OFFICIAL NEWS A Lasting Record Of TLJ's Financial Performance.

I've generally always ignored ratings.
Ratings don't really mean that I will or won't like something.
My problem with critical reviews is that critics are jaded people who aren't looking for what I'm looking for in a film. They're looking for something that impresses them, and thinking from their lens. Well, I don't sit around all day consuming films as a job, so I doubt I'm going to be in step with that kind of person's mindset and emotional satisfaction.

My problem with user ratings and reviews, while also true that I don't know how I can relate to an anonymous blob of people, more importantly it's not really an impressive point to show me self-elected user ratings (the most common method) of hundreds of thousands of people.

I mean, for scope of how this functions for me...if I go through and tally up the amount of review and ratings involved in the above table, then I get somewhere between 800,000 and 900,000.
We'll take the median of 850,000 total reviews.
Now, we'll assume 2/3rds of the ratings were unfavorable. This isn't true, but we're just going to put the 8 ball against us here for due diligence.
That's 530,478 ratings against the film under that condition.
We'll also assume that the consumer industry standard of 96% of your customers who didn't like your product won't tell you is true.
That makes that 530,478 users 4% of the customers who didn't like the product.
That means our total count of customers who actually didn't like the product could be all the way up to 14,025,000 consumers.

Now, let's flip around.
The average price of a ticket is roughly 8.97 USD - varies all over the place, but we'll just use this since it's the average.
If we divide the final by that, then we get 148,542,035 tickets.
We can't count each ticket as an individual person because some people go more than once. However, the average films in a year for the average audience member isn't actually that high, broadly speaking, as the MPAA reports that to be about 5 films per individual in a year. There are obviously people who go more than that, and there are plenty of people who go quite heavily to a single film repeatedly, but as an average, the amount that an audience member will see a film won't be that much more on average than once.
But, we'll skew this average in mind of the demographic response that is Star Wars and bump that up to 2 views average, which is high, but I want to give every inch of possibility to the negative angle here as much as possible rather than weight it towards the positive rating side of things. The more times people see it, the more that negative experience demographic counts, so I'll weight it upward.
I'll even run it with 3 views per person being the average.

OK, so, at 2 times we're looking at 74,271,017 people.
At 3 views, we're looking at 49,514,012 people.

I don't care if those numbers seem small; we'll just roll with it, because the smaller those numbers the more the negative rating population grows in scale.

So, that's 14,025,000 viewers against either 49,514,012 or 74,271,017.
That translates to 28% to 18% of the audience not liking the film.

Flip that around, and that comes out to 72 to 82% of the audience liking the film.

When you put that into perspective, and wipe out each review site's grades entirely and just take a head count...it's not really that impressive.

If 100% of the site reviews were negative, and every audience member saw the film 3 times, the quantity would be 42% of the audience calculated as not liking the film.


The thing really is that most people don't bother with reviewing or rating films.


Basically; at best (for the negative camp), we're looking at roughly a quarter of the audience not liking it, and it's much more likely that we're probably more around a top range of 10 to 15% of the audience (effectively 1/3rd of the rating audience reviewing negatively in anyway other than liking it).

Even if we take the Rotten Tomatoes 53% of the reviewers rating poorly concept and apply it across the board, you're looking at around 22% of the general audience.


Here's what matters at the end of the day.
Did the film company make their money back?
Did you enjoy the film?

I would honestly argue that the only real metric that truly has any meaning is the second one...unless you're part of that company or the film project.

The rest is noise; honestly.
It's fun analytical noise, but at the end of the day, it's really blabbering noise about not much of anything...especially negative self-elect ratings.

Cheers,
Jayson

 

So ya... this happened over the weekend and should rightfully shake the business.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=4398&p=.htm

A billion dollars internationally, 17 days in. $1.6 billion. IW just simply leapfrogged 7 of the top $1.2b+ earners and kicked TLJ out of the top 10. And China is just coming online. Just staggering. IW will be the first film in 20 years that isn't Avatar to break Titanic's initial foreign first-run($1.2 billion). It almost straight-up merc'd TFA's entire foreign run.

What this does is give a nice reference point and see what a Flagship IP movie that hits hard overseas, as well as domestically, looks like in 2018.

And guess what.. that's not The Last Jedi. We can now clearly see that TLJ underperformed on both sides. It lost hundreds of millions from its direct predecessor both domestically and internationally(and we're also seeing now that TFA's foreign gross was actually kind of weak for a flagship, which shouldn't be surprising given it couldn't even beat the foreign first-run of a film from 1998) to give a net dropoff of upwards of $700 million from TFA.

