Fanboys

larry-411 · 23 Feb 09 :: 18:55

For those who are following it, another decent weekend at the box office. Of the films that dropped, Fanboys had only the 4th smallest drop out of the top 39 films. It took in another $62K for a total so far of $395K. All this on only 34 screens, which is not bad.

P.S. I wasn't watching for Sean either but I definitely will next time I see it.

irina · 23 Feb 09 :: 23:17

larry do you know how much they spent for making the movie? i mean i am curious what sum does it have to reach in order for them to make a profit ?

larry-411 · 23 Feb 09 :: 23:29

Hi irina. The other folks here are much more closely connected with the film and its history and probably know more about the budget than I do.

What I can tell you is that no budget has been officially revealed publicly.

I'm sure some of the ladies here can answer your question (if they are allowed).

TheCentralScrutinizer · 23 Feb 09 :: 23:51

I really don't know. It was only a few million though, from the way Kyle talks. But we do know that the reshoots cost $2 million. And they were so not worth the money.

irina · 24 Feb 09 :: 01:05

i get it. thank you guys.

ps : i will be a little off topic here. but i just wanted to say that i feel like a stalker of larry on imdb ( i can assume it's not a huge coincidence and it's the same larry ). following larry's posts i got to know about lots of not so well know movies and watched them and really enjoy them. so i guess, thanks larry

Illinoisguy1 · 24 Feb 09 :: 01:33

The amount I hear most often is that a film has to make about double it's budget to make a profit.

That's to cover the cost of making the movie, prints & marketing costs.

Now lets say that Fanboys cost 5 million to make (including the reshoots), the cost of making the prints plus the little marketing costs. Let's say 6.5 million.

Right now the box-office looks like it'll be lucky if it breaks 1 million.
There is no merchandise, so nothing from that.
It really looks like the only way that it could make a profit is DVD sales and tv rights. But time will tell.

larry-411 · 24 Feb 09 :: 03:56

irina wrote:

i get it. thank you guys.
ps : i will be a little off topic here. but i just wanted to say that i feel like a stalker of larry on imdb ( i can assume it's not a huge coincidence and it's the same larry ). following larry's posts i got to know about lots of not so well know movies and watched them and really enjoy them. so i guess, thanks larry

Oh, you're too kind. Thanks so much for reading my posts. Mostly what I hope to do is turn people on to terrific movies, and if I do that for just one person it's all worth it. Most people won't take the time to give feedback, so I truly appreciate it. You're a star!

Illinoisguy1 wrote:

The amount I hear most often is that a film has to make about double it's budget to make a profit.
That's to cover the cost of making the movie, prints & marketing costs.
Now lets say that Fanboys cost 5 million to make (including the reshoots), the cost of making the prints plus the little marketing costs. Let's say 6.5 million.
Right now the box-office looks like it'll be lucky if it breaks 1 million.
There is no merchandise, so nothing from that.
It really looks like the only way that it could make a profit is DVD sales and tv rights. But time will tell.

That's correct.

For anyone who's interested in such things it is true that, especially for studio films, P&A (promotion & advertising = marketing) is generally about equal to the film's production budget. A film with a listed budget of $40M, let's say, might end up costing close to $100M or more when you factor in marketing and prints and other ancillary costs.

Some say that no film ever makes back its money on box office. There are exceptions (Juno, Twilight, Slumdog) but most of the time a film doesn't go into the black until DVD rentals and sales, TV/cable deals, and merchandising kick in.

TheCentralScrutinizer · 24 Feb 09 :: 04:05

In this case, the Weinsteins will reap exactly what they've sown.

TeeJay · 24 Feb 09 :: 09:44

larry-411 wrote:

Hi irina. The other folks here are much more closely connected with the film and its history and probably know more about the budget than I do.

Kyle said it was $5 million in an interview in 2007:

TeeJay wrote:

Someone asked what the budget for The Hollow (another of Kyle's movies) and Fanboys was. He said The Hollow was $750,000 and (if I understood it right) Fanboys was $5,000,000.
http://www.chris-marquette.com/forum/vi … 257#p15257

The $5 million doesn't include the reshoots, so it looks like they spent $7 mill on shooting the movie alone. There is no way they're gonna make $9 million back in the theater run, it would be short of a miracle if they can make $1 million from that, right?

