"Fantastic Four" Flops With $26.2 Million 2nd Place Finish

[kalorama]

Didn't realize Fox couldn't cross them over without Marvel's permission. That actually gives Marvel some leverage here. If Fox needs them to sign off on bringing X-Men to television, and if they can't crossover FF (cause no way they're going to make a sequel to this one) there's really no incentive for them to keep the rights. I really hope these studios are in serious discussions about this.

That whole "needs Marvel's permission to do a crossover" thing purely a rumor/speculation with zero confirmation at this point. And, as a simple matter of business logic, if it were true then (A) Fox would already be aware of it and thus (B) Wouldn't be making such a public show of talking about it without having at least opened discussions on it with Marvel first.

[AJBopp]

Is losing money worth keeping a property out of another studios hands when they could possibly gain more by selling, trading or bargaining a deal with Marvel that may be more lucrative?

It's entirely possible that the calculation is made that the most lucrative deal is to hold on to the property for as long as possible without making any sequels so that no one else can make a movie from it that will compete with FOX.

Imagine if FOX ended up in WB's position, having to back down from a release date of X-Men because Marvel scheduled their Fantastic Four on the same weekend.

[Lethargyman]

While I never wanted this film to be bad, now that the verdict is in and it's due to sink from theatres without a trace within a fortnight ($26.2 million opening weekend putting it behind Mission Impossible 5 in its second week is pretty catastrophic for a film of this size and a franchise this well known), I'm really, really hoping that someone in Fox understands the term 'hemorrhaging' and they sell the rights back to Marvel to simply recoup some of the losses this film is going to cause them. At this point it's in the air whether it'll even make budget back.

I don't worry so much for anyone involved (besides some heavily sweating Fox execs), none of the cast will be tainted and even Trank could come out of this ok; this is his second film and David Fincher screwed the pooch with his debut - Alien3 - both directorially and relationship-wise with Fox, yet went on to bigger things.

[marvelprince]

While I like the character, nobody is going to make a Moon Knight movie. He's one of the most blatant Batman rip-offs out there. That knowledge will shadow the movie all the way from its announcement through production, and on to its premiere.

And...?

Even if the Moon Knight movie thats made does it best to be Batman in White (which it obviously wouldn't) how does that affect its earning potential? Do you think people's loyalty to Batman will stop them from watching or something? Hell if they wanted they could play up the "This is Batman fighting werewolves!!!" angle and make a killing.

That said I think MK would work much better in the Netflix format than on the big screen.

I'm sorry - my bad.

Your (mis)interpretation was funny though.

[kalorama]

Why would they even try and make another FF film down the road when audiences have repeatedly shown they don't care all that much about their three previous attempts. Audiences may not be as forgiving as you think. Fox may possibly lose money on this film. Is losing money worth keeping a property out of another studios hands when they could possibly gain more by selling, trading or bargaining a deal with Marvel that may be more lucrative?

From a simple business/tactical perspective? Yes, it certainly could be. Keeping a potentially valuable asset out of a competitor/enemy's hands, even at a cost to one's own side, is a common tactic in chess, business, and war.

[Colossus1980]

Too bad Fox went the cheap route with their budget on FF. They should have let Trank do his original big action sequences. Maybe then the movie could have broke even or been a big hit.

It's hard for me to imagine Fox allowing a budget of 155Million for Gambit but only 120M for the FF. Doesn't seem right.

[kalorama]

Internationally its gonna have to do at least $300-$350 million to even make it worthwhile to keep. Domestically its bombed here so the big hurdle is selling this film to an international audience.

It's become fairly common for films--these types of films in particular--to pull in bigger numbers internationally than domestically. Dark Knight Rises, Man of Steel, Amazing Spider-Man (1 & 2), and most of the Marvel movies have pulled in bigger numbers internationally than domestically.

[Doctor Know]

Fox is conducting it's post mortem.

http://variety.com/2015/film/news/fa...mb-1201566230/

“The confluence of clearly the decidedly negative reviews with the combination of social media did not help the cause,” said Fox distribution chief Chris Aronson.

He was not willing to write off the “Fantastic Four” series yet, but stressed that the studio would be engaged in a rigorous post-mortem.

“We have a lot to look forward to in our comic book character universe,” said Aronson. “We may find different ways to feature these characters in the future, but it’s early and we’ll have to see what form that takes.”

[kalorama]

Fox is conducting it's post mortem.

http://variety.com/2015/film/news/fa...mb-1201566230/

“The confluence of clearly the decidedly negative reviews with the combination of social media did not help the cause,” said Fox distribution chief Chris Aronson.

