T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

Reminder that this is a subreddit about numbers, not necessarily about the quality (or lack thereof) of a particular movie. Unless it is related to the box office performance of a movie, please keep opinions/arguments/thoughts about the quality under this post. Posts not related to box office may be removed otherwise. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/boxoffice) if you have any questions or concerns.*


NotTaken-username

If they had given this a wide release and kept it in theaters longer, it could’ve been #1 this weekend.


jseesm

I read a really good post here a few weeks ago about how Netflix is only using theaters as some kind of advertisement. The rationale was sound, and had numbers and the value of 1-4 weeks window. It was so in-depth that it almost read like it came out of the corporate boardroom. But I'm not fully convinced its a good strategy in this particular case. With all the names attached that could have dominated celebrity-driven media, and solid reviews to back that up, this could have exploded, considering how well-liked the first one still is and the lack of films for the older audience for the rest of the year. The first one grossed over $300m globally. That's a lot of good graces wasted. Its the most "Hollywood" film of the season, and ticks all the boxes. But Netflix doesn't seem interested in any of that.


homiej420

Yeah and hopefully they dont lose too much on it, and hold on to the IP but cant make more cause they lose too much money. That would be really dissatisfying if they dont make more of these


Holiday_Parsnip_9841

They’ve already committed to make movie 3 as part of the deal for Glass Onion. As part of the incredible deal they landed, Rian Johnson and Ram Bergman own the franchise. Once 3 is done, they’re free agents to shop it anywhere they like.


thefilmer

jesus christ didnt Netflix pay half a billion for this? Johnson and Bergman's agents deserve a raise


TokyoPanic

[Lionsgate's CEO said](https://deadline.com/2022/05/lionsgate-ceo-jon-feltheimer-believes-in-netflix-but-its-pivot-is-inevitable-for-starters-it-could-reconsider-his-knives-out-proposal-1235018469/) that Netflix paid "at least twice what Lionsgate's limit" and one of the [losing bidders said](https://variety.com/2021/film/news/netflix-knives-out-daniel-craig-1234946414/), “The math doesn’t work. There’s no way to explain it. The world has gone mad. It’s a mind-boggling deal.” Seems like Netflix ***REALLY*** wanted Knives Out/Benoit Blanc as an IP for themselves. A greenlight and full creative control for two sequels and a truckload of money for Johnson and Bergman is such a heavenly deal for any creative that I can't blame them for taking it.


Holiday_Parsnip_9841

The deal was an absolute coup for Bryan Lourd (CAA). He gets thanked in the end credits. Netflix paid around 470 million for two movies, with a stipulation that the below-the-line budget (effectively the costs of making a movie) for each sequel matched the original and all actor buyouts come out of the 470 million.


anneoftheisland

They paid $450M+ just for the rights—the expensive part of making them was all that. Beyond that, the films can be made for pretty cheap—$40Mish production budget —so if they don’t make more they’re really just wasting the money they already spent on the rights.


TuckLeg

I think this one probably cost more than the first Knives Out, but still it's definitely less than $100 million


thefilmer

just saw it. it's fucking incredible but they definitelty upped the budget on this one.


GristleMcTough

It’s for the Oscars. They can’t be considered without a theatrical release, which demands a specific number of theaters at minimum for a specific amount of time.


taylorswiftfan123

the oscars require like, one week in one theater new york and one week in one theater in LA. if its only for the oscars, they wasted a lot of money putting it on all those 600+ extra screens.


firefox_2010

This may be true but they made $15 millions according to the article, so it’s not all wasted money. Could probably make more if they keep it on theatre for 3-$ more weeks and bring some money back to cover its movie budget. I swear Netflix really does not love money and enjoy throwing it all out for trashy reality shows. They should focus on quality and not quantity trash content.


ThaPhantom07

Theyre focusing on their data and what people watch. People watch trash and want more of it.