Its just amazing to me to watch these numbers and Marvel(hehe) at what a popular film can do. This is why we track this stuff, for times like this when you have a Great Movie doing Great Numbers across the board, and when something hits its fun to watch. That used to be Star Wars. Sadly, it wasn't with TLJ, and no matter how much spin gets thrown out there, you can't unbreak the egg. TLJ underperformed and didn't deliver because it was a bad Star Wars film. It doesn't matter how much 'profit' you want to attribute to it. It didn't follow through on the promise of TFA, and at times was pretty much openly hostile to it. A house divided against itself cannot stand, and honestly I don't expect anything different in Episode 9. JJ will come in and half glance at what was done in 8, and then do his own thing to finish the trilogy as close to how he was originally intending as he can get. They'll then make what they make, and whatever comes after that is anyone's guess.

Make no mistake, the saga of The Last Jedi at the box office is a clear indication of what not to do. Its the Goofus of Box Office tracking that underperformed across the board while killing expectations for 9. Whereas IW is the Gallant, and showing how to deliver a popular film(even with a downer ending) that can excite and entertain mass audiences everywhere, 20 films in, and primes them for the finale next May. The truth points to itself, and it can be no clearer in these two instances.

The only question in my mind is how badly Solo is going to perform, but one could make the case of rising tide lifting all ships, so who knows?

Its just... quite frankly, I have a bad feeling about this.

 

TLJ was expected to underperform TFA's run, this witchhunt to bury it financially is really strained and uninformed for how these films track, and the historic precedents in the franchise. I understand you hated the film but, please. TFA set the pace--it was always going to be the biggest entry in the trilogy. Nothing would ever match it. It was the return of Star Wars, the return of the full OT cast, the trilogy that we never thought would happen, and it got decent audience and critic scores to boot. That was the bar, nothing will ever change that, no matter how amazing any future film does, the peak was always TFA.

Just like with ANH
Just like with TPM

ESB brought in less than the first film. AOTC and ROTS--the "good prequel"-- couldn't bring in what Phantom Menace did. Lucas knew that at the time, and the two sequels did what they were expected to do, same with the OT. Historically the final film takes a dip upward, so I expect Episode IX will do a bit better than TLJ.

It was understood that each film from TFA out would perform lower, and that's exactly what is happening. TLJ had a fine and expected run financially, it was of absolutely no surprise and did what any reasonable analyst was expecting of it.

 

It's a continued run of relative privation with moving goalposts to boot.
First it was Jumanji, then BP, now IW. Cool.

Also, I find it amusing to compare the 20th film to the third film.
If we're going play the d**k comparison game let's compare the same age brackets shall we?
How were things going for Marvel by the third film of the current run?
$585,171,547 (Iron Man)
$265,573,859 (Incredible Hulk)
$621,156,389 (Iron Man 2)



Cheers,
Jayson

 

For a "Star Wars fan" you're certainly determined to see the saga burn in hell. Why do you want it to fail so miserably? In the end, Disney is the ultimate victor so who cares.

 

Disney must be so upset that their propieties are doing so well in the B.O xD

 

Good grief you are really reaching. You're comparing apples to oranges. You do know that IW has 10 years of hype behind it right (just like Episode 1 and Episode 7)? How are the numbers compare to Episode 7. That's more an equal playing field. Your essentially comparing Avatar vs Original SW. Are you trolling? I'm honestly asking because your are flirting with it man. Your post is irrelevant.

 

TLJ had 40 years of hype behind it, and 2 years of hardcore hype from its lead-in of TFA. TLJ was easily the most anticipated film in at least a decade. Try again.

And had you read my post fully, you'd have noted that I do in fact compare it to 7 on a foreign basis, with IW nearly murdering TFA's anemic(couldn't even beat a 20-year old film's first run foreign gross), 17 days in.

I don't think anyone is expecting IW to challenge TFA on a domestic basis, while likely pulling in ~$700-750 million, but given its a smash hit across the world, TFA's overall number should be easily murdered, with the movie likely becoming at least the #2 moneymaker of all-time before its done. Whether it challenges Avatar for the overall title is an open question. If it doesn't, the movie next year should. But then, 40% drop-offs, second film or otherwise, don't exist in the Marvel Dojo.

And has always been stated, the big test for just how badly The Lost Jedi was botched and how much damage it did to the overall IP will be Solo, opening in 11 days. The Mendoza Line for that film is a $150 million domestic OW. Anything less and the damage will have been significant. As a simple test, I asked my teenage niece the other day which film she wanted to see more... Solo or Deadpool 2. Her response: Deadpool 2.

ATM, i'd give it a one buy... but likely not until well after release. It will be the first Star Wars film in 22 years I didn't see OW, and the first I won't watch more than once. They reap what they sow. Guess I need to get rid of the past, destroy it if I must. I'm just not sure they ever considered they were referring to themselves with that statement... but there you go.

