Official STAR WARS Saga Discussion Thread: Part 5 (1 Viewer)

[Tino]

I'm talking worldwide box office by the way.

 

[Lord Dalek]

deleted.

 

[AshJW]

I don't have any intention to see Avatar 2 in the theaters. I liked the first one just ok, so I probably wait for the Blu-ray if anything.


But I don't think it's wise for both movies to go into competition with one another.

 

[Lord Dalek]

But I don't think it's wise for both movies to go into competition with one another.

Oh they'll delay it, Fox has too much riding on Avatar 2 saving their bacon again (because X-Men probably won't) to get trolled by Disney ala WB this year.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Travis, I'd definitely END with Avatar 2 Judge that as you will.


As for timing, I know the rules are somewhat different now, but Alien to Aliens was 7 years (1979 - 1986) and Terminator to T2 was 7 years (1984 - 1991). Avatar to Avatar 2 would be 8 years (2009 - 2017). Frankly, I like the gap.


Anyways, I just think Fox has a much stronger hand than most other folks believe (except Tino). Any "backlash" against Avatar is outside the mainstream. Last I looked, it was also being directed by JIM CAMERON. You know, that guy. His last two movies made FIVE BILLION dollars. I know Star Wars is a (much) stronger brand than Pandora, but I also know Jim Cameron movies connect with audiences worldwide at a staggering pace.


When Titanic makes as much money as TPM and ROTS combined (unadjusted), and his next movie makes $600M more...that is a filmmaker with whom I do not want to tangle and risk hurting the international growth of my $4B franchise.


And like Tino, I agree that Avatar 2 will outgross Episode 8. I do think E8 will beat it domestically.

 

[Patrick Sun]

Fox will move Avatar 2's release weekend to the last weekend of March, 2018.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I liked Avatar, a lot.

With that said, I feel like I was in the minority with that view. Avatar was a movie everyone had to see, but not necessarily something that was beloved. Titanic certainly was more beloved as a film. I don't think making Avatar 2 is a mistake, though I do question making Avatar 2-4 simultaneously. I don't think they'll flop, but I think the audience excitement level will drop off - I think it's more likely that the general public will go but with less enthusiasm, the way The Hobbit films didn't set the movie world on fire the way the Lord Of The Rings movies did. I think the financial success of Avatar will be something Avatar 2 struggles to reach, as would any film in today's climate. 3D admissions are down, and movies play increasingly shorter windows. I could still see Avatar in IMAX 3D at a theater it had never left in April 2010. Now movies generally stay in IMAX for 1-2 weeks. TFA has had four, and that's considered a huge amount of time in today's world. There's no way any single film, regardless of how good or how popular it is, keeps an IMAX house for a five month run in 2017.

I don't love these box office comparisons because the money comparisons are often apples to oranges. Even adjusting for inflation doesn't tell the whole story. My local IMAX theater charged more for TFA in 2015 than it did for Avatar in 2009, and the increase in price was more than inflation over the last six years. I think the only number that really tells us anything is number of tickets sold, which isn't as publicized. If ticket prices continue to skyrocket, we'll have a new box office champ every few years, and it'll be based on merits other than viewers.

My IMAX 3D ticket for Avatar in 2009 was $15. In today's dollars, checking with several CPI and inflation calculators, that's about $16.60. My IMAX 3D ticket at the same theater in 2015 for TFA was $23.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Josh, the Hobbit analogy is an interesting one. I'm not sure I can argue against it (just yet); you may be onto something. The IMAX theater is another challenge, since Avatar 2 will have to compete in a much more crowded market, and that long run there will not exist. Like Disney, Fox could probably demand a few weeks, but that is about it.


I would argue that your excitement metrics for Avatar apply equally (if not moreso) to Episode 8. I expect both films will drop off relatively equally to their predecessors. That said, (again) Avatar's strength is in the international arena, where I think the more dreamlike and visually focused adventure will play better (and longer) than the character-centric and dialogue-driven Star Wars sequel.


In the end, I think Cameron's name is very valuable. Saying "From the Director of Avatar and Titanic" carries a lot of weight worldwide. Attach that to a sizzle trailer with trademark Cameron visuals (and when was the last time he didn't dramatically improve visual effects spectacle with his newest film...1984's The Terminator?) and I think the mainstream will be ready to go again.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

My guess is the decision was driven by a) production realities on Episode VIII that made it increasingly impractical to deliver a top-quality product on that tight of a turnaround time; and/or b) Disney not wanting to cannibalize its two very successful space opera sagas (Guardians of the Galaxy and Star Wars) by opening the latest entries so close to each other.