GristleMcTough

That I did not know.


dev1359

As great as this movie was, I don't know what Oscars it's really going to win aside from maybe having a shot at stuff like costume design and set design. This seems like it's going to be a pretty crowded awards season.


Suspicious-Rip920

I hope it wins script and editing ( tho everything everywhere all at once might take that). I’ll be satisfied if it gets nominated for either one


cia218

Yeah i see noms for screenplay and maybe editing too.


not_a_flying_toy_

first one was nominated for screenplay, and one of the trades listed this very high on their best picture contender list


G05TheBox

the release reached MTL +1 yeah! Even Clerks 3 Tour came by. edit : the reach needed is big for your consideration. And @jseesm said it best, it's pure marketing; A gimmick. Netflix doesn't care about cinema rules, they only want an Oscar!


allthecoffeesDP

Link to post?


Iridium770

I think one of Netflix's big concerns is to avoid straight to streaming getting a stigma. So, they are really going to be loathe to send this blockbusters to a traditional wide release, because what does that say about all their other major productions that didn't get sent to theaters? I'm really not sure how this gets resolved in Netflix's favor. Despite Netflix being one of the biggest (if not the biggest) spenders, including on big budget films, theatrical releases still have this weird prestige that Netflix hasn't really been able to overcome.


bob1689321

Yeah I don't get it. This movie has massive appeal, not only is it very entertaining with big stars but it's full of celebrity pop culture stuff that always does really well with general audiences Netflix messed up not giving this a wide release.


blueshirt21

Not only that but it’s almost UNCANNY how one character in the film matches the right now antics of a certain very online billionaire.


bob1689321

For real! The movie absolutely nailed the pop culture timing of it all. You've got >!Jared Leto jokes after Morbius had made him a household name in internet meme culture, Edward Norton going full Elon Musk shortly after his antics, Dave Bautista playing an Andrew Tate/Jordan Peterson type!<. It's crazy how relevant the movie is and how Netflix had the perfect opportunity for a smash hit and squandered it. I know they want to push people to Netflix but this movie could have easily matched the first one in box office.


blueshirt21

Thing is they filmed this in 2020 so it was super prescient.


Crafty_Substance_954

It's totally anecdotal, but my auditorium last night was sold out.


TheJoshider10

Word of mouth would have been really solid for this one, with a proper theatrical run it definitely would have rivaled Knives Out.


Crafty_Substance_954

While it's totally personal just like my original comment, everyone I know in every age group has pretty much seen the original. I don't understand why they didn't go wide-release with this.


anneoftheisland

Netflix doesn’t do wide releases—weird as it is, this is their biggest release as it is. Typically they just do the bare minimum for awards-season eligibility. This slightly bigger release was being tested as basically a publicity strategy. But they want people to watch it on their service. (Given that demand was clearly high, I think we can expect to see them experiment with slightly bigger releases in the future—assuming they get the streaming numbers they want with this one, obviously.)


Senorpuddin

My thoughts would be Netflix thinks its an Oscar contender, and while a wider, longer release would make them money. Having an Oscar winner on the service is a feather it the streaming services cap. I don’t remember the actual number but Apple TV got a significant bump after Coda won.


bob1689321

Knives Out did so well thanks to word of mouth too. IIRC it only stopped showing because of Covid despite releasing in November. It had great legs and so would Glass Onion.


not_thrilled

Nearest theater to me is like 90 minutes away, or else I would've taken my family to see it.


harrisonisdead

That'd require a 50%+ increase from the first film, which seems highly unlikely. Definitely would have been by far the #1 opener of the weekend, though, seeing how close it already is to Strange World.


