- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: ‘The Mandalorian and Grogu’ Discussion Thread. Currently 62%. Big 2nd Weekend drop
Posted on 5/30/26 at 3:17 pm to sgallo3
Posted on 5/30/26 at 3:17 pm to sgallo3
quote:
streaming, merch, and brand recognition/engagement shite.
That isn’t factored into movie math, it never has been.
Now the STUDIO might factor those things in and they’ll be lucky if they break even over the long haul, but they put themselves underwater by making this movie
1
Posted on 5/30/26 at 3:18 pm to Proximo
I mean we'll know whether it beats solo or not in a few weeks. No need to play hypotheticals.
Posted on 5/30/26 at 3:20 pm to Proximo
quote:
That isn’t factored into movie math, it never has been.
Well in the modern age it probably should be. Of course Star Wars is a little different animal because of the theme park stuff as well. Most movies dont have to worry about theme park and streaming service tie ins besides what they get paid up front for streaming rights.
I upvoted you because you did acknowledge that for the studio the math is much more complicated
This post was edited on 5/30/26 at 3:24 pm
Posted on 5/30/26 at 3:26 pm to sgallo3
quote:not really a hypothetical at this point, it’s getting crushed by horror movies, Masters comes out next week and then Toy Story.
No need to play hypotheticals.
Posted on 5/30/26 at 3:27 pm to sgallo3
quote:If it needs 550 million, it can definitely lose 200+ million
Then you should agree with me that its impossible for Proximos analysis to be correct
It may end up at only 200 million revenue after this weekend (but not likely)
Unless there is an significant rebound, this is almost certain. 300 million is unlikely, unless the WW numbers really shite the bed, and we won't know that for sure until Tuesday
It isn't looking good for the film, though
As to RDLSC's point in another thread, it is unlikely this is going to make up that in toys. And you would have to show an increase over what the franchise draws annually as is, to justify attaching it to this film.
This post was edited on 5/30/26 at 3:28 pm
Posted on 5/30/26 at 3:38 pm to Roaad
Im not claiming its gonna sell $100 million worth of toys. Im talking about brand value that comes with adding a property to your catalog. The reason these services are spending billions per year creating shows isn't to sell toys. You have to keep adding stuff to your services. Netflix spent $480 million on stranger things season 5. They arent planning on selling $480 million worth of merch. Its brand recognition/exposure/content. And they dont even have a theme park to consider.
Our math just isnt that relevant when it comes to these corporate machines.
They spend billions and will continue to.
Our math just isnt that relevant when it comes to these corporate machines.
They spend billions and will continue to.
This post was edited on 5/30/26 at 3:39 pm
Posted on 5/30/26 at 3:39 pm to Roaad
why make a meaningless movie, several years too late, that nobody wants to go see? Reportedly, they needed to get Mando off the streaming expenses. All you're doing is diluting the brand and IP.
Make a fricking Order 66 Darth Vader movie without shoehorning in shite like Reva and it would KILL. Hayden still loves the character and is obviously on board to make more content.
I don't have faith in anyone at Lucasfilm to fix the franchise. Favreau and Filoni sit up there chuckling on their media tour and it's sad to see
Make a fricking Order 66 Darth Vader movie without shoehorning in shite like Reva and it would KILL. Hayden still loves the character and is obviously on board to make more content.
I don't have faith in anyone at Lucasfilm to fix the franchise. Favreau and Filoni sit up there chuckling on their media tour and it's sad to see
Posted on 5/30/26 at 3:40 pm to Roaad
quote:
As to RDLSC's point in another thread, it is unlikely this is going to make up that in toys. And you would have to show an increase over what the franchise draws annually as is, to justify attaching it to this film.
It might lose some money, no doubt. I just don't think it needs over 600 to break even. Studios pay for marketing costs with things like licensing deals, PVOD, merchandise, streaming, etc.
Posted on 5/30/26 at 3:52 pm to RLDSC FAN
quote:No, 600 was always the upper limit of the estimated
It might lose some money, no doubt. I just don't think it needs over 600 to break even
Anyone suggesting higher than 600 is doing so contrary to available information
quote:Yes, but that is never sufficient, and many of the arrangements actually end up costing the studios, depending on metrics.
Studios pay for marketing costs with things like licensing deals, PVOD, merchandise, streaming, etc.
Posted on 5/30/26 at 3:57 pm to sgallo3
The flagging point that is being missed
Even if the movie manages to break even. . .that makes it a total IP and financial failure, just not a catastrophe.
If you make a product that makes your company nothing, but costs them nothing. . .you are losing them money by opportunity cost, because the time you spent on that could have been spent elsewhere making something that earns a profit (assuming such a thing were available).
Even if the movie manages to break even. . .that makes it a total IP and financial failure, just not a catastrophe.
If you make a product that makes your company nothing, but costs them nothing. . .you are losing them money by opportunity cost, because the time you spent on that could have been spent elsewhere making something that earns a profit (assuming such a thing were available).
Posted on 5/30/26 at 4:09 pm to RLDSC FAN
My kid wanted to go see it today.