The Avatar sequels are still purely theoretical at this point. I think they're definitely going to happen, but until principal photography begins I don't think any of the rival studios are factoring Avatar release dates into their planning.

 

[Tino]

I think they are way past theoretical at this point Adam. They are definitely going to happen.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Josh, the Hobbit analogy is an interesting one. I'm not sure I can argue against it (just yet); you may be onto something. The IMAX theater is another challenge, since Avatar 2 will have to compete in a much more crowded market, and that long run there will not exist. Like Disney, Fox could probably demand a few weeks, but that is about it.


I would argue that your excitement metrics for Avatar apply equally (if not moreso) to Episode 8. I expect both films will drop off relatively equally to their predecessors. That said, (again) Avatar's strength is in the international arena, where I think the more dreamlike and visually focused adventure will play better (and longer) than the character-centric and dialogue-driven Star Wars sequel.


In the end, I think Cameron's name is very valuable. Saying "From the Director of Avatar and Titanic" carries a lot of weight worldwide. Attach that to a sizzle trailer with trademark Cameron visuals (and when was the last time he didn't dramatically improve visual effects spectacle with his newest film...1984's The Terminator?) and I think the mainstream will be ready to go again.

Some great points here. I agree completely with you about Episode VIII - I don't think it'll be as huge, but it'll still do some great business. The thing with TFA was that there hasn't been a new SW movie for ten years, there'd never been one where George Lucas wasn't hands on before, and people have been waiting since 1983 to find out what happened after Return Of The Jedi. For TFA, people came out who loved Star Wars, who liked Star Wars, who were disappointed before by Star Wars, who had never seen what Star Wars was about. It'll be huge, but it won't be quite this huge.


I think whatever film Cameron does next - and I'm sure it'll be Avatar 2 - will be a hit, and I learned a long time ago not to bet against Cameron. But much like it will be nearly impossible for Episode VIII to do what TFA did, I think it'll be just as tall of an order to ask Avatar 2 to accomplish what Avatar 1 did. I think Cameron will have to settle for not making the top grossing film of all time for the third time in a row -- and I honestly think he'll be quite fine with that. Fox, and the entertainment press that watches the grosses like horse races, on the other hand, will probably have unrealistically high expectations and consider anything sort of a certain number to be a disappointment.


One thing's for sure - I'll be seeing both movies opening day, whether they open weeks apart, months apart, or years apart.

 

[TravisR]

In the end, I think Cameron's name is very valuable. Saying "From the Director of Avatar and Titanic" carries a lot of weight worldwide. Attach that to a sizzle trailer with trademark Cameron visuals (and when was the last time he didn't dramatically improve visual effects spectacle with his newest film...1984's The Terminator?) and I think the mainstream will be ready to go again.

Yeah, once the Avatar 2 trailer hits, people are gonna go ape shit. Simultaneously, I think if you walked up to people on the street today and said that they were making Avatar 2, most people would be- at best- slightly excited but once people start seeing footage from it, it'll be huge.

 

[Tino]

From Deadline:

"In regards to 20th Century Fox’s Avatar sequels, which Rupert Murdoch said would be released in December 2016, 2017 and 2018; nothing official was ever put on the release date calendar, and one insider says there aren’t any planned dates as of yet."

 

[TravisR]

From Deadline:

"In regards to 20th Century Fox’s Avatar sequels, which Rupert Murdoch said would be released in December 2016, 2017 and 2018; nothing official was ever put on the release date calendar, and one insider says there aren’t any planned dates as of yet."

Looks like Cameron has just bought himself even more time to make the movies.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

That's what I meant by the Avatar sequels being "theoretical". I don't doubt that they're going to happen eventually, but there's nothing concrete enough for any of the studios to factor into their plans.

 

[Lord Dalek]

Yeah he may never make them at all like that Battle Angel Alita movie he gave up on.

 

[Tim Glover]

Agree that both Ep. 8 and Avatar 2 won't be as big of hits BUT I will say that Avatar was HUGE and I do feel that while the water cooler conversations re: Avatar are somewhat indifferent; numbers don't lie. Cameron is probably the best director going other than Steven Spielberg. Avatar connected and I think Avatar 2 will do bonkers at the box office.


May not have the legs as the first but will be big. Same for Ep. 8. So much front loading these days.


Off topic but it just makes what Titanic did so freaking impressive.

 

[Tino]

Cameron gave an update on his progress for the sequels, telling Entertainment Weekly that he is currently in the “process of doing another pass through all three scripts right now.”