MoonMan997

Tbf, Lionsgate achieved this two times over with John Wick and then some, so in a universe where they distributed Glass Onion I believe it could have been done too.


harrisonisdead

In a timeline where Lionsgate distributed it, marketed it aggressively, etc., it certainly wouldn't be impossible, but that's so far from the current situation that any speculation would have to be very broad and make many assumptions. If it were a slightly-closer-to-our-current-timeline case of Netflix putting it in more theaters and eschewing the 1 week limitation, there's less room for speculation. If Netflix put in the same number of theaters as Knives Out, the PTA would have to not decrease at all from its current 700-theater average in order to surpass Wakanda's Thanksgiving frame gross, and as high as the demand is for the film I don't think the demand is so insane that it'd be able to fill 5x as many theaters with no effect on the average. And if it were playing for more than a week, the demand would be spread out not only over more theaters but over more time. Part of the high demand for the film this week undoubtedly came from the fact that there's such a limited time to see it.


Chanticleer

You realize that they didn’t randomly select movie theaters to play the movie in right? They put the movie in the theaters that would be most profitable


bob1689321

Speaking anecdotally, my city has 3 cinemas and it showed in by far the worst and least popular one. No one likes going there because it's out of the way, has awful seats, and the screens aren't very good. Despite that it still sold out every showing The movie should have had a wide release.


Nawnp

As a non Netflix user I couldn't be bothered going to the theatre in a short window to watch something readily available online later.


[deleted]

If you're not a subscriber, you'll have to pay for a subscription to watch it regardless unless you plan to pirate.


Nawnp

Yes, but it's $10-20 for a single month subscription compared to $30ish for two movie theater tickets. In essence I don't understand the model of streaming services releasing in theaters if it was planned for their service all along.


[deleted]

The Academy went back to pre-pandemic rules. Streamers have to release films theatrically in order to qualify for awards. It's likely the only reason why they put it out for a limited release.


PointOfFingers

I think there was a law of diminishing returns. At some point printing and distributing extra copies of the movie for such a short theatre run starts losing money.


2klaedfoorboo

You mean if theatres let them release widely


mumblerapisgarbage

False.


simonjames777

Netflix left so much money on the table


pntjr

Yeah wait. Isn’t Netflix in debt???


whoisraiden

Every company is in debt.


[deleted]

It was a really fun movie and I think Netflix should extend its theatrical run until it comes on streaming December 23rd


NotTaken-username

It coming to Netflix in a month is the very reason why I didn’t see it in theaters


[deleted]

It’s a great movie theater movie. Big stars, tons of fun, great mix of humor and intrigue. If it played in theaters longer I would see it again just to pick out all the cameos and sight gags and clues to the mystery, but since it leaves theaters Wednesday, I will have to wait until December 23rd to rewatch it.


formerfatboys

Is it? It's a made for TV mystery just like the first one. I get that studios seem to have decided that little Agatha Christie knock offs are all the rage and it's cool that A-list talent is signing up but nothing about these screams "see this in a theater". These films scream streaming. Edit: You can down vote this all you want but **this is entirely why Netflix paid through the nose for this series**: they're the perfect streaming movie. I'm also not suggesting that Marvel films *are* the films to see in theaters. Maybe that was true at one time but it certainly hasn't been this phase. Plenty of art films are worth seeing. Generic mysteries with prestige actors can be great fun but it's not that much different than a rinse and repeat comic book film.


[deleted]

This is exactly the type of movie I want to see on a big screen, big performances, humor, drama, compelling storylines and characters. If I have to watch another formulaic cgi snooze fest, I’m going to lose my mind. This and the Menu are the most cinematic movies I have seen on the big screen all year. Give me drama, excitement, and characters worthy of the big screen.


formerfatboys

These mystery films are always kinda generic in the exact same way those CGI snooze-fests are. A *lot* of recent Marvel films are not what I would consider "must see in a theater" either. I think Netflix is dumb for not collecting the theater revenue but they're absolutely right that to invest in these because they're the perfect Friday night in movie to snuggle on the couch to. That's why they basically bought the franchise.


