Deadpool 2 (2018) (1 Viewer)

[Jake Lipson]

If theaters die out, I think the kinds of tentpoles we've grown to love also are gone. There's no mechanism currently for a studio to recover a $250 million budget through digital distribution only. Lucasfilm, for example, will not be able to make Star Wars films if the only opportunity to recoup that budget is through Netflix and the iTunes store.

If theaters crumbled -- I hope not -- I would probably just do a blind Blu-ray purchase of any new Star Wars title, which would be a one-time $20 purchase. There wouldn't be repeat viewing charges like how I saw The Last Jedi twice in theaters. So yeah, I think you're right.

The bigger question is: do the studios see it that way? As long as they are making their huge grosses, are they smart enough to understand that the theaters' problem in slower months is a problem for them? They should, but I'm not sure they're there yet.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

If theaters crumbled -- I hope not -- I would probably just do a blind Blu-ray purchase of any new Star Wars title, which would be a one-time $20 purchase. There wouldn't be repeat viewing charges like how I saw The Last Jedi twice in theaters. So yeah, I think you're right.

Who knows if physical media would survive much longer than that, if the theaters went.

Not to mention, to your point - I saw the first Deadpool with my wife in theaters at a Dolby Cinema location, and we paid about $40 for the pair of tickets. If movies premiered digitally instead of in theaters, we wouldn't have paid $20 each for a ticket. We would have spent a single $5 charge for the both of us.

The bigger question is: do the studios see it that way? As long as they are making their huge grosses, are they smart enough to understand that the theaters' problem in slower months is a problem for them? They should, but I'm not sure they're there yet.

No, I think they either don't understand or don't care. They're already not taking into account that at a theater, each pair of eyeballs has to pay for a ticket, and for home viewing, it's not only a one-time rental or purchase that can now cost less than a single movie ticket, but that only one person in the group has to pay for everyone to have access. Studios have been eager to shrink the theatrical window even further. Talk comes and goes, but eventually, the idea will stick. They want to offer the ability to watch the film at home as soon as two or three weeks after it premieres in theaters, since they've noticed that that's about as long as anything survives there these days. They've discussed charging higher prices for this convenience, perhaps $25 or $50 for a pay-per-view rental instead of the usual $5. My question is - if you know that you could spend $15-25 for a movie ticket for each person in your group to see it, plus concessions, transportation, etc., or you could simply wait two weeks and do it at home for a much lower fixed rate, which option will win out long-term?

I'll point out that absolutely no one paid IMAX prices to see the two-hour Marvel's Inhumans pilot on the IMAX screen two weeks ahead of its free television debut.

I don't mean to be too far off-topic and I hope Jake and I aren't bugging y'all too much. I think Deadpool being a massive success in February was a wonderful boost for the industry, and as wonderful as that was, Deadpool in the summer is equally bad for the industry. And I love the movies and movie theaters, and I want to see them do well and survive and thrive. Going to the movies has been a part of my life for as long as I can remember, and all of my major life milestones are forever intertwined with the movies I was seeing at that time. (Heck, I remember that the day I interviewed for the job I have now, I went to see the Ryan Gosling movie "Drive" in theaters after getting out of the interview - I'll always remember that. Or that I saw "Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge Of The Sith" the day after graduating from college, going to the theater directly from a celebratory party with friends. Can't put a price on those memories. And I want the chance to keep making new memories like that until the day I die.)


Sidenote on Deadpool - it seems that TJ Miller may be becoming toxic, though not at the levels of toxicity that some other people have achieved. Do you think anyone at Fox is worried about him being in Deadpool 2 or do they figure it's a supporting role and people will come out or not solely on the basis of Reynolds' portrayal of the character?

 

[Jake Lipson]

Who knows if physical media would survive much longer than that, if the theaters went.

Let's not think about that. The demise of theaters is heavy enough for one day. I really don't want to think about the potential demise of Blu-ray, too. I'm not saying you're wrong. I just don't want to think about it.

I think Deadpool being a massive success in February was a wonderful boost for the industry, and as wonderful as that was, Deadpool in the summer is equally bad for the industry.

