Mad Dog
V.I.P. Member
Smurfs were a rampant rumor for KidZone before the Nintendo deal went down. It received largely negative response on this Forum.
Why were Smurfs bad received in this forum? I hate the 3D movie versions but the originals from French albums or even the HannahBarberah versions were quite cool. In their origins they were close to The Hobbit or that kind of European fantasy than silly TrollsSmurfs were a rampant rumor for KidZone before the Nintendo deal went down. It received largely negative response on this Forum.
Yep, that's the somewhat transparent grey area after FINISH and before the FINALE/TROPHY. This concept does require one pass over the other tracks with a single track.How would you get from the final lap in the innermost circle back to the unload area? Bridge?
I don't know why any individuals were, but forum posters were pretty much anti Smurf. Myself, I couldn't care less one way or another.Why were Smurfs bad received in this forum? I hate the 3D movie versions but the originals from French albums or even the HannahBarberah versions were quite cool. In their origins they were close to The Hobbit or that kind of European fantasy than silly Trolls
Talking about clasic cartoons
Does anybody here remember Dungeons & Dragons 80's cartoon. Super cool and nostalgic IP. Same for Masters of the Universe. Both could do nice rides/lands, Id spend tons of $ of merchan if they were on Uni parks.
Because the rumor had it based on the new (at the time) live-action films. And given how that film series fell out of existence and out of most people's minds since then, I think we were right to be against it coming to the parks.I don't know why any individuals were, but forum posters were pretty much anti Smurf. Myself, I couldn't care less one way or another.
Because the rumor had it based on the new (at the time) live-action films. And given how that film series fell out of existence and out of most people's minds since then, I think we were right to be against it coming to the parks.
I love the original comics and cartoons, but that doesn't matter. It isn't owned by Universal and it isn't hot property in the US. Above that the theme parks rights are in use all over the world. So we won't so the Smurfs at Universal ever. Trolls is owned by Universal and is hot property (for whatever reason) and we are 1000% more likely to get Trolls than Smurfs unfortunately.What if they built it based on original french comics/Hannah Barberah series? Would you like them this way? But I totally agree you. Live action movies versions sucked and of course they dont deserve a place in Uni Resort.
I know this is an old post, but wanted to do some movie math:FB 2 underperformed, but making over half a billion is not being a flop lol and its still the Potter brand. Im not worried. Paris seems wonderful choice for them.
Not sure where you're getting that math. If that was true, many more movies would be losing money. (Though it's possible these production companies are reporting losses for tax purposes.)I know this is an old post, but wanted to do some movie math:
If a movie has a $200M budget + $100M Marketing (which I believe FB easily had), your movie now needs to make just about $800-$900M before it starts to MAKE money. Remember, the studio doesn't keep but about 50% of the lifetime domestic cume and internationally, films only make about 25% from the theaters.
FB2 was a money loser for Warner Brothers.
$340M is absolute minimum break even on that type of a budget and that's assuming that the $170 includes marketing costs. If not, then there's no way it recoups at $340. I agree that what I stated is probably a bit high, but not by too much. Say $300-$350M was spent on FB2 once you include marketing. That movie now needs to make AT LEAST $700M, if not more to break even.Not sure where you're getting that math. If that was true, many more movies would be losing money. (Though it's possible these production companies are reporting losses for tax purposes.)
According to this article, films need to make twice the budget globally to break even. This also doesn't count merch / DVD / tv / streaming.
This article about Alita agrees, stating it's budget was $170 million so its break even was $340 million (it probably didn't make enough for a sequel).
I gave two sources for my math, can you cite sources which disagree with the 2xbudget rule and state it needs to be four times budget as your math shows?$340M is absolute minimum break even on that type of a budget and that's assuming that the $170 includes marketing costs. If not, then there's no way it recoups at $340. I agree that what I stated is probably a bit high, but not by too much. Say $300-$350M was spent on FB2 once you include marketing. That movie now needs to make AT LEAST $700M, if not more to break even.
Great post. That’s a key thing people seem to be overlooking regarding Paris and FB. The time period. Paris now? Meh. Paris in the 20s? All of that romanticism and allure that still draws people there today.My wish list for Fantastic Beasts (aka Wizarding World):
I walk into a well known location, Paris, but it's the 1920's. Not the picture perfect, clean and sugar coated Paris of Epcot that doesn't has the feel of the real thing, no a faithful recreation.
Trees line the impressive buildings and there are little cafe's. At night it gets even more magical.
An artist sells his artwork in a Montmartre street and there is a small souvenir shop.
There is a posh restaurant, art nouveau style of course, with amazing food.
From Montmatre we travel trough an arch and the world changes. It is getting darker. I'm in the wizarding world. There is a tiny circus and in front of it people seem to fly and there are fire eaters.
This is the holding room for an exiting ride. Eventually we are let into the tent.
We meet Newt. He secretly tells us the magical creatures there have a terrible life in the circus and he is going to save them. We step into a ride vehicle and go trough his magical suitcase. Here we meet many environments. The saved magical creatures are happy but there is 1 who creates a problem, a Runespoors it's a huge three-headed snake . During our tour we see how Newt eventually wins the trust of the mistreated animal and we end in the Runespoors' environment and wave Newt and the animal goodbye.
Still exited from the ride I order a croissant with Camembert and a glass of campaign when I notice another ride.
I enter a small courtyard with a beautiful Wallace Fountain in the middle. You can drink some water from it. It's getting quite crowded here as the area fill with people.
Then the lights go out for a second and we are transported too the "Ministrè des Affairs Magiques". In the grand hall we are greeted by young Albus Dumbledore from the first floor. We are recruited to collect information about an evil that threatens the wizarding community. I and the rest of the recruits enter several elevators that takes us, with the power of the Floo network trough the wizarding world. We get to the ministry of magic in Londen, New York, Japan and more. In each location we find multiple rooms and come back with a clue. Fun thing is that every elevator got some different rooms and locations. In the end Dumbledore catches the evil and it ends well as we exit the ride and are back in Paris.
I think that's part of the hyperbole.When was Paris 100% Confirmed?
If the $170M wasn't including marketing, which almost assuredly was around $75M (probably a conservative estimate) or so itself, there's no way it makes back it's money at the amount you gave based on the amount the studio will receive back from the theaters domestically and internationally. You're talking around $250M+ sunk into a film between production and Marketing, which means, the ACTUAL amount the movie needs to make is $550-$600M just to break even.I gave two sources for my math, can you cite sources which disagree with the 2xbudget rule and state it needs to be four times budget as your math shows?
BTW $170 million was not including marketing.
Epic Universe is now cancelledI don't care about your "sources" because they're wrong.
Sounds legit.Epic Universe is now cancelled
If the $170M wasn't including marketing, which almost assuredly was around $75M (probably a conservative estimate) or so itself, there's no way it makes back it's money at the amount you gave based on the amount the studio will receive back from the theaters domestically and internationally. You're talking around $250M+ sunk into a film between production and Marketing, which means, the ACTUAL amount the movie needs to make is $550-$600M just to break even.
I don't care about your "sources" because they're wrong. You can't ignore the facts of doing business and once you add in marketing and the fact that studios only receive, on average, 50% of Domestic box office and 25% of Foreign box office. But you can keep thinking that somehow they're gonna spend $250+M and make it back with $340M.