I don't know enough about DVD sale figures to estimate whether the DVDs will get them the money back that they spent on it.

-TeeJay

Illinoisguy1 · 24 Feb 09 :: 14:31

There are a few cases where a movie that flops/under-performs at the box office does well enough to make a profit. It's also sometimes possible that it makes enough to make a sequel.

This could be the case where quite a number of people are interested in seeing the movie, but it's not playing anywhere near them. Or it is, but not close enough. So these people could be waiting for the dvd release to either rent or buy it out right.

TheCentralScrutinizer · 24 Feb 09 :: 16:16

It pisses me off that people will consider this movie a flop after TWC only released it in a thimbleful of theaters and didn't advertise it at all. That's incredibly unfair to the movie. We all know that they doomed it to failure from the get-go. And we know why, too.

Illinoisguy1 · 24 Feb 09 :: 16:38

I don't know if I should ask this, but here it goes.

Who had final cut rights in regards to the film?

I know Spielberg does. But I would doubt that this director would have final cut for such a low budget film.

If he didn't then that is why the studio could force edits regardless of what the director wanted.
I am sure that this is why in the past a director would want his name taken off a movie because the studio cut the film not to his liking. In other words 'Alan Smithee'. But I think they can't do that anymore.

Now I'm not defending what Weinstein did, but the studio likely had the right to edit the film. They/he looks at the money aspect and not the "art", so he felt the cancer story didn't fit and could affect the box office.

So it's nothing really new in regards to the studio butting in. I even think this happened to Orson Welles as well.

TeeJay · 24 Feb 09 :: 17:08

Of course the Weinsteins had the final cut rights. There would not have been any reshoots or last-minute edits if Kyle Newman had had the final cut rights.

I think the Weinstein's reasoning for losing the cancer storyline was that the audience didn't laugh for minutes at a time after the word cancer was mentioned. And that the first cut didn't screen as well as they had hoped (whatever that means) with the 12 to 16-year-old audiences. Their decision was, of course, governed by greed. They just didn't have a clue what to do with the movie, didn't know the first thing how to market it and how to sell it to the audience it was intended for. I think what they wanted it to be was a big comedy hit for a broad audience. The problem is that Fanboys was never supposed to be that movie. It was one of the reasons for the dozens of pushbacks.

Also, it's not just that, it's also the way they treated the movie. Apparently, the reshoots were done while Kyle Newman was out of town. It was like the Weinsteins were waiting for an opportunity for Kyle not to be available to bring in someone else (whose vision couldn't have been farther away from Kyle's) to rework the film to the studio's liking behind Kyle's back. It was all very below the belt.

-TeeJay

TheCentralScrutinizer · 24 Feb 09 :: 17:28

And they don't call him Harvey Scissorhands for nothin'. Ask any filmmaker who ever had a film raped by this jerk. He's worse than anyone else in Holloywood. Anyone. Even Tarrantino has been bent over. See Grindhouse.

My dearest wish is that Chris never goes anywhere near another TWC movie. Ever. Then I can just forget that this assclown even exists.

TheCentralScrutinizer · 24 Feb 09 :: 17:32

PS: According to Kyle, in the end it was Kevin Spacey who saved the movie. Fan outcry helped, but it took Mr. Spacey picking up the phone and having a chat with Harvey to get the film back into Newman's hands. I kind of have a feeling that he won't be working with TWC anymore after this. And that's the best thing that could ever happen to anyone.

TheCentralScrutinizer · 24 Feb 09 :: 18:37

OMFG!!!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0489049/boa … /131369671

Is there no end to the utter stupidity on IMDb? As sick as I am of arguing that Pete died in The Invisble, I never thought I'd have to argue that Linus died!

larry-411 · 24 Feb 09 :: 18:59

Illinoisguy1 wrote:

There are a few cases where a movie that flops/under-performs at the box office does well enough to make a profit. It's also sometimes possible that it makes enough to make a sequel.
This could be the case where quite a number of people are interested in seeing the movie, but it's not playing anywhere near them. Or it is, but not close enough. So these people could be waiting for the dvd release to either rent or buy it out right.