“The design process is very mature at this point. We’ve been designing for about a year and a half. All the characters, settings and creatures are all pretty much [set],” the triple Oscar-winning director explained.

Cameron also hinted that the hold-up on parts two, three and four of his extraterrestrial saga has a little something to do with the height of the bar he himself set with movie one.

“You have to challenge yourself,” he told EW. “Obviously, expectations are going to be very high on these films, especially on ’Avatar 2,’ to make sure it wasn’t just some big fluke the first time. So we’ve got to deliver. I’ve created a nice rod for my own back, so they say.”

Can’t fault the guy for wanting to do it right, right?

All three sequels are expected to film simultaneously, and the release date for “Avatar 2″ has been moved to Dec. 25, 2017, barring any further delays.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

As promised, a quick fiscal breakdown of the Middle Earth movies. Excuse all of the rudimentary math...I'm an engineer, not an economist.

I know it is a little tough to read, I was hoping it'd be a bit larger (click on it, and it'll be bigger). The top bar chart shows each movies domestic gross and international gross, unadjusted for inflation. The bottom bar chart is the same graph, adjusted for inflation (with some trickery to make that work for international revenue - but close enough). The graph on the right is just the ticket prices from 1961 to 2015. Ticket prices show steady growth from 1961 to 1989 (getting a bit steeper in the 80s). The 90s stagnated a bit until 1998/1999 (presumably Titanic and TPM), and then took off even more dramatically in the oughts until the economy crapped out a bit.


Anyways, the unadjusted drop from ROTK to AUJ was 9% (most of which was a domestic drop), 9 years later. If you account for the substantial ticket inflation, the drop was actually a pretty staggering 31% (again, majority was domestically driven). Which means ticket inflation countered 22% of the drop in revenue.


So, before I assess Avatar 2's prospects, I need to determine if the ticket prices will have risen by the same proportion when Avatar 2 is released. Quick math indicates that the same inflator (2003-2012) applied to Avatar 2 (2009-2018) would require ticket prices in 2018 to be $9.90. They are projected to be $8.70 (per BOM) in 2016 (up just over 25 cents from 2015), therefore it is totally unreasonable to expect them to rise an additional $1.20 in two years. So, I'll assume 25 cents a year, making tickets $9.20 in 2018 (you may gag now).


7.50 to 9.90 would be inflation equal to that benefitting AUJ (2.40)

7.50 to 9.20 means effective inflation would only be 71% as beneficial for Avatar 2 (1.70/2.40)


The one key change I do not know how to account for is IMAX screen pressure. Avatar was able to run for about 3 months in IMAX (longer in many places), whereas Avatar 2 will have 5 or so weeks, at best. That matters, but I'm not certain how much. So I'll leave it aside for now.



So, if Avatar 2 performs like AUJ in terms of franchise drops but only gets 71% if the inflation boost AUJ got, it will drop ~15% from the 2009 gross.


Why did I do all of this? If inflation stays consistent and Avatar-ian interest drops consistent with ROTK --> AUJ (same time gap), Avatar 2 would still make a little more than $2.3B, independent of competitive aspects.


Since this is a SW thread, I'll examine E8 next, using respective drops between TPM/AOTC and TPM/ROTS. I expect it'll behave much more like the latter, since AOTC had a bunch of TPM baggage, and Episode 8 does not.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

My experience of ticket prices is that they don't necessarily correspond to inflation - my IMAX 3D ticket for Avatar in 2009 was $15, and my IMAX 3D ticket for Star Wars in 2015 (at the same theater) was $23. Inflation would dictate that the amount of inflation would have raised the ticket price to about $16.60 - theater prices haven't been consistent with inflation in my experience, they've gone up far faster. A 2D ticket in 2009 would have been $9-10 by me in 2009; now, a 2D ticket costs $15.50.


I think the more interesting numbers to look at are number of tickets sold (if such numbers are even available) - that gives a much better idea of how many people are actually paying to see these things.


I don't think it's unreasonable to expect ticket prices to go up $1.20 in two years. I don't like it as a customer, but that's exactly what's happened in my area. Looking at my purchase history online real quick, I see I paid $20.50 for an IMAX 3D ticket in February 2014, and I paid $23 for one in January 2016 at the same theater. Going for 2D showings, I see I paid $14.50 for a 2D movie in December 2013, and $15.50 for a 2D movie in December 2015, again, same theater. So it looks like prices have been consistently going up $1-2 per year in my area.