MGM was about to finish partnership with Sony before the release of specter. That's why advertising of specter was very underwhelming compared to skyfall. They didn't wanted to build a brand when partnership was about to end. But like like MGM wasn't able to find any other studio to finance 250 million dollar budget for James bond
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Sony shares rally on hopes it could see the best profit in 20 years
- Thread starter samar11
- Start date
Lord of Castamere
Member
? Smurfs is out right now and bombing pretty hard. Week 3, 33mil on a 60mil budget. Domestically at least, not sure about WW.
vpance
Member
600 mil is a massive bomb at the B.O. these days for tent pole releases.
Bond and Spidy need to being doing at least $1B to be considered a success, and they failed on the former with Spectre.
Spidy reboot is their last hope at scoring big, but in the end, they have no ability at maintaining consistent hits.
You should look up the details of the sony bond deal with mgm because sony barely made any money from the bond movies. Their cut is very low so the movie is pretty much a prestige thing for them rather than a money maker.
hodayathink
Member
No they don't to the bolded. Non-Avengers Marvel movies are generally considered successes at $600-800 million. If they can keep the budgets in check (and that's been a problem with Sony and those two franchises in particular, as Spectre and the ASM series had production costs over $200 million each), then they can definitely find financial success at well under a billion. And I feel like I should respond to this:
There's a thread in Off-Topic showing the 20 most profitable movies of last year, and I'm going to post a chart from it to show you something:
The "Other Revenue" part basically breaks down the money they made off Home Video releasing and selling the rights to TV (domestic and overseas). And if Don't Breathe (which is coincidentally also a Sony movie) made $100 million dollars from that, then I would say that Passengers, even with it's lackluster reception, would have stood/stands to make as much if not more solely off the names of the leads.
vpance
Member
No they don't to the bolded. Non-Avengers Marvel movies are generally considered successes at $600-800 million. If they can keep the budgets in check (and that's been a problem with Sony and those two franchises in particular, as Spectre and the ASM series had production costs over $200 million each), then they can definitely find financial success at well under a billion. And I feel like I should respond to this:
There's a thread in Off-Topic showing the 20 most profitable movies of last year, and I'm going to post a chart from it to show you something:
The "Other Revenue" part basically breaks down the money they made off Home Video releasing and selling the rights to TV (domestic and overseas). And if Don't Breathe (which is coincidentally also a Sony movie) made $100 million dollars from that, then I would say that Passengers, even with it's lackluster reception, would have stood/stands to make as much if not more solely off the names of the leads.
None of us here know exactly how much these studios actually take in after all is said and done. I don't think you can derive actual profitability to any degree from charts like that.
All I know is Sony just took a $1B write down on their pictures division, and they make a measly 6% profit margin from it. Maybe the turnaround is coming after this shake up, but the point is they have sucked at this for a while so their ability to make good profits needs to be proven first.
ChronotriggerJM
Member
They need to get their act together on mobile phone camera, and chase that market specifically. They're the only massive player in the camera space that has mobile overlap. It saddens me that they're often underwhelming.
Sony should toss more of their pictures budget to TV shows.
Being an arm chair CEO is so damn easy.
Sony should toss more of their pictures budget to TV shows.
Being an arm chair CEO is so damn easy.
Unknown?
Member
Partnership?? I remember reading Sony purchased them for 5 billion in 2004. Do they not own MGM?
Melchiah
Member
They've had some good TV series, like Breaking Bad, Hannibal, Better Call Saul, and Bloodline, so I second to that.
They announced few days ago that they will produce Wheel of Time TV show.
Melchiah
Member
Just googled that, and it sounds interesting.
Sony will never leave the movie or music industry. People might have forgotten why the even ventured in these businesses, it's because they sell consumer electronics. Having CE and movies/music combined allows then to push for new standards from both an engineering point and from a content point.
They are making money with them now, so yes, there is value in it. Plus, Sony phones are popular in Japan, they won't easily give up of that local market presence.
I bought an Alpha 6000 for a trip to Europe with plans on returning it after. You will never get it back from me now, soooo good.
hodayathink
Member
Those numbers are from Deadline, a website that covers Hollywood exclusively. They are about as reliable as we can get publicly. If you actually checked that thread, there is another chart with expenses, and that's where general profitability was determined. While I'm not going to sit here and argue that the movie division is fine right now, because it isn't, what the writedown means generally is that the movie division isn't worth what you would assume based on what they paid for it (and possibly other factors), not that it is explicitly losing money (which, even in the quarter of the writedown, they actually weren't). Right now, it's a division with the potential to make more if run better, but it isn't actually losing them any money.
Edit: And we do know how much these studios actually take in, in general, it's in the earnings statement. What we usually don't know is how any specific movie has done unless the company actually releases that info (which most do, but some don't).