"Equally bad?" I don't know if I agree with that. Even at a reduced level, Deadpool 2 should be able to perform well in May. But I do think it is going to perform less well in May than it would have in June. And I think it is a missed opportunity to put a big hit movie in an off-season slot where its grosses could have gone even higher. Like I said, August is currently lacking in a major tentpole release (unless you count Mission: Impossible 6, which opens in the very tail end of July.) I think putting Deadpool in August, in the window previously used for Guardians of the Galaxy and Suicide Squad, is the way to go.

Sidenote on Deadpool - it seems that TJ Miller may be becoming toxic, though not at the levels of toxicity that some other people have achieved. Do you think anyone at Fox is worried about him being in Deadpool 2 or do they figure it's a supporting role and people will come out or not solely on the basis of Reynolds' portrayal of the character?

That's an interesting question. Because Miller was also in the first one, I think it's reasonable to assume most people would suspect that he will be in the new one, which of course he is, so I'm not sure how well they would be able to hide that fact. Whether it has now become a problem, who can say? I do think the marketing will attempt to make minimal use of him, but that would probably largely be surrounded on Reynolds anyway. On the other hand, if Deadpool 2 does underperform in the face of Avengers and Han Solo in May, Miller has turned into an awfully convenient scapegoat. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Fox ignores the obvious problem with the date and says "Oh, well, it's all T.J. Miller's fault." It's very common for studios to assign blame anywhere they can except on themselves when a movie bombs, and to take all the wrong lessons from its failure.

This one isn't really related to Deadpool, but one of my all-time favorite (or, most sad, really) examples of this was when Disney put Winnie the Pooh out on the same date as Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2. I said for months that that was clearly a stupid idea because Deathly Hallows 2 was the conclusion to a decade-defining family film franchise that almost everyone would want to see, and no one would be left for Winnie the Pooh on that date. They probably thought that Pooh would be right for little kids too young for Harry Potter, but a) Harry Potter was a family franchise still attracting lots of kids even to its darker final chapters, and b) there's no one to take the young kids to the theater to see Pooh if they're all busy going to Harry Potter instead, so the young kids either got taken to Harry or left with a babysitter.

I was right, of course, and anyone with any sense could have told Disney the same thing. But instead of blaming themselves for their futile attempt at counterprogramming, Disney took the bombing of Pooh as the final nail in 2D animation's coffin and hasn't made another 2D film since. Hell, no major Hollywood studio released another 2D film between Pooh in July 2011 and My Little Pony last October. The lesson from Pooh should have been "Don't try to counterprogram a massive family film with another family film," but instead they thought it was "People just don't want to see 2D animation anymore."

Pooh is coming back in August, but it will be in CG form within a live-action movie about a depressed, workaholic adult Christopher Robin who ignores his wife and family. Who the hell wants to see that? I don't, but I would love to see more traditionally animated films with Pooh and friends at the center. But Disney doesn't think people want that because they won't admit they screwed the pooch (or Pooh, as the case may be) by opening against Harry Potter.

All this is to say: if Fox is unhappy with the performance of Deadpool 2 in May, they can just write it off as T.J. Miller backlash instead of taking a long hard look at what they actually did wrong. If I were Miller, I would be extremely concerned about potentially being written out of any possible Deadpool 3.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

"Equally bad?" I don't know if I agree with that. Even at a reduced level, Deadpool 2 should be able to perform well in May. But I do think it is going to perform less well in May than it would have in June. And I think it is a missed opportunity to put a big hit movie in an off-season slot where its grosses could have gone even higher.

You're right, that was probably a bit over the top.

