200 million
MSN Entertainment ^ | March 19, 2012 | AP

Posted on 03/19/2012 6:29:06 PM PDT by Vince Ferrer

"John Carter" is now officially a flop of galactic proportions.

The Walt Disney Co. said Monday that it expects to book a loss of $200 million on the movie in the quarter through March.

"In light of the theatrical performance of John Carter ($184 million global box office), we expect the film to generate an operating loss of approximately $200 million during our second fiscal quarter ending March 31.

(Excerpt) Read more at movies.msn.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: boxoffice; chat; disney; moviereview
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 last
To: Vince Ferrer

Only Disney could lose money on an Edgar Rice Burroughs story.


61 posted on 03/19/2012 9:52:58 PM PDT by zeugma (Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: avenir

I agree. I think that the computer graphics special effects look so fake, as to be distracting.


62 posted on 03/19/2012 9:55:57 PM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
This is the first I’ve heard about the movie. I haven’t read any Edgar Rice Burroughs for decades, but I think I read just about all of them when I was younger, including John Carter on Mars. And I still have them around somewhere, I think.

 

Books by Burroughs on Project Gutenberg US (first 5 Barsoom books)

Books by Burroughs on Project Gutenberg AU (Rest of them)



63 posted on 03/19/2012 10:01:04 PM PDT by zeugma (Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman; freedumb2003

64 posted on 03/19/2012 10:08:52 PM PDT by zeugma (Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

I’m sure the Disney CEO will earn a big bonus as a result. Just seems to be the way corporations work. Be a total screw up and get a $100 million payday.

No, I’m not a corporation hater like liberals, but I am very cynical about CEOs getting rewarded for poor and mediocre performance. It seems they can’t lose. Do great, get a huge bonus. Screw up royal, get a medium bonus. No downside.

They should be punished for screwing up like the rest of us. Getting fired with a $50 million golden parachute does not constitute punishment to me.


65 posted on 03/19/2012 10:23:21 PM PDT by Freedom_Is_Not_Free (REPEAL OBAMACARE. Nothing else matters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer
I'm waiting for Prometheus.

Everything before or after will pale in comparison.

66 posted on 03/19/2012 10:29:41 PM PDT by Kickass Conservative (A day without Obama is like a day without a Tsunami.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty
I don't remember which it is, but it's either the Rule of 2.4 or the Rule of 2.5.

Simply put, for every $10 it costs to make a movie, it has to bring in $24 or $25 to cover costs, actors' salaries, all that other. So yeah, if it cost $180M to make, it would need to bring in about $450M to be considered a "break even."
67 posted on 03/20/2012 3:05:17 AM PDT by Category Four (Joy, Fun, the Joke Proper, and Flippancy ... Flippancy is the best of all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: redhead

Yep, same here.
“A Princess of Mars” is the first.

There’s a lot of other smaller novellas originally published in magazines and such. There’s even a “Tarzan on Mars”.

Everything else seems so derivative compared to the Carter series.


68 posted on 03/20/2012 3:49:52 AM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: gogogodzilla

I remember hearing a movie was coming out, called “John Carter” and for me there was no clue as to what is was about or like. Even some promo photos I don’t recall anything distinguishing. So yes, bad marketing. You only have a few seconds to create an impression, and the impression they left was “a movie about some guy”.


69 posted on 03/20/2012 4:30:28 AM PDT by visualops (artlife.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Tex-Con-Man

Good point. I was amazed that “Avatar” even broke even. It was a remake of “Dances with Wolves,” with blue Indians and flying wolves. Just the PC garbage was enough to make me gag. I stopped watching about 2/3 through. And no, you don’t have to tell me how it ended.


70 posted on 03/20/2012 7:16:43 AM PDT by pabianice (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith
Fear not. The next Star Trek Rebooted movie is in production. In it, Kirk and Spock have an inter-species affair, Scotty is caught with child porn, and the Romulans make a campaign movie for Obama.

Abrams cannot write to save his life. "Lost." "Star Trek." And now "Alcatraz," which lasted exactly five weeks in our house. Abrams never learned that without internal logic, no story can succeed, and today's audiences are just too damn stupid to be able to tell.

71 posted on 03/20/2012 7:22:54 AM PDT by pabianice (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
And no, you don’t have to tell me how it ended.

SPOILER ALERT!

Cameron made another bazillion...

72 posted on 03/20/2012 8:04:42 AM PDT by Tex-Con-Man (T. Coddington Van Voorhees VII 2012 - "Together, I Shall Ride You To Victory")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

According to boxofficemojo Carter has taken in $179,000,000 worldwide.

Can someone explain how this movie is losing $200 million?


73 posted on 03/20/2012 8:07:11 AM PDT by morphing libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Category Four

Your statement only proves costs are not costs.


74 posted on 03/20/2012 8:09:44 AM PDT by morphing libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: AnTiw1

they are free on Itunes too :)


75 posted on 03/20/2012 8:23:30 AM PDT by TexasFreeper2009 (Go Newt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty

Promotional costs are often close to the budget to make the movie - so in this case, you could guesstimate Disney spent a half billion dollars total so far on “John Carter”. Sure they expect long-tail sales to add up, but not that much.


76 posted on 03/20/2012 8:32:21 AM PDT by ctdonath2 ($1 meals: http://abuckaplate.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith

“Hollywood accounting must be very interesting.”

Yes it is. The scriptwriter for “Forrest Gump” was not paid because the movie did not make any money (according to the creative accounting).


77 posted on 03/20/2012 8:37:58 AM PDT by ctdonath2 ($1 meals: http://abuckaplate.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: PreciousLiberty; Vince Ferrer

>>I hope there’s a sequel<<

2 words: Van Helsing. The producers of that turkey had planned an entire franchise on that movie and character. They also were going to build an entire THEME PARK based on it.

In reality, they created a rather lame “haunted house” at Universal Studios, Hollywood. Then, after a year they dropped the name entirely and the Van Helsing name slunk off into silence.

Hollywood doesn’t like losers and even breaking even is losing. Unless someone puts their own money into it there won’t be a sequel for 10 years at least.

Maybe next time they will call use “A Princess of Mars” (the best in the series) and feature a hot chick, ala the Vallejo covers (think Brigette Nielsen in her prime). Check back in 2022.


78 posted on 03/20/2012 9:16:12 AM PDT by freedumb2003 ('RETRO' Abortions = performed on 84th trimester individuals who think killing babies is a "right.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
http://s1.moviefanfare.com/uploads/2010/09/Producers-1968.jpg

The Producers.

First they make a (very good) movie.

Then they make a so-so Broadway musical based on the movie.

Then they make a terrible movie based on the so-so Broadway musical based on the movie.

What could go wrong?

79 posted on 03/20/2012 9:20:41 AM PDT by freedumb2003 ('RETRO' Abortions = performed on 84th trimester individuals who think killing babies is a "right.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard

I agree. I just think producers see something work, and then saturate it with the same story 10 times in a few years, and its like “why watch the new one”?


80 posted on 03/20/2012 10:33:51 AM PDT by Raider Sam (They're on our left, right, front, and back. They aint gettin away this time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson