Captain America: Brave New World

[BrandX]

There's no reason they can't still use She-Hulk, just because her show failed.  The show and character had moments of being good.

 

As for BNW, I do wonder if it would've been better if it had been a Sam and Bruce team up.  The two of them working to uncover what was happening.  Could've been a good time to explain how Bruce seems to go back and forth between Smart Hulk and Bruce Banner (Shang Chi), maybe even lead back into a more ragey Hulk (I like it better when Banner and Hulk are separate personalities but not actual different people...Banner should still be Hulk).

 

 

[PeregrineFalcon]

How much did this movie cost to make again?

 

[Troo]

Grosses (thru 2/25/25)

Domestic (49.5%)
$145,631,098

International (50.5%)
$148,368,477

Worldwide
$293,999,575

 

@PeregrineFalcon Budget publicly stated by Marvel/Disney as $180,000,000.

Edited Thursday at 07:28 PM by Troo

[ZacKing]

17 hours ago, Troo said:

Budget publicly stated by Marvel/Disney as $180,000,000.

 

I'm sure Disney would love for this movie to have only cost $180,000,000 to make.  That budget would make it among the cheapest MCU films made.  It doesn't add up when it's reported to have gone through at least 3 extensive re-shoots and doesn't include any marketing.

[Glacier Peak]

Silver lining...?

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/27/us/captain-america-ceiling-collapse-wenatchee-washington.html?unlocked_article_code=1.0U4.qibY.DR9QBUVYnNNn&smid=url-share

 

[Techwright]

2 hours ago, Glacier Peak said:

Silver lining...?

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/27/us/captain-america-ceiling-collapse-wenatchee-washington.html?unlocked_article_code=1.0U4.qibY.DR9QBUVYnNNn&smid=url-share

 

That's okay.  There's another movie theater on the north side of the town.  They can go watch it with the other two viewers, so long as they get in before March 6, which the theater has announced is the last showing.

[Troo]

4 hours ago, ZacKing said:

I'm sure Disney would love for this movie to have only cost $180,000,000 to make.  That budget would make it among the cheapest MCU films made.  It doesn't add up when it's reported to have gone through at least 3 extensive re-shoots and doesn't include any marketing.

 

Yep.. but that's the number that was released and the movie will eclipse $300M this weekend.

 

[ThaOGDreamWeaver]

5 hours ago, ZacKing said:

and doesn't include any marketing.

It generally doesn't. Marketing and promo is the responsibility of the distributor(s) and not part of a flick's overall budget, happens after the flick wraps, and can go on for months.

 

Even though in this case Disney is the primary distro, that's still a different company to Marvel Studios who made the flick. So cue even more Hollywood Accounting magical cross-charging shenanigans between Disney, Marvel, the Marvel sub-LLC that made the flick, the various international distros, ad agencies... you name it.

 

As a rule of thumb, marketing budget is supposed to be half as much again as your original production.

If we take that as read, BNW would have spent another $90m to market the movie, for a grand total of $270m.

But honestly, Superbowl spot aside, I've not seen that much activity for it. I've seen it described in trade press as "a successful viral campaign", which roughly translates as "it's done okay for a flick that's had jack-all money spent on punting it."

 

By comparison, Endgame's marketing spend was a little more than half ($200m-ish on top of the $390m production budget), while The Marvels thankfully "only" dropped another $75m to $100m-ish more over the $270m production.

Edited Friday at 05:49 PM by ThaOGDreamWeaver

[battlewraith]

The spectacle of this film not flopping hard enough to satisfy some people is amusing.

[ThaOGDreamWeaver]

Eh. It's not really a flop. Neither is it anywhere near a hit. It's a fairly average popcorn flick that had pretensions of being Manchurian Candidate and didn't pull it off.

Is that going to end Anthony Mackie's Marvel career? Hell no.
(And if his pet project Quantumania didn't give Kevin Feige the boot, this one sure ain't gonna.)

 

But in the current economic climate, you're going to have to do a lot better than average to drag people's butts to the 'plex. 

Edited Friday at 07:01 PM by ThaOGDreamWeaver

[ShardWarrior]

1 hour ago, Troo said:

Yep.. but that's the number that was released and the movie will eclipse $300M this weekend.

 

Disney or any studio can release whatever numbers they want.  There are a great many reasons why they do as has already been reflected here in this thread, along with many other reasons.  It strains credibility to believe the budget of this film, with the extensive amount of CGI, all of the extensive script rewrites and re-shoots came in at the reported budget. 

 

48 minutes ago, ThaOGDreamWeaver said:

So cue even more Hollywood Accounting magical cross-charging shenanigans

 

This is exactly what the reported numbers are - wishful thinking and "creative accounting".  This is no different than any Hollywood film.  According to Hollywood, films like Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix that brought in over $942 million in box office against a budget $150 million dollar still lost over $150 million. 

 

Admittedly, my knowledge here is on the periphery, however the films I do know about always cost far, far more to produce than is reported. 

[Excraft]

19 hours ago, battlewraith said:

The spectacle of this film not flopping hard enough to satisfy some people is amusing.

 

This proceeds from a false assumption that people want these films to fail.  I know I don't and no one I know looks forward to these MCU films being box office flops.  

 

I like Anthony Mackie.  He was great as Falcon.  I've enjoyed most of the MCU films and loved comic book characters as a kid.  I really want these movies to be good and make everyone involved a lot of money.  There are a lot of people who work really hard on these movies and I don't think they want them to be failures either.

 

Most critics I've read all want these movies to be a success too, but what Disney and Marvel is doing now isn't working for them and hasn't been for years now.  I think people aren't wishing these films to fail, it's more they're hoping that the poor performance is a wake up call for Disney and Marvel to right the ship and get back to what worked.

 

From what I've read and what my brother told me, this film ruined the Red Hulk and Leader.  Stick with the plots and stories that drew fans to these characters.  That'd be a good start.

[Excraft]

20 hours ago, ThaOGDreamWeaver said:

It generally doesn't. Marketing and promo is the responsibility of the distributor(s) and not part of a flick's overall budget, happens after the flick wraps, and can go on for months.

 

Even though in this case Disney is the primary distro, that's still a different company to Marvel Studios who made the flick. So cue even more Hollywood Accounting magical cross-charging shenanigans between Disney, Marvel, the Marvel sub-LLC that made the flick, the various international distros, ad agencies... you name it.

 

It's still falling under Disney, no matter how many LLCs and shell companies they try to make to hide money.

[TTRPGWhiz]

20 hours ago, battlewraith said:

The spectacle of this film not flopping hard enough to satisfy some people is amusing.

That, and the obsession several regulars of this sub have with budgets and box office are what keep it entertaining. You’d think these movies are being made with taxpayer dollars for how much some people care about Disney’s bottom line. 

[battlewraith]

51 minutes ago, TTRPGWhiz said:

That, and the obsession several regulars of this sub have with budgets and box office are what keep it entertaining. You’d think these movies are being made with taxpayer dollars for how much some people care about Disney’s bottom line. 

 

Lol yes the specifics of how Disney can manage to turn out crap films and not suffer a horrible fate is approaching the level of a deep state conspiracy theory. Also the corrective can typically be summed up as "just do the things that I like and you will make a ton of money!" hahahaha. 

 

I would not have even remembered this movie was a thing except for this thread.

[Ghost]

2 hours ago, TTRPGWhiz said:

That, and the obsession several regulars of this sub have with budgets and box office are what keep it entertaining. You’d think these movies are being made with taxpayer dollars for how much some people care about Disney’s bottom line. 

https://insidethemagic.net/2025/01/disney-receives-million-in-tax-payer-funded-incentives-rl1/

 

 

🤭🤭🤭

Edited Saturday at 04:29 PM by Ghost

[battlewraith]

18 minutes ago, Ghost said:

https://insidethemagic.net/2025/01/disney-receives-million-in-tax-payer-funded-incentives-rl1/

 

 

🤭🤭🤭

Oh snap! The British have been giving Disney tax incentives to film there!

[Troo]

Lots of places do. With such a high return on investment the incentives are good government.

 

"The British Film Institute studies how effective these incentives are for the people of the United Kingdom, showing that for every dollar film companies receive in tax incentives, they spend $10 in the country. At a 10 times return, the UK government receives on its investment in films and television.

 

In 2019, the UK government estimates that filming created more than 40,000 jobs in the country. So, the benefits come not just from the spending but also from the taxes these new employees pay to the government."