Or relieved. IW alone will no doubt pay for the mess LucasFilm left in the bed. But make no mistake, in this game there are no sandbaggers. If LucasFilm can't pull its weight, i'm fairly confident changes will be made. You can't always depend on Marvel paying for LucasFilm's mistakes, and those mistakes will get progressively more expensive. Letting the problem fester is not how this works.

And yet here we are, the 20th film in with Marvel, and its made more money than all other Marvel films, with next year's entry likely to be even bigger. Because if there is anything Marvel knows as well as setting stuff up, its paying stuff off. This entire idea of your second film always taking a nosedive off a cliff is an extremely antiquated one. In fact, its almost entirely a Star Wars problem.

 

Why are y'all continuing to attempt to have a reasonable conversation with someone who continues to make irrational statements? Don't feed the trolls.

 

Animated gifs seem to be great repellent, and at least then the reading through the nonsense is entertaining.



Cheers,
Jayson

 

I would have to disagree. I'd say that was TFA. The first film in 33 years to finally continue the OT with the promise of the return of the big 3. Just my opinion, neither of ours is right or wrong.

Mickey appreciates your cash whether it is at the advanced screening, opening night, OW, Wednesday, next weekend, or one month three days fours hours thirty six minutes from opening night. Popcorn and drinks can be picked up in the concession area, make sure cell phones are turned off, and enjoy the show.

I agree, it is never good to let a problem fester, however, their needs to be a problem to fester first. LF survived as an IP with no problem before Disney and really do not see where they are having a problem now. In six years since acquisition, just 3 movies in, each crossing the billion dollar mark, One more ready for release, One to start production, two more trilogies in the works and a TV show...... EEEEE Gad, what's the world coming to.... Just me though.

I sorry, I guilty too. Send me to my room and make me watch TLJ.

 

More it just makes you look like you have nothing substantial to add or anything worth taking the time to read or respond to. Its.. oh look.. animated gifs.. /scrollpast.

You're like a commercial break I zip through on my DVR.

--- Double Post Merged, May 14, 2018, Original Post Date: May 14, 2018 ---

I considered that. No, not really. When TFA was gearing up, for the most part Star Wars was deep in The Dark Age that followed the prequels and not much was expected out of it. I think my response was... god... I hope it can be good again. The big expectations came AFTER TFA, once TFA showed Star Wars Could be great again. The expectation of TLJ was then enormous, particularly given all the story threads that had been setup with a good cast and LUKE SKYWALKER to be in TLJ. I'd easily say that TLJ had 2 to 3 times the anticipation factor given how much inertia TFA had put back into the product. And then The Lost Jedi happened. I could now frankly care less what happens in 9 and really even barely care about a Star Wars movie coming out 11 days from now.

They're down to at most one buy(and that's only because of Ron Howard), where it could have been three. That's lost cash right there. Hope they enjoy me not watching the show and not helping to pay their bills, when normally I would have. When you start training your audience not to watch your product, just lol. But keep up the bad work!

I know, right. Because a Star Wars flagship getting cracked by BLACK PANTHER on all fronts... nope... nothing to see there HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Infinity War went by it like a boss. Flagship vs Flagship and TLJ is somewhere beneath The Atlantic on the chart atm. You're going to need a submersible to find that film.

They also made 7 feature-length films(Clone Wars count? I'll count it) total in 37 years. *7*. That's a lot of air they got there. Marvel makes 3 films a year. Lucasfilm can barely do 1, and at the rate they're going they're going to need to give it another multi-year layoff as has been done in the past, but as you state are planning two trilogies nobody cares about and one that people will actively avoid.

But hey... they got that Favreau teevee show, amirite?

Pride goeth before a fall /shrug.

 

I'm not sure what you are trying to argue. TLJ fit in with the expectations of the company and analysts, and fit in with the pattern of the franchise. Star Wars isn't Marvel, it's Star Wars, it's a totally different thing, with different appeals. Empire Strikes Back, what everyone considers the best, had a massive drop off in ticket sales compared to the first film, and the highest-grossing film before Disney took over is still Phantom Menace, with the two prequel sequels coming up shorter. Star Wars will never be Marvel because it's not as relateable as a teenager like Peter Parker living with his aunt in a suburb of New York, or Steve Rogers realizing there is corrupting in Washington.

My two favourite Marvel films are Thor: Ragnorok and Guardians of the Galaxy, and they are very Star Warsy, very space-opera, with spaceships and monsters and aliens and people firing ray guns, they are the closest comparison. They both made under a billion worldwide.
They only did $800million or so worldwide each, and less than $350million domestically. By your estimate they would not be considered successful, and yet they are considered among the biggest success stories in Marvel's recent history, especially Guardians, because space opera is not supposed to do that well, and yet Star Wars' box office put them to shame. They are incredible sci-fi fantasy films, but they don't appeal to as wide catch an audience as something like Iron Man and Spiderman and Black Panther, which is why they couldn't even come close to breaking the billion dollar mark.