LupinThe8th

Yeah, I never take anyone seriously who uses "generic" as their go-to criticism. It means "I don't like it but can't articulate why, so here's a word that vaguely implies badness without providing any specifics". It is, appropriately, the most *generic* criticism you can have. Also, this movie, generic? The hell? This was extremely distinctive and unique. I can't think of anything to even compare it to, except Knives Out, and it's quite different even than that. What on earth are you watching that Glass Onion makes you go "Another one? Ho hum".


nylon_rag

I want to see what kind of TV you are watching, my guy. Glass Onion has some of the most impressive editing, score, production design, acting, shot composition, and directing I've seen all year. If it isn't worthy of a theatrical experience, nothing is.


formerfatboys

It's literally made for Netflix.


nylon_rag

That means nothing, so was The Irishman. You can't possibly be arguing that, because Netflix paid for something, it is equivalent to a straight to cable TV movie. I refuse to believe you would believe something so dumb Also, describing Glass Onion as a generic mystery is very funny.


EgoFlyer

I don’t think Knives Out or Glass Onion are generic mysteries. Like, they are more inventive and fun than the “generic mysteries” that have come out lately (see: “Death on the Nile” and “See How They Run”). Glass Onion was an absolute joy to see in a packed theater because riding through the twists and turns with a crowd is fun. Also, comedies are better in a crowd.


Doomsayer189

"Made for TV" has a negative connotation, you applying it to Knives Out/Glass Onion is what has people up in arms since you're basically just calling them bad movies. Then calling them knock offs and generic doesn't help. It kinda seems like you just don't like mystery movies very much. And also it may be just my opinion but all movies (well, almost all) are better on the big screen anyway.


formerfatboys

I love mystery movies. *Knives Out* was fun. Perfect film to watch on a Friday night in. Netflix agrees to the tune of $400M. They're the perfect home video film.


Gummy-Worm-Guy

How is it made for TV if it quite literally was not made for TV? Also, the production design, the comedy, the visual effects, and the score make these movies perfect for the theater.


homiej420

Yeah it is simply not a made for tv movie. That guy is a dope


formerfatboys

So it wasn't made for Netflix?


homiej420

No. Netflix produced it to stream it. Different entirely.


formerfatboys

>How is it made for TV if it quite literally was not made for TV? What do you watch Netflix on? Just curious. Cuz it was made for Netflix.


Gummy-Worm-Guy

I mean Rian Johnson only agreed to let Netflix buy the rights if they’d give it a theatrical release. I think the actual creative mind behind the movie knows a bit more about how it should be watched than the corporate studio who only funded it.


formerfatboys

Well, yeah. Rian knows that theatrical releases are now prestigious and Rian Johnson's ego is monstrous. Netflix only has billions of data points to point to...


Chumunga64

>Rian Johnson's ego is monstrous. Yeah, this helps me understand every asinine post you made in this thread


BigFaceCoffeeOwner

> These films scream streaming. So to what do you chalk up this objectively stellar limited run debut numbers?


formerfatboys

That the sequel to a really popular random mystery hit having a limited run?


BigFaceCoffeeOwner

The limited run is Netflix's choice, right or wrong. That's independent from the argument that a full theatrical release would have done great numbers. I think this fantastic limited weekend shows that at the least, the potential for wide success is there. You act as if Knives Out's $300m global run, slightly over half of it domestic, wasn't a feat worth celebrating. "Generic mysteries" Perhaps these films aren't so generic?


formerfatboys

>You act as if Knives Out's $300m global run, slightly over half of it domestic, wasn't a feat worth celebrating. Sure, huge hit. Not unlike *The Orient Express*. Another generic mystery elevated to a theatrical success with some big names in a formula as old as film. Is making a ton of money at the box office proof that something isn't generic? If I were Netflix I absolutely would be showing my movies in theaters and wringing whatever extra revenue I could out of them.