 

 

[TTRPGWhiz]

25 minutes ago, Ghost said:

https://insidethemagic.net/2025/01/disney-receives-million-in-tax-payer-funded-incentives-rl1/

 

 

🤭🤭🤭

lol, yeah I almost edited my post to include a bit about tax breaks/incentives. That’s definitely why folks are concerned about these movies’ budgets and why it’s never come up before. 😂

Edited Saturday at 04:53 PM by TTRPGWhiz

[TTRPGWhiz]

10 minutes ago, battlewraith said:

Oh snap! The British have been giving Disney tax incentives to film there!

Wait til you hear about the incentive to move 2,000 jobs from Cali to Florida! (Also around $600M)

 

Anyway: I miss being able to talk about comics movies without the conversations inevitably turning to armchair econometrists making their best guesses about the motives and business practices of a megacorporation with a $200B market cap. You either like the movie(s), or you don’t. They either do well commercially, or they don’t. The rest is just baloney.

Edited Saturday at 04:59 PM by TTRPGWhiz

[Ghost]

3 hours ago, TTRPGWhiz said:

lol, yeah I almost edited my post to include a bit about tax breaks/incentives. That’s definitely why folks are concerned about these movies’ budgets and why it’s never come up before. 😂

I only posted that because for some weird reason, you crawled out onto that limb and I couldn’t resist.

[TTRPGWhiz]

2 minutes ago, Ghost said:

I only posted that because for some weird reason, you crawled out onto that limb and I couldn’t resist.

Ha, fair’s fair. I mean if a single sentence of the budget convos was “and they used MY TAX DOLLARS!”, I’d feel a bit more petard-hoisted. I stand by my opinion that it’s weird to care about movie budgets (or box office, frankly) if it’s not your money. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[Ghost]

33 minutes ago, TTRPGWhiz said:

Ha, fair’s fair. I mean if a single sentence of the budget convos was “and they used MY TAX DOLLARS!”, I’d feel a bit more petard-hoisted. I stand by my opinion that it’s weird to care about movie budgets (or box office, frankly) if it’s not your money. 🤷🏻‍♂️

It is weird, but as someone alluded to earlier - we know what they are capable of, story and quality wise.  It’s been a while since we’ve gotten that, so now I think people are at the point that we are hoping they hit rock bottom.  That way they will hopefully get back to what they once were.

 

 

 

Edited Saturday at 09:27 PM by Ghost

[Luminara]

21 minutes ago, TTRPGWhiz said:

I stand by my opinion that it’s weird to care about movie budgets (or box office, frankly) if it’s not your money. 🤷🏻‍♂️

 

Streisand Effect.  Hollywood works so hard to conceal their real expenses and profits that they've drawn attention to them.

[ThaOGDreamWeaver]

Just now, Luminara said:

Streisand Effect.

I'd concur on that. Not to mention releasing a budget that's inflated to show how Big And Important A Studio We Are backfires when you have a Morbius-level bomb.

 

Budget is not and has never been the best indicator of how good or creative a movie is. On the other hand, being able to produce amazing flicks with a half-dozen mates and a one camera (occasionally nailed to a plank) doesn't just inspire a sense of pride: it's good training for when someone does give you the big bucks, and you don't waste them.

 

Wildly tangential, self-promotional side note: one of the things I was doing in Whollyodd was trying to establish an online film school.

(Unfortunately I no longer have the laptop those files were on and only backed up my contracts and such, or I'd put it back together).

 

If you think you could do better than the Marvel or Lucasfilm crew (and by the way, you may be reading this on a device with a better digital camera than Phantom Menace was shot on), here's some light reading that might help.

• Gotta Have It: Inside Guerrilla Filmmaking - Spike Lee
• Rebel Without A Crew - Robert Rodriguez
• Guerrilla Filmmakers' Handbook - Chris Jones and Genevieve Jolliffe
• Make Your Own Damn Movie! - Lloyd Kaufman
• The Total Filmmaker - Jerry Lewis
  Yes, THAT Jerry Lewis. Whatever your opinion on his flicks, Jerry opted out of the studio system and built his own production company, made his own tools (inventing things like video rushes) and did what he wanted in a way that cuts through the garbage. Then wrote the whole lot down for other filmmakers to borrow ideas from, and taught classes at USC - including a young chap called Spielberg. It's back in print for the first time in ages. And while tech has moved on - you can buy or download tools he would have killed for - it's still a refreshingly BS-free guide to Getting Stuff Done.