Why was it such a flop?


Sure it did okay. But the studio projected obviously projected on the lower side...a 35 million dollar opening isn't much in late 2021.

I honestly thought it was going to open 100 million +.

Especially with the demographic 35/gen x'rs who weren't frightened about covid +

A sorta nostalgia fest.

Audiences waited 2 years for this Paramount movie to open.

It hasn't event surpassed the 2016 film that destroyed the IMDB boards.

reply

The trailers did not really show it as a nostalgia fest. It looked like a kids movie that had cameos. I think they keep trying to pander to demographics that aren't going to come out in mass. Not to mention they already lost some of the remake buzz by having the 2016 one flop. An all female ghostbusters, there is a good idea why didn't they think of that in 1984. Oh yeah because women aren't interested in sleazy startup companies and ghosts/mythology.

This time around they thought they could get the Stranger Things crowd to come out.

reply

women aren't interested in sleazy startup companies and ghosts/mythology....LAME AND CHEAP REASONING.


This time around they thought they could get the Stranger Things crowd to come out....FINN WOLFHARD DOES NOT STRANGER THINGS MAKE.

reply

".LAME AND CHEAP REASONING." .... Infantile and no reasoning!

".FINN WOLFHARD DOES NOT STRANGER THINGS MAKE " No one associates him with Stranger Things?

reply

LMAO...AMUSING.

reply

You must be a housewife, you don't know how to form an argument or even have a discussion.

reply

I'LL SHOW YOU MINE IF YOU SHOW ME YOURS.

reply

In what universe would it open to 100 millions? The one where Matrix 4 was suppose to open to 100 millions too? ))) This is a movie no one asked for. Just like no one asked for that SNL casts disaster. But studio made it anyway.

Studio people dont understand level of popularity of Ghostbusters brand. There was no demand for another movie. Just like there was no demand for Terminator movie. For Charmed reboot. For Charlies Angers reboot and many other. Yeah, originals were popular in their time but no one wants to see sequels.

Also - it didnt flop. Despite not that great opening - it had great legs and got to 125 millions overall at domestic. Despite epidemic. On a budget of 75 millions. And it was generally well accepted among fans and public. I wont be surprised if they will announce sequel.

2016 version was flop because it had budget of 146 millions and earning 128 millions. And they spend way-way more on promotion.

On pure theatrical numbers 2021 gained 50 millions, 2016 lost 18.

reply

Nah, there was demand from fans and audiences. The problem is they served a meal nobody ordered twice and the ones who ate the 2016 one got pretty sick. The fact that either of them made money is a sign there was demand for more ghostbusters, release those same films without gb title or premise and they wouldn't make shit.
They will announce a sequel to the recent one but I will bet you it never gets made. They do it a lot with films that they want fans to keep interest in and keep buying products for, but after the dvd everything goes quiet.
Why would they risk making a sequel when they know all the novelty has been used up? Is anyone going to rewatch Afterlife?

reply

Afterlife is a huge hit in streaming like Itunes, Google, Vudu and Amazon, which shows the franchise still has interest.

reply

What's your point, Space1999? It was better than that UTTER POS that GB 2016 was!!

reply

It cost 75 million to make and made 192 million worldwide so it's made it's money back, while 2016 cost 144 million and crossed 229 million but with marketing and other costs it needed 300 million to break even and half a billion to be considered a success, so 2016 lost over a 100 million dollars.
It's doing better on streaming https://ghostbustersnews.com/2022/01/16/ghostbusters-afterlife-loses-nearly-300-theater-screens-as-digital-sales-top-itunes-google/

reply

Wait a minute. If 300 is breaking even, why would 500 million be the minimum to be considered a success? What movie studio would think 100 million in profit is not a success?

reply

Seems 2016 spend shit load of money like on the production budget and marketing costs.

reply

Right, but you posted that the production budget and marketing costs meant that it needed 300 mil to break even. So why did it need another 200 mil after breaking even to be considered a success?

reply

Wish I knew, likely spent 100 or 200 million on marketing and other stuff.

reply

"with marketing and other costs it needed 300 million to break even"

That's what I'm questioning.

reply

Because if you spend 300 million on making a movie, all that time and resources, and it makes 301 million, then all you've got to show for it is a (relatively) paltry million. If your 300 million dollar investment nets you a 200 million dollar return, then that's a success.

Also consider they only have so many resources, so if a project only nets a profit of a million, they're going to wish they had gone with a different project that might have resulted in a fatter profit.

reply

Yes, I can see that a one million dollar profit on a 300 million dollar investment isn't great. But a 100 million dollar profit on a 300 million dollar investment certainly is.

reply

Well of course it's not black and white - if it netted 199 million they're not going to say it wasn't a success. 200 million is just a ballpark figure for a successful investment, enough so that they're happy with the decision they made. 100 million isn't to be sniffed at, but they'll question if they could have done better with a different project.

reply

People would rather watch Spider-Man: Away from Home.

reply

Simply because the movie stank. It started getting desperate and rushed towards the end with that ridiculous Keymaster/Gatekeeper interplay. The rescue scene at the end was also trivial and idiotic. In addition, although Mckenna Grace is a wonderful actress (i.e. I especially loved her in Gifted (2017)), I found her performance to be somewhat dry and lackluster in this one. I hate to admit it, but although I hate all this woke stuff going on in films these days, Ghostbusters (2016) was a much better viewing experience.

reply

Biden and the democrats have all turned into funny boys and can't handle someone like Phoebe in a movie.

reply

Here's a look into what type of movies are making the most money in today's world:

The top 10 biggest movies of 2021 were as follows:
5 of the top ten were Super Hero/Comic book movies
3 of the top ten were Chinese movies
2 of the top ten were F9 and NTTD

I don't know about you but all but 1/10 of these movies mildly pique my interest.

reply