First of all, I am not a Star Wars fanboy. Loved the movies when I grew up and can remember the experience of seeing the first 3 in the theaters. Loved them.
I don’t hold these new ones accountable to their originals and complain about how they have ruined the franchise. Just treat them as separate sets of movies.
With that said, this was probably the worst movie I have seen in a theatre in a long long time. It was horrible. Sorry was crap. The 30+ minutes of healing the Mandolorian was like watching paint dry. Even my 13 year old said it sucked.
First of all, I am not a Star Wars fanboy. Loved the movies when I grew up and can remember the experience of seeing the first 3 in the theaters. Loved them.
I don’t hold these new ones accountable to their originals and complain about how they have ruined the franchise. Just treat them as separate sets of movies.
With that said, this was probably the worst movie I have seen in a theatre in a long long time. It was horrible. Sorry was crap. The 30+ minutes of healing the Mandolorian was like watching paint dry. Even my 13 year old said it sucked.
Posted on 5/30/26 at 4:22 pm to Lsudx256
quote:My buddy compared that scene to the camping scene in Deathly Hallows
The 30+ minutes of healing the Mandolorian was like watching paint dry.
Posted on 5/30/26 at 7:03 pm to Roaad
quote:
The flagging point that is being missed
Even if the movie manages to break even. . .that makes it a total IP and financial failure, just not a catastrophe.
If you make a product that makes your company nothing, but costs them nothing. . .you are losing them money by opportunity cost, because the time you spent on that could have been spent elsewhere making something that earns a profit (assuming such a thing were available).
It's amazing people don't seem to get that the very fact they are having an argument about whether or not a Star Wars film will lose a lot of money, maybe kinda break even, or maybe eventually make a small profit shows how far the franchise has fallen.
Long time big Star Wars fans don't seem to grasp that most of Star War's profits came from casual movie goers and those people no longer really care about the brand that much.
The sequel trilogy was Disney's one big opportunity to reach these people for the next generation and it uh... didn't go very well.
Posted on 5/30/26 at 7:14 pm to StansberryRules
quote:
Long time big Star Wars fans don't seem to grasp that most of Star War's profits came from casual movie goers and those people no longer really care about the brand that much.
This is the spin Disney and others want to put on it but its not true at all.
The issue isnt Star Wars, it is ENTIRELY the specific themes and writing of DISNEY star wars.
The new Disney Star Wars are NOTHING like the original star wars that brought in fans.
The solution is to write/produce/direct a star wars that actually LIKES western culture, actually LIKES men, and isnt inundated with progressive themes, lesbians, and other stupid progressive stereotype stand-ins.
Youre watching a piece of progressive propaganda wearing the Star Wars brand as a skinsuit.
So please stop saying "SEE! Star wars just isnt popular anymore!"
The OT and the prequels are still way more popular than any disney star wars and the streaming services get much higher ratings for that.
You can see plain as day what people want, but Disney wants to shove progressive feminism and female leads down your throat.
The problem isnt star wars, its Disney's cultish political activist nutjobs smashing the brand.
Posted on 5/30/26 at 9:02 pm to tiggerthetooth
I mean you're right, the audience left because Disney aggressively drove them away. There's a world where this didn't have to happen.
The fatal flaws were
1. The sequel trilogy was actually a reboot, not a sequel. People wanted true sequels, not a reboot. Disney wanted to just recreate Star Wars over again for a new generation with new characters. That was never gonna happen.
2. Trying to make the franchise girl centric was a disaster. Girl Luke was a terrible idea. Star Wars has always mostly appealed to little boys and men who love adventure stories. Boys were never going to like Rey they same way they did Luke.
3. Having absolutely no actual overarching storyline for the "trilogy" and instead just making up random shite every movie.
The fatal flaws were
1. The sequel trilogy was actually a reboot, not a sequel. People wanted true sequels, not a reboot. Disney wanted to just recreate Star Wars over again for a new generation with new characters. That was never gonna happen.
2. Trying to make the franchise girl centric was a disaster. Girl Luke was a terrible idea. Star Wars has always mostly appealed to little boys and men who love adventure stories. Boys were never going to like Rey they same way they did Luke.
3. Having absolutely no actual overarching storyline for the "trilogy" and instead just making up random shite every movie.
This post was edited on 5/31/26 at 10:35 am
Posted on 5/30/26 at 9:50 pm to sgallo3
Wrong again.. womp womp
Posted on 5/30/26 at 9:52 pm to RLDSC FAN
quote:
Studios pay for marketing costs with things like licensing deals, PVOD, merchandise, streaming, etc.
This does not happen
Posted on 5/30/26 at 10:00 pm to Madking
Sure it doesn't. Disney is not making anything from licensing fees
Posted on 5/30/26 at 10:04 pm to RLDSC FAN
You people will say anything and even though the difference has already been shown to you before you’ll continue this irrelevant and false talking point. The Toys don’t supplement to movies’ box office just like the Parks don’t. They’re separate entities.
Posted on 5/30/26 at 10:11 pm to Madking
Licensing fees involve far more than just toys. Try googling it sometime
Page 14 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News