MovieChat Forums > Alice Through the Looking Glass (2016) Discussion > Update to thread: Alice just bombs (from...

Update to thread: Alice just bombs (from Alice bombs domestically)

posted 9 years ago by Norran
28 replies | jump to latest

Well I was wrong. After the original made over $300 million 6 years ago I didn't think it was possible for the sequel to lose so much of its audience that it would make less than $150 million domestic. But this is only estimated to make $40 million over a 3 day weekend.
This is another Lone Ranger sized disaster for Depp. This won't make more than $90 million domestic now. A box office drop of over 70% from the first. The foreign box office is the only chance this has now.

An update to the thread after over a month in theaters. Since the film has made only $237 million worldwide at this point its obvious that Alice isn't just a bomb domestically but a flat out bomb period. I wonder how large a loss Disney will report on this film in their quarterly statement. I'm guessing this film loses them at least $120 million.

Next up for Depp the Pirates sequel. His last chance to salvage his career as a big box office draw.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] nddostal 9 years ago

incorrect-the movie cost almost 400 million (200 production, 200 marketing)-it will barely make 200 total! That's a 200 million dollar loss!

[–] Slam_Evil 9 years ago

Much more of a loss. At best they get half of the box office back. So if it makes 200 million they only get 100. It needed to make, what, 800 to break even?

Johnny Derp is trash.

You're welcome.

[–] MaximumMadness 9 years ago

At best they get half of the box office back

I work at a major movie-theater chain, and the numbers are a lot bigger than "at best half"... especially for a Disney release.

First week or two (when a HUGE amount of profit is made), theaters make MAYBE pennies on the dollar. (And some studios will go so far as to demand 100% of the opening weekend, and it's not unheard of for them to start demanding a cut of the concession profits) It goes up a little every week after, but really, most major releases get the bulk of the box-office back, despite what you read on some website. (Theaters certainly don't see any real significant cut of it... why do you think water costs $5 there and a popcorn/soda combo can run up to $20? Because theaters make virtually nothing on ticket sales most of the time.) It's only for the slow-burn movies like Avatar or Disney's own Frozen that stick around for months when theaters make any real money on tickets.

Something like this, probably next-to-nothing is gonna go to the theaters given how quickly the box office dropped.

And FURTHERMORE, this is my signature! SERIOUSLY! Did you think I was still talking about my point?

[–] Slam_Evil 9 years ago

I remember this box office spin doctor, put them on ignore ages ago. Let me guess, it's that "theaters get next to nothing, they make money off of candy and popcorn" crap. Nope, not true.

The rule of thumb stands, the studio get's back half at BEST. And internationally even less. China takes 75%!

That's just the way it is, ignore the studio shills.

You're welcome.

[–] Norran 9 years ago

incorrect-the movie cost almost 400 million (200 production, 200 marketing)-it will barely make 200 total! That's a 200 million dollar loss!

Where do people come up with these ridiculous numbers? The movie cost $170 million as reported by multiple sites.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=alice2.htm
http://www.econotimes.com/Alice-Through-the-Looking-Glass-Bombs-at-Domestic-Box-Office-Despite-Big-Budget-X-Men-Apocalypse-Claims-Top-Spot-at-$80-Million-215019

Nor was the advertising budget $200 million. Batman vs Superman ad budget was only reported as $150 million. The ad budget for this would be somewhere between $100 to $150 million.

Disney is still going to eat a huge loss on this of over $100 million. It only made $33 million over a 4 day weekend worst than was predicted and its overseas weekend was only $65 million despite releasing in almost all territories.

I think this is the end of Depp's career as a big star. The Last Pirates film will be his last hurrah with Disney. After the Lone Ranger and Alice 2 disasters Disney will be cutting ties with him.

[–] kb-kid3 9 years ago

The general rule is that on big budget productions, the production budget is typically several ticks higher than reported, and the marketing budget is about size of the production budget (especially on a major Disney release). A total cost close to $380 - 400 million is not out of the question - it's around the total estimated cost of "The Lone Ranger".

Writer, founder, editor, and webmaster: filmreviews12.com

[–] Norran 9 years ago

The Lone Ranger's reported budget is $215 million. A $150 million marketing budget would take it to $365 million which is close to the reported total budget of $375 million. I really doubt Disney spent more on Alice than they did on the Lone Ranger just based on all the money Verbinski spent building sets in the desert and laying down railroad tracks for his train sequence. So I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of the $170 million production budget for Alice.