Black Panther made about the same amount as money as TLJ, and BP was one of the biggest sleeper hits in years. That movie has been the biggest hit Marvel has had since the original Iron Man franchise, it was still in theaters when IW came out.

The idea that Star Wars has to be #1 financially, in all areas at all times, is really dumb and unrealistic (even though Star Wars for the last three years has been the highest grossing films of their respective years) . Coming in second to Marvel is fine. They are both Disney products! I really don't think the bosses mind. They can't both be #1, someone has to be #2, Disney is rolling in money and laughing all the way to the bank as the only franchise that comes close to Marvel is also owned by itself. This whole idea of "competition" is nonsense, it's the same company at the end of the day.

 

I would have to disagree. Given that TFA was the first Star Wars movie in 10 years (and if you consider the PT era the dark ages, then it was the first Star War since then) and 33 since we saw the legacy characters, I'd say TFA had the bigger hype and expectations but that's just my opinion, not right or wrong.

Oh my bad, I thought you were going, just not opening weekend. But if Im understanding you correctly, if a movie doesn't make as much or more than its predecessor, (or even the current top money maker) then they lost money and it was unsuccessful? If that is the case, then anything since Avatar has just been a flop. I doubt those paid by Disney and those that sit on the board actually think that way but I don't know. Im not making that kind of money and just an amateur sitting on an internet forum board rambling. Only two more weeks before we see how the next one does.

Still don't see LFL sweating anything....but we will find out in the future. After 40 years, Star Wars is still going strong, actually stronger than before. I think they will still be here in another 40 years. We will have to see where MCU is after their 40 year mark. Hope they still here, I like there movies, too.

Im not sure where you get barely from? but ok. Im sure if was in their plan, they could come out with a Lea movie, and a Luke movie, and a Tarkin movie, and Vader movie, and a Sidious movie. They could make a movie for all their saga characters. Its a different company though with a different plan for their IP. Just because they are not doesn't make it a "barely". That's just a stretched opinion. Im glad Marvel has finally got traction and gotten great products out. I enjoy them. Its a win win for me.

 

Nice try, but I have provided considerable material to you in many, many ways and it usually results in you either switching the tangent, cherry picking, or just completely ignoring the post and then going on as if nothing has been said.

So yes, now I have fun because I can't take you seriously at all.
You just keep saying the same thing regardless, and choose to ignore anything shown to the contrary.

Funny thing is; other's aren't ignoring my posts.
They have memory; they can see the long run of material you keep ignoring.

You need TLJ to underperform.
It didn't. That's a simple fact by checking with Disney.
You keep shifting feet with relative privation after relative privation.
When one of your rediculous points is shown in error, you move the goalpost, or make additional qualifiers to dismiss the evidence to the contrary.

Claim Star Wars underperformed all you want; it doesn't change fact.


Is this where you take my phrase "it doesn't change fact", and say that's true and then insert your rediculous relative privations as facts in spite of that having been shown to be incorrect repeatedly?

Tinfoil hat time perhaps?
Maybe just continue to ignore reality to better suit your taste; keep up with that more.


Cheers,
Jayson

 

i'm genuinely curious, though, how many people who walked away from Star Wars in the PT era came back for TFA.
some of us met the news of an ST with horror, not anticipation.

i know i nearly didn't go. i had to be dragged by the ears. i look like a gundark now. : D

 

That's definitely not me. I got into Star Wars after the Prequels (even though I was alive when they came out) at the time when there wasn't that much SW content out. My reason for watching Star Wars was that these are films of huge cultural importance and it's probably a good idea to watch them... I was thirteen at that time. I was a very serious kid.

 

interesting! see, this is why ALL the generalizations don't hold water.
it's not like there's a clear divide between the generations or point of entry.
there's just fans. and some people love everything and some people don't.

all i see when i look at the box office is that Star Wars is just as popular as ever.

if people want to see a franchise in actual collapse, they should look at WB DC.
that's a flaming tragedy the likes of which i doubt Star Wars could ever hope to achieve again post-PT.
Lucasfilm has gone through its purgatory. it can't please everyone, but it will never fail that hard again.

 

Yeah, for me all I remember was a video game: 05 Battlefront 2 as my first SW experience. I don't know about never. We're in the process of getting SW content in which the franchise has never seen before: a one a year (maybe two one day) SW film, and that doesn't even include tv. One film isn't going to 'destroy' this franchise (the prequels are proof of that) as someone likes to believe, but I do hope Lucasfilm takes a lesson from the fan backlash.

 

Poor DC, it tried so haaaaaaaard to mimic MCU and failed so miserably. Also, 1138th post.