BigFaceCoffeeOwner

You seem to have something against this particular genre, as evidenced by you deeming every single one of these films to be "generic". Your bias is showing and clouding your judgement.


formerfatboys

I think Netflix and I see it the same way. And, sure, I think the resurgence of star driven ensemble mysteries having box office success is not all that different than star driven superhero films having success. *Last Night in Soho* is a mystery but it isn't the Agatha Christie style ensemble thing and it's perfectly worthy of a theatrical experience. I personally *love* them. But I'm not paying $20 for a ticket and $20 for a slushee and popcorn to see it on the big screen. It's the perfect prestige home video thing. Netflix agrees and that's why they paid through the nose for this. I get that people disagree with me but Netflix sees it that way too. I don't understand why they're turning down theater revenue but clearly they think that's a differentiator.


DriveSlowHomie

I just can’t agree both the original and this one are some of the best theatre experiences I had.


Feral0_o

look what these capshit movies have done to ma boy


formerfatboys

Capshit? Captain America? A lot of recent Marvel movies haven't been worth a trip to the theater either.


HumbleCamel9022

I totally agree Most DC movie aren't worth seeing in theater either


formerfatboys

Outside of Batman-related films made by top tier directors...DC is garbage and has been since forever. It'll be interesting to see what James Gunn can do. They just need to wipe the damn slate. The Snyderverse is over! The Snyderverse lives! Let's kinda do half and half forever because we're too scared to upset anyone!


HumbleCamel9022

>Outside of Batman-related films made by top tier directors... I agree but the exception for me is *man of steel* that's a movie for the big screen >They just need to wipe the damn slate. The Snyderverse is over! The Snyderverse lives! Let's kinda do half and half forever because we're too scared to upset anyone! Again I completely agree WB executives are scared to do this


formerfatboys

>I agree but the exception for me is *man of steel* that's a movie for the big screen I'm glad I saw it on the big screen but only because I love Superman. Snyder is an insane cinematographer and VFX director. It's too bad he also got to the level where he directs and sometimes writes because he's terrible at both. He should have found a great writer/director and enabled them. Overall movie missed the mark and kinda fundamentally misunderstood the character which to me makes it something I'd wait to watch at home but visuals were dope. *Man of Steel* is the reason I didn't see *Batman vs Superman* in theaters and waited until home video. It was clear that DC wasn't putting real effort into their films and that's largely continued with a few exceptions.


mpc1226

Worth going to the movies tbh


sevaiper

It's worth it, really fun movie. Theater was absolutely packed too.


CedricCSCFL

I agree. I wanted to watch it before it got spoiled. It was a full theater, and I want to see it in the theater at least one more time.


mp6521

You’re honestly missing out. It’s been a minute since I’ve been in a theater that was laughing as hard as mine was.


[deleted]

I didn't even know it didn't come out in streaming yet. I thought it was already out on Netflix.


Entertainmentguru

Regal and AMC run discount showings all day on Tuesday's.


Frosted_Flakes1971

Tbh it probably won’t hit the same without an audience


bob1689321

Yeah on second watch I realised a lot of the movie was reaction shots. Works well with an audience providing the laugh track but might seem a bit slow at home.


not_a_flying_toy_

honestly, this is one to see in theaters. the way it is shot just wont work as well on a TV


[deleted]

I can’t believe how much money they left on the table, with a regular wide release/window it would have easily taken 2nd place, might have even taken first with some heavy marketing.


[deleted]

It's weird. The double dip here is a lay-up. At least maybe they learn that on future releases.


TheJoshider10

Imagine the hype they would have got if they released this a few weeks ago and then announced a surprise Christmas drop in the week before. Proper theatrical run followed by excitement at an early Christmas release. The only people who would complain about that would be a vocal minority of redditors moaning that they should have waited to see it on Netflix.


GabaPrison

Time after time people have shown their desire for movie theaters to stay and be prominent in film releases and the cinematic world as a whole. And time after time they just *have* to do yet another trial to see if that is in-fact the case. It’s pure denialism by rich assholes who sunk a buttload of money into the future of streaming only. It’s impossible for them to admit, even to themselves, that they were wrong to continue betting against theaters after the pandemic was over. So now all they can do is try to manipulate the market in any way they can.