As for ad budgets the rule of thumb I always used to hear was the ad budget was half the production budget for big budget productions. It's only been the last several years that I read of ad budgets going north of $100 million. Now it seems every movie that is around $170 million or more is said to have a ad budget of $150 million which leads me to think people are just guessing on that number.

If the ad budget is equal to the production budget of these movies than they would all need to do Zootpia, Jungle Book and Civil War type business just to make a modest profit. Even if Alice made $500 to $600 million WW which is a large amount they would still end up losing $100 million or more on the movie.

[–] kb-kid3 9 years ago

Another rule of thumb for budgets, of course, is that Disney is likely to spend more than anyone else. I could easily see "Alice Through the Looking Glass" approaching "The Lone Ranger"-esque numbers. Ultimately, if we presume that $170M is downplaying, and the "real cost" is closer to $180-185M, and that the Disney machine wouldn't mind dropping $140-150M on advertising, then maybe "Alice"'s final cost is closer to the low 300s, which is still rather exorbitant.

Writer, founder, editor, and webmaster: filmreviews12.com

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Prince_Charming02 9 years ago

They waited too long for the sequel. Depp doesn't have the box office draw like he used to. The new
Pirates movie will flop as well. Disney made the mistake of making these movies about the Mad Hatter and having him as the main draw. They ruined Alice in Wonderland.

[–] NerdyBirdy82 9 years ago

Johnny Debt

well even more so because...divorce lol

------------
🐈 RIP Zoe Melms 2/14/03 - 4/21/16 😿

[–] ffnogoodnik 9 years ago

Where are you getting your 40 million number from? entertainment weekly (ew dot com) estimates closer to 63 million

In looking at the numbers you also have to consider on March 7 2010 when "Alice in Wonderland" was released the only other nationwide release was a rated R film called "Brooklyn's finest"

For "Through the Looking Glass" you have "X-Men Apocalypse" going against it so the numbers should be fewer.

[–] piper9791 9 years ago

It opened with just over 9 million on Friday which includes 1.5 mil of Thursday previews. EW is a celebrity gossip publication anymore; and their business insight is far from trustworthy. Head to boxofficemojo or The Numbers for more information. Variety just labeled this mivie a Tomorrowland size flop from this opening number. Nice to see my Disney stock keeps crashing thanks to the bozo Bob Iger. This company needs a some legitimate hits that aren'texpensive licences (Star Wars and Marvel don't cut it factoring in the purchase prices for the properties). Can we have a CEO with some vision for original content that will have legs for years to come?

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Prismark10 9 years ago

The critics have lambasted this and it feels like an unnecessary sequel.

It's that man again!!

[–] C-Younkin 9 years ago

It will be depressing if this movie even makes 40 million this weekend. It's trash, hopefully all the bad reviews will deter people from seeing it. What sucks is that it probably will make more money than the really good Nice Guys.

Really love film and am trying to put together a funny, informative YouTube channel. Check it out if you get a chance.

A review of the film- https://youtu.be/0TUmGxkfZ0M

[–] Wombstar 9 years ago

Why do want people not to see it? doesn't matter if it bad or not, people can go watch it if they wish... how does it impact you? You really want to be that important that you dictate to people what than can and should not see?

[–] dalbrech 9 years ago

I hope it bombs because it a lousy movie...just like the first one.

[–] LenaAFoster 9 years ago

The first movie made $1.065 billion...There were enough people who liked the first one...and I liked both. Ironically I did not connect with Avatar...I love colorful movies but for some reason no with Avatar but I liked these. Interesting how different people connect or dont connect with this film or that film...

*Free speech opinion w/ pseudonym internet moniker w/o malice for debate and discussion🌈

[–] jeffer23 9 years ago

It isn't a bad movie, but certainly is no classic. It is just as good as the other movies at the theater right now. I like the X-Men franchise, but the latest one is is more of the same old thing.

[–] trollomatic 9 years ago

>>>It will be depressing if this movie even makes 40 million this weekend. It's trash, hopefully all the bad reviews will deter people from seeing it.

I liked this movie. I thought it was good.

[–] adam_cook 9 years ago

Disney's lack of diversity is hurting them financially.