There are actually a LOT of cases where this is true. A couple of years ago I got into a debate about this (during the Alpha Dog days) and I did some research. I don't know where it is now (IMDb gutted their boards) but I put together a list of dozens of recent films that bombed at the BO but have made a ton since then.

One example I like to use is the David Duchovny/Anton Yelchin/Robin Williams film House of D. Its lifetime theatrical gross was $388,532. But it made something like $20 million in DVD rentals alone. That doesn't count DVD sales or TV rights, and it's been shown hundreds of times on cable.

Alpha Dog took in $15,309,602 domestically. But it made an additional $22 million in just 3 months of DVD rentals. Again, that doesn't count sales or TV.

There are literally thousands of examples.

About final cut rights in general, another topic which I've written about extensively, it is extremely rare for a young director on a low-budget, independent film to have final cut rights. They deliver their cut to the producers or distributors by a certain date and then it's out of their hands. In the majority of cases the studio is then free to recut it however they want.

It's similar to the movies themselves in regards to actors' pay. Only a handful of powerful actors have a stake (points) in their movies. Most get paid a salary -- a flat fee -- and make no more than that regardless of how well the picture does.

Their decision was, of course, governed by greed. They just didn't have a clue what to do with the movie, didn't know the first thing how to market it and how to sell it to the audience it was intended for.

Very very well said.

I can honestly say that this applies to the overwhelming majority of independent films ever made. It's one of the main reasons so many never see the light of day. If I had a nickel for how many times I've written or spoken this statement...

Last edited by larry-411 (24 Feb 09 :: 19:08)

domesticelefant · 24 Feb 09 :: 20:50

I guess my plan to send Tobi to see the movie didn't work. I never heard back from Nathalie, so I don't even know if she told him.

TeeJay · 25 Feb 09 :: 22:17

Laura, this might be interesting for you and Shawn:

EVERYONE IN PITTSBURGH!! Fanboys party 8:00 @ AMC Lowes Waterfront!

Also, here's the theater info for the Fanboys week of Feb 27:

Los Angeles
1. AMC Town Center 8 Burbank
2. AMC Block 30 @ Orange Orange
Chicago
3. AMC South Barrington 30 South Barrington
Boston
4. AMC Liberty Tree Mall 20 Danvers
5. Landmark Theaters Kendall Square Cinema 9 Cambridge
Washington, DC
6. AMC Hoffman Center 22 Alexandria
7. Phoenix Adlabs Theatres Union Station 9 Washington
Detroit
8. AMC Forum 30 - Sterling Hts Sterling Heights
9. Centurion Uptown Birmingham 8 Birmingham
Atlanta
10. Paulson Theatre Services Plaza Theatre Atlanta
11. Regal Entertainment Group North Point Market 8 Alpharetta
Minneapolis-St. Paul (New Market)
12. Carmike Cinemas, Inc. Oakdale 20 Oakdale
13. Kerasotes Theatres Block E 15 Minneapolis
14. Regal Entertainment Group Brooklyn Center 20 Brooklyn
Cleveland (New Market)
15. Co-operative Theatres of Ohio Atlas Great Lakes Stadium 16 (formerly Mall 9 Mentor
16. Florin Creative Management Shaker Square Cinemas Shaker Heights
Miami-Ft. Lauderdale (New Market)
17. AMC Sunset Place 24 Theatres South Miami
18. Regal Entertainment Group Sawgrass 23 Sunrise
Phoenix
19. AMC Westgate 20 Theatres Glendale
20. AMC Deer Valley 30 + Imax Phoenix
21. Harkins Theatres Harkins Chandler Fashion Center 20 Chandler
22. Harkins Theatres Arizona Mills 24 Theatre Tempe
Denver
23. AMC Westminster Promenade 24 Westminster
Pittsburgh (New Market)
24. AMC Waterfront Theatare West Homestead
Orlando-Daytona Bch-Melbrn
25. AMC Universal Cineplex 20 Orlando
26. Regal Entertainment Group Pointe 21 Theaters Orlando
27. Regal Entertainment Group Oviedo Marketplace 22 Oviedo
Baltimore (New Market)
28. Bow Tie Cinemas Annapolis Mall 11 Cinema Annapolis
29. Muvico Theaters Egyptian 24 Hanover
Indianapolis (New Market)
30. Kerasotes Theatres Showplace 16 Indianapolis
31. Regal Entertainment Group Shiloh Crossing 18 Avon
Hartford & New Haven
32. Bow Tie Cinemas Hartford Palace 17 Hartford
Raleigh-Durham
33. Cinema Service Company Raleigh Grand Raleigh
Kansas City (New Market)
34. AMC Barrywoods 24 Kansas City
35. AMC Studio 29 Olathe
36. Cinemark USA Palace 15 Kansas City
Cincinnati (New Market)
37. AMC AMC Newport on the Levee 20 Newport
Columbus, OH
38. AMC Lennox 24 Columbus
39. Marcus Theatres Pickerington Pickerington
Memphis (New Market)
40. Malco Theatres Studio on the Square 5 Memphis
Greensboro-H. Point-W. Salem (New Market)
41. Carmike Cinemas, Inc. Carmike 18 Greensboro
42. Independent Theatre Booking Carousel Greensboro
Providence-New Bedford (New Market)
43. Cinema Film Buying Cinema World 16 Lincoln Lincoln
44. Cinema Management Company, Inc. Island Cinemas 10 Middletown
45. National Amusements Providence Place 16 Providence
Austin
46. Cinema Service Company Alamo South Lamar Austin

