|
|
Post by the light works on Mar 8, 2017 3:57:01 GMT
This is a Tim Burton film, and has a lot of his hallmarks. it has a relatively large number of young characters, with no apparent lapses in character. the storyline is not an entirely uncommon one, but a time travel twist gives it an interesting new angle. the story is a bit darker and more intense than the trailers implied, and may not be suitable for sensitive children. I would place it on a level with the later Harry Potter movies. I'm not sure how well the movie did, but it is based on a series of books, and I would like to see more of the story.
|
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Mar 8, 2017 5:17:41 GMT
www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=peregrine.htmGlobal take was $297 million on a $110 million budget, but it only earned $88 million US domestic, leaving it #35 for the year. So it made its production costs back and then some, but a disappointing US domestic like that doesn't entirely bode well for the prospect of a sequel, especially in light of how mediocre the reviews were (mine included).
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Mar 8, 2017 15:11:34 GMT
www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=peregrine.htmGlobal take was $297 million on a $110 million budget, but it only earned $88 million US domestic, leaving it #35 for the year. So it made its production costs back and then some, but a disappointing US domestic like that doesn't entirely bode well for the prospect of a sequel, especially in light of how mediocre the reviews were (mine included). yes, the competition for production dollars is pretty intense, and like every other industry in our current economic climate, people aren't willing to settle for mere solid profit. |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Mar 8, 2017 18:52:36 GMT
www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=peregrine.htmGlobal take was $297 million on a $110 million budget, but it only earned $88 million US domestic, leaving it #35 for the year. So it made its production costs back and then some, but a disappointing US domestic like that doesn't entirely bode well for the prospect of a sequel, especially in light of how mediocre the reviews were (mine included). Is the figure box office takings, or how much money actually went to the studio? Box office figures are misleading, as half of that doesn't go the studio but the cinema chains and distributors. So $297 million would actually be 148.5 million for a $38.5 million profit...less whatever they spent on marketing. So rough estimate would be $8-18 million. Even if a sequel made as much money as the first film, increasing costs would make it unprofitable. |
|