He was not willing to write off the “Fantastic Four” series yet, but stressed that the studio would be engaged in a rigorous post-mortem.

“We have a lot to look forward to in our comic book character universe,” said Aronson. “We may find different ways to feature these characters in the future, but it’s early and we’ll have to see what form that takes.”

In other words: Anyone doing a happy dance because they think Fox is going to just throw in the towel should probably take a seat for now.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

It's become fairly common for films--these types of films in particular--to pull in bigger numbers internationally than domestically. Dark Knight Rises, Man of Steel, Amazing Spider-Man (1 & 2), and most of the Marvel movies have pulled in bigger numbers internationally than domestically.

Of course as one poster has posted , China as a market isn't gonna have the film. Also its made $30 million outside the United States and its pretty sluggish so far. I don't think your gonna see a big international take for the film. Nowhere near what Fox needs to justify the film getting a sequel.

[XPac]

Too bad Fox went the cheap route with their budget on FF. They should have let Trank do his original big action sequences. Maybe then the movie could have broke even or been a big hit.

It's hard for me to imagine Fox allowing a budget of 155Million for Gambit but only 120M for the FF. Doesn't seem right.

It does sort of boggle the mind that they would have him take out the action sequences. Even a "bad" movie can be saved commercially at least if it's got enough action and fun. Micheal Bay movies have proven that time and time again. It's a comic book super hero movie... fans are paying to see the action sequences as much as anything else if not more.

Though if it were a budget issue perhaps I can understand it. If I were FOX and I suspected stongly this movie was gonna be a dud, I might not wanna put any more money into it than I already have.

[Iluvitloud1976]

Damn, such bad breaks for this movie. I truly had high hopes for this flick despite all the negativity it had been getting. I have to plead ignorance because I had no idea there was such bad blood brewing during the filming of this with the director & the studio. It's a shame we'll never get to see Trank's full version of this movie. Look's like a sequel is highly doubtful too at this point. That's Hollywood for ya.

[marvelprince]

From a simple business/tactical perspective? Yes, it certainly could be. Keeping a potentially valuable asset out of a competitor/enemy's hands, even at a cost to one's own side, is a common tactic in chess, business, and war.

Its a common tactic, but its only effective if you have an endgame. No one hoards rights just to have them. Of course we see the benefits to keeping the rights out of Marvel's hands but the previous times there was a plan/some sort of reasoning behind it. Its keep the rights from Marvel AND:

Lets try to generate our own franchise OR
Lets jumpstart our shared movie universe

Obviously neither of those are happening right now. If they really cared about just holding onto rights in perpetuity then they never would've let Ghost Rider and Daredevil revert. With the rights they kept they had some sort of plan in place, some sort of endgame. Their keeping the rights to make money, as they're a business and thats their main goal after all. Even for a major studio like Fox $120M is not a small amount of money to throw away just to spite the other guys when you could find ways to make money off it.

Although you are right and I wouldn't want to be the guy who makes the decision to sell the rights back and Marvel's FF opens to Avenger's level BO. What I would like though is the guy who negotiated a distribution deal that allows Fox to make money off any FF movie that Marvel makes without having to contribute anything to the actual making of the film. The film studios can find a way to work things out where everyone (but especially us fans who have clamouring for an FF movie done right) wins.

[Calighoula]

And...?

Even if the Moon Knight movie thats made does it best to be Batman in White (which it obviously wouldn't) how does that affect its earning potential? Do you think people's loyalty to Batman will stop them from watching or something? Hell if they wanted they could play up the "This is Batman fighting werewolves!!!" angle and make a killing.

The real question is: Do you trust Fox to make a good Moon Knight movie? I sure as hell don't. Between Fox, Sony, Disney and WB, Fox is clearly the one that's embarrassed they're making "superhero" films.

[marvelprince]

It does sort of boggle the mind that they would have him take out the action sequences. Even a "bad" movie can be saved commercially at least if it's got enough action and fun. Micheal Bay movies have proven that time and time again. It's a comic book super hero movie... fans are paying to see the action sequences as much as anything else if not more.

Though if it were a budget issue perhaps I can understand it. If I were FOX and I suspected stongly this movie was gonna be a dud, I might not wanna put any more money into it than I already have.

Trank was both severely behind schedule and over budget. I think they saw the writing on the wall when they realized that they were $20M over budget and still didn't have enough finished footage to get a teaser out for the Superbowl.