-TeeJay

TheCentralScrutinizer · 25 Feb 09 :: 22:19

So I guess that means more people in costume! Woohoo! Somebody has to take pictures.

larry-411 · 25 Feb 09 :: 22:25

Looks like an increase from 34 to 46 theaters. That would make it the largest distribution so far (it opened at 44).

1) 44
2) 41
3) 34
4) 46

Looks like it's gone from New York as well as Philly. Closest to me now is Baltimore. Annapolis and Hanover are each about 2 1/2 hours away.

Simon · 25 Feb 09 :: 22:34

Good to see it expanding theater sizes, even if it isn't in the UK.

domesticelefant · 25 Feb 09 :: 22:36

I wish I could go.

TeeJay · 25 Feb 09 :: 22:55

Simon, there may be good news for you very soon. That's all I can say right now.

-TeeJay

TheCentralScrutinizer · 26 Feb 09 :: 23:25

You can see more pics from the Atlanta event here...

http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v694/ … t/fanboys/

Chris Marquette Message Board

#2601 23 Feb 09 :: 18:55

Re: Fanboys

#2602 23 Feb 09 :: 23:17

Re: Fanboys

#2603 23 Feb 09 :: 23:29

Re: Fanboys

#2604 23 Feb 09 :: 23:51

Re: Fanboys

#2605 24 Feb 09 :: 01:05

Re: Fanboys

#2606 24 Feb 09 :: 01:33

Re: Fanboys

#2607 24 Feb 09 :: 03:56

Re: Fanboys

#2608 24 Feb 09 :: 04:05

Re: Fanboys

#2609 24 Feb 09 :: 09:44

Re: Fanboys

#2610 24 Feb 09 :: 14:31

Re: Fanboys

#2611 24 Feb 09 :: 16:16

Re: Fanboys

#2612 24 Feb 09 :: 16:38

Re: Fanboys

#2613 24 Feb 09 :: 17:08

Re: Fanboys

#2614 24 Feb 09 :: 17:28

Re: Fanboys

#2615 24 Feb 09 :: 17:32

Re: Fanboys

#2616 24 Feb 09 :: 18:37

Re: Fanboys

#2617 24 Feb 09 :: 18:59

Re: Fanboys

#2618 24 Feb 09 :: 20:50

Re: Fanboys

#2619 25 Feb 09 :: 22:17

Re: Fanboys

#2620 25 Feb 09 :: 22:19

Re: Fanboys

#2621 25 Feb 09 :: 22:25

Re: Fanboys

#2622 25 Feb 09 :: 22:34

Re: Fanboys

#2623 25 Feb 09 :: 22:36

Re: Fanboys

#2624 25 Feb 09 :: 22:55

Re: Fanboys

#2625 26 Feb 09 :: 23:25

Re: Fanboys

Board footer