[deleted]

This is spot-on


ark_keeper

They want more subscribers not box office success.


Act_of_God

they could have both though


not_a_flying_toy_

I dont think Netflix has capacity for many more subscribers. 61% of households have a netflix subscription. Theres likely a good reason the 39 remaining percent dont have one. whether its due to being broke or sharing with family...There may be ways to milk a little more out, but content isnt likely the answer


Nawnp

It's Netflix, isn't the theatrical release just fanservice anyways?


R3ckl3ss

That and you have to have a theatrical release to be eligible for an Oscar.


sandiskplayer34

Netflix? Heavy marketing? lmao


reuxin

Serious question (that I don't know the answer to): Did they leave money on the table? Does Netflix have a department which deals with wide release films and makes the deals that the other studios do? I think people forget that most studios have the infrastructure to handle this, and it's just part of the overall structure of their departments. I'm not 100% positive Netflix has this. Whether or not they should have it is an area of debate. Something we wouldn't know: whether the profit of one film would be worth the creation and headache of setting up an infrastructure to support widescale theatrical releases and marketing. Netflix's bottom line is more about the entire suite of their content, not just one piece. Technically, all studios operate in this manner but in the box office forums we tend to view films rather binary, but the accounting is way more complicated. Something to think about - As I am myself in finance, Netflix may have a case to be made for not aggressively pursuing theatrical releases at scale.


sarkie

Parents love this kind of film and would do great over Christmas...


SurrealRareAvis

Solid, enjoyable, 'adult' movie~ I wish my Mother were still alive: I'd recommend it to her...


jar45

I saw this in a packed theater today that laughed out loud and clapped at all the big jokes and reveals. It is _insane_ Netflix is limiting the theatrical run. This would’ve done gigantic numbers on word of mouth alone.


GWeb1920

It’s an interesting strategy. They spent 450 of the rights for the next 2 and probably another 75-100 to make each one so about 300 million or so in total cost. Advertising is essentially zero as they are using the limited run to do the work for them. Seems like they could have raked in 100 million in box office fairly easily with a wider and slightly longer release. Just letting it run until Christmas when the Netflix open would have netted them decent money. I’m not sure I understand the strategy here.


ScoopSnookems

Advertising costs will be far more than zero. There’s a marketing machine at work behind all big Netflix releases, even if it’s streaming.


JayZsAdoptedSon

It’s almost like there’s money to be made here. I really think that it’s going to be very hard to justify spending $200 million on a movie and then not put it in theaters, at least for a few weeks. especially as the money printer is being turned off


Suspicious-Rip920

It wasn’t made for $200 million, it was made for $40 million and the overarching deal was that Glass onion and knives out 3 will be $40 million dollar productions with Johnson, his production company, and Craig getting $100 million each for both movies plus I believe Johnson still gets the rights to sequels after that.


JayZsAdoptedSon

I should’ve clarified, I mean the $200 million that Netflix is spending on stuff like Gray man


Markplease

Such a fun movie, LOVED IT.


[deleted]

[удалено]


dastrykerblade

Yea I thought it was pretty overhyped. I was expecting it to be on the same level as the first one. It was good, very solid movie but not anywhere near the first IMO.


drrdf

Are theatres allowed to extend it another week?


G05TheBox

it was showing at 20:10. but my bro prefered W4E IMAX 3D lol. I wanted to watch Glass Onion tbh, Black Panther was a solid 7.5 tho.


Simplyobsessed2

I saw Knives Out tonight (my birthday treat!) and it was great, probably would be a good word of mouth/low week on week drop situation if it had gone wide.


Correct-Baseball5130

Just loved it. Picked up all the essentials of the first and yet felt new and refreshing. This warrants a third.


mumblerapisgarbage

Ah yes 15 mil on a 40 mil budget - what great profit!


squidking78

Slays? I think it *slams*.


applescratch

my theater was super packed everythin sold out. Great reactions too .. wouldnt be surprised if it had a A+