I would like to revise that statement to say that I think it's bad that studios are discovering that a movie can be a hit at all times of the years, but then immediately discarding that knowledge, or treating those newly hit months as the minor leagues to graduate from. They're taking the success of a Deadpool in February and instead of saying "This opens up the calendar and could be a game-changer for our industry," they're reacting like, "Wow, this movie is bigger than we thought, we have a new summer blockbuster franchise on our hands!" Fox individually doing it with Deadpool in and of itself is merely the symptom; but the illness is the general thinking that May or June is still intrinsically "better" that February, when the reality is, it's not. I know there are tons of arguments about how the best business happens when school's out, but I think reality doesn't bear that out. The top two grossing films domestically from 2017 were Beauty And The Beast, which opened in March (most public schools take breaks in February and April), and The Last Jedi, which opened in mid-December (when most schools still had a week to go before the holiday break). With studios having traded midnight openings for 6pm and 7pm Thursday night screenings, and digital projection allowing theaters to add as many showings on as many screens as they want on the fly (instead of having a set number of screens and showtimes that couldn't change because there were only so many physical film prints in their possession), that thinking is so outdated. I remember when "The Phantom Menace" came out in theaters, I was still in high school, and it took a little while for "everyone" to have seen it. Or "Titanic", same deal, everyone ended up seeing it but not all at once. With stuff like The Force Awakens, or Avengers, or Deadpool, the theaters will just keep canceling showtimes for movies that aren't selling tickets, and repurposing those screens for the blockbuster opening that weekend, until everyone has made it in. There's no such thing as "completely sold out for the weekend" anymore. It really is about how much cash you can grab in a week, or in two weeks. So why not do a Disney, and open your big tentpole in March, when you can maybe extend that by not having competition? As a general rule, why not give yourself -- and your industry -- the best chance of success?

 

[Jake Lipson]

it's bad that studios are discovering that a movie can be a hit at all times of the years, but then immediately discarding that knowledge, or treating those newly hit months as the minor leagues to graduate from. They're taking the success of a Deadpool in February and instead of saying "This opens up the calendar and could be a game-changer for our industry," they're reacting like, "Wow, this movie is bigger than we thought, we have a new summer blockbuster franchise on our hands!"

Agreed. 100% this.

Also, for a film like Deadpool, schools being out doesn't matter as much as it would for a family-friendly title because of the R rating. Yes, I get that a lot of college students are also off in the summer, but when I was in college a few years ago, I had my days that were really busy and then I had my days that were lighter, so I was able to fit in movies that I really wanted to see accordingly. Schools being out increase midweek grosses of family films during the summer. But Deadpool wouldn't be attracting family audiences anyway, so kids being out of school isn't really an issue for it.

And for family films that come out in the non-summer-or-winter-break months, almost 100% of kids are out of school for two full days every single weekend. The midweek grosses may not be as high as they would be in the summer, but if it's something that is really compelling, the audience will find it on weekends no problem.

 

[Jake Lipson]

As a general rule, why not give yourself -- and your industry -- the best chance of success?

The issue is that the studios are still thinking the best chance of success IS in the summer. I guarantee you that Fox thinks, "Deadpool grossed $783 million in February! If we put the sequel in June, we can make even more money than that because it's the summer!" The chance to make more money = the best chance of success.

The studios aren't thinking that a year-round strategy is the best chance for success, even though it is. They're still too narrow-minded in their thinking pattern.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I'm probably an oddball, but I actually find it easier most of the time to make it out to the movies on my way home from work than to make it out on an day that I'm completely off. And, judging from the number of people I see at Thursday night showings, I'm guessing I'm not totally alone in this

 

[Jake Lipson]

I actually find it easier most of the time to make it out to the movies on my way home from work than to make it out on an day that I'm completely off.

Right, but how many kids do you see at Thursday night shows? The kinds of films that would benefit most from a summer play period -- family films for audiences inclusive of children that can play better on weekdays in summer -- will bring in a lot of business on weekends whether or not school is a factor, which was my point in my above post. Beauty and the Beast did better than any family film released during the summer months in 2017 because people wanted to see it, and the family audience connected with it on weekends.

For Deadpool, kids being out of school in the summer makes no difference, since it's not going for kids anyway. So they really should be fine just sticking with a non-May or June date. They can't use President's Day this year because Black Panther is there, but like I said, August is wide open.

 

[Malcolm R]

I'm not sure TJ Miller is a big enough "name" to affect the box office gross.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I'm not sure TJ Miller is a big enough "name" to affect the box office gross.

I tend to agree, especially in a supporting role. But that won't stop Fox from scapegoating him if it doesn't work, since that's an easy out to avoid taking responsibility for the movie's performance based on factors they controlled, like the release date.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I think AMC revealed during an investor or stockholder call that during off-peak seasons, their average screens were grossing less than $100 a day or something ridiculously low like that. It's not sustainable. They're not going to be able to afford their leases for too long if they only make money two months of the year.

Ultimately, if tentpoles are going to be the future for theaters and the only way they survive, they can't all be spread over a three or four week period from May-June, and another similar period from November-December. There are probably going to be, what, a dozen $100+ million budget films released between May and July? Those should really be spread out over the course of a year.

The only way the exhibition business survives long term is if there's desirable, grade A, premium product available year round.

The theater industry cannot survive if theaters are losing money for about 40 out of 52 weeks in the year. And that's very close to where things already are right now.

Look what The Hollywood Reporter concluded at the end of its report about the box office in 2017:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/average-price-a-movie-ticket-soars-897-2017-1075458

In terms of admissions, 2017 had a strong first quarter, with hits like Beauty and the Beast contributing to a record-setting Q1 in terms of both admissions and box office. But then the tide turned because of a disappointing summer, in which a number of sequels failed to perform up to expectations. A particularly downbeat August accounted for half of the summer 2017 shortfall, according to NATO. Moviegoing rebounded in the fourth quarter of the year to nearly the level of 2016, as 315 million tickets were sold compared to 319 million in fourth quarter 2016.

From the theater owners’ perspective, the see-sawing business during the course of 2017 only underscored the need for Hollywood to maintain a balanced, compelling release schedule throughout all 52 weeks of the year.

Have they been reading HTF?

Now that this observation has been made in a trade, do you think the studios' distribution executives will start paying attention to what should be right there in front of their faces?

As Josh noted, the move of Deadpool into June, and then May, is merely the symptom proving the larger problem. But I think it will also be test case A for the sequel underperforming relative to its predecessor due to its newfound placement in the most aggressive, competitive season on the calendar.

 

[Sean Bryan]

 

[Mike Frezon]

View attachment 43796

Sheriff Woody!

 

[John Dirk]

Didn't work for me at all. Waayyy too long but as Crawdaddy said, humor is subjective and I will definitely still be buying this one.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Sheriff Woody!

I hate to say it, but that's about the only part of the trailer that really worked for me. Otherwise, this just doesn't look that inspired.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Apparently Josh Brolin is headed back for reshoots:

https://omegaunderground.com/2018/0...-back-vancouver-reshoots-working-title-daisy/

Now, reshoots happen all the time on big tentpoles, as we know, so that's nothing to be concerned about, but the timing of this is a bit concerning. An official release date of May 18 really means May 17 in evening "previews," and that's 91 days from today. So, they're really going to have to hurry to get whatever they need finished in time to make this date.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I wouldn't be concerned - I think it's likely that the date was previously scheduled during this time when they made the original contracts. It probably seems worse than it is because the actors were probably contractually locked into being available during this window, which would have been further away from the release date had the studio not moved the date up.

But given that Ridley Scott could re-edit an entirely new actor into an already completed film weeks before the release date and not miss it, Brolin's reshooting material on a previously planned reshoot shouldn't be an issue. With everyone working digitally these days, the footage can be sent to the editing room directly from the set and be cut into the film almost instantly, and the amount of time needed to make and distribute a DCP is far shorter than it would have been to make new prints in the old days.

I remember listening to the commentary on Star Trek Into Darkness, and director JJ Abrams mentioned in it that a pivotal scene between two lead characters was written and shot a mere two weeks before the film's release, and you'd never know it watching the film.

 

[Malcolm R]

As Josh said, with current technology and digital delivery, I think 90 days is an eternity to get this done.

 

[Jake Lipson]

The Hollywood Reporter has a new article about a recent test screening of Deadpool 2. Apparently, it went very well, and the reshoots are done.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/deadpool-2-outscores-original-test-screenings-1095838

 

[Johnny Angell]

The Hollywood Reporter has a new article about a recent test screening of Deadpool 2. Apparently, it went very well, and the reshoots are done.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/deadpool-2-outscores-original-test-screenings-1095838

I’m ready.