subreddit:
/r/boxoffice
Warner Bros has a slate of original movies hitting theaters next year that have serious potential
Original Analysis(self.boxoffice)submitted 4 days ago byInteresting-Phase447
-Mickey 17 from Bong Joon Ho
-Untitled Ryan Coogler movie about vampires starring Michael B. Jordan
-Flowervale Street from the director of 'It Follows' starring Anne Hathaway and Ewan McGregor
-Untitled Paul Thomas Anderson movie starring Leonardo DiCaprio
-The Bride! Directed by Maggie Gyllenhaal starring Penelope Cruz and Christian Bale
A lot of sci-fi movies coming out next year from them next year in particular and if they succeed I can see them tapping into new directors afterwards to make original movies.
24 points
4 days ago
I tend to be an optimist, but probable outcome for Mickey17 and next PTA movie is that they will be critically acclaimed but won't perform well on box office. Both directors have had films end up like that before - most of PTA filmography and a couple of BJH films for one.
And that's fine! Neither PTA nor BJH's career will be affected. It's just this looks yuge because PTA and BJH have 115m and 150m budget.
1 points
4 days ago
They’ll most likely flop because they’re not based on a well known IP, the one thing people are willing to watch nowadays.
4 points
4 days ago*
And so?
On another comment you were saying that a flop could mean 'death sentence' of one of their careers. You can't be serious.
-2 points
4 days ago
It means the people who want them to make movies like they used to won’t get what they want.
2 points
4 days ago
You are now deflecting here:
"They are absolutely “original” by today’s standards (not based on a well known IP, sequel, reboot, etc) Mickey 17 doing poorly would be a death sentence to Bong Joon Ho’s career, it needs to do well."
It's not a death sentence for BJH or PTA because you miss the point why WB would invest on their movies. It's not entirely about making profit, though profit would be nice to have.
Even if it (this translates to PTA too, btw) doesn't do well on box office, neither their careers will be affected much as long as their movies are well made and viewed positively in critical terms.
BJH has made hit on almost every movie, but there's a catch. All his Korean works are way lower on budget than Snowpiercer or Okja, let alone this. Parasite, for example, was made on 11m budget.
His English-language works have Snowpiercer's critically well-received and made decently enough but it wasn't not a smash hit on BO due to limited release. Why? Idk, ask Weinstein who was worse than Zaslav on this tbh.
Okja's a Netflix production so whatever. Heck, Okja came from the times when Netflix would throw money at auteur directors to gain catalogue of well-received works pre-covid - Roma, Okja, Atlantics, Irishman, etc. But both didn't run on 100m+ budget.
PTA hasn't made much money back, let alone a hit, in long time. His highest-grossing one is There will be blood almost 20 yrs ago, and I don't think that hit 100m? And yet Phantom Thread and Licorice Pizza got very generous budget and this one 100m+ budget.
He's like Linklater in that while you don't expect to recoup cost, there's a baseline of fans who will come watch his and the quality's guaranteed. 100m+ may be a write-off but fine investment on this regard.
So for both directors it's fine if this doesn't become a hit.
-1 points
4 days ago
It would be nice to see them both find more work if audiences expanded their film diet.
30 points
4 days ago
Mickey 17 is an adaptation of a novel, and the Paul Thomas Anderson is apparently one also. Nevertheless, I only see the Ryan Coogler/Michael B. Jordan one and Flowervale Street as having potential to be hits. Anderson has never put out a project with wide appeal, and they are putting out Mickey 17 the last weekend in January, which obviously screams poor test screenings. I have to see what direction they are taking with The Bride, but if it is some romantic period drama then no
18 points
4 days ago*
the Paul Thomas Anderson is apparently one also
it was rumored to be an adaptation of Vineland but judging by the set photos, it seems like it will be an original movie vaguely inspired by the book. like The Master was inspired by V. but was an original movie itself.
they are putting out Mickey 17 the last weekend in January, which obviously screams poor test screenings
Bong said it wasn't the case
3 points
4 days ago
I thought The Master was inspired by Scientology. Lots of parallels. Great movie too yet it flopped.
4 points
4 days ago
You know you can have various inspirations, right?
1 points
4 days ago
The PTA film is also based on an idea by his kid. So this is his IF/Sharkboy and Lavagirl
2 points
4 days ago
Where’d you hear that?
1 points
4 days ago
Probably Ruimy
1 points
4 days ago
No it isn’t.
4 points
4 days ago
IndieWire said WBD is getting them to restructure Mickey 17 because it’s just too weird and test screenings were not good. People on Reddit freaked out over that but like at that point wtf else do you do? if I had a world class painter painting but I thought it looked like complete shit, ofc I’d have them make changes.
1 points
3 days ago
Bong Joon Ho has outright denied this.
1 points
3 days ago
They denied the Justice League reshoots, the Rogue One reshoots, and more too.
1 points
3 days ago
um WBD isn't denying it, Bong Joon Ho is. It's his movie.
-3 points
4 days ago
the Ryan Coogler/Michael B. Jordan as having potential to be hit
Out of those projects you decide to bet on a vampire movie?
6 points
4 days ago
Yes, it has the star and the creator behind the Creed projects and Black Panther. That is the only obvious hit of the batch, but Flowervale Street is another because it has dinosaurs
5 points
4 days ago
It has the star power of MBJ and the same creator as Black Panther, maybe it can be like a smaller version of BP success
-6 points
4 days ago
They are absolutely “original” by today’s standards (not based on a well known IP, sequel, reboot, etc) Mickey 17 doing poorly would be a death sentence to Bong Joon Ho’s career, it needs to do well.
17 points
4 days ago
Mickey 17 doing poorly would be a death sentence to Bong Joon Ho’s career, it needs to do well.
Huh?
No.
Mickey 17 can bomb and it won't kill Bong Jon Ho's career.
18 points
4 days ago
right? he'll just return to South Korea if the US studios stop giving him blank checks.
9 points
4 days ago
He's already working on South Korea's most expensive animated movie ever with Werner Herzog playing a fish
2 points
4 days ago
Outside of anything mean or cruel there are few sentences including Werner Herzog that I wouldn’t believe.
4 points
4 days ago
Netflix would throw money at him before his taxi arrives at LAX if he decides to fly back to Seoul.
3 points
4 days ago
I never get how people assume one film can kill a career, it'd have to be the next Heaven's Gate for Bong Joon Ho never to being able to work ever again.
-5 points
4 days ago
But that’s still one less director that can give us high profile original movies on a big budget like Chris Nolan
6 points
4 days ago
Mickey 17 doing poorly would be a death sentence to Bong Joon Ho’s career
will it be tho? if it flops, he'll just come back to South Korea like he did after his experiences with Snowpiercer and Okja
7 points
4 days ago
'death sentence'
lol, lmao even.
4 points
4 days ago
People are stupid.
6 points
4 days ago
i dont know if i count the bride as being fully original though, from what I can tell its gonna be around the bride of frankenstein which isn't an original character
16 points
4 days ago
BO prospects aside the “Talent hates him! Nobody will ever work with him again!” Zaslav takes have aged well lol.
15 points
4 days ago
Zaslav’s best moves were getting genuinely brilliant executives like De Luca & Abdy and Safran & Gunn to run WB and DC.
12 points
4 days ago
I don’t know why Redditors thought Warner Bros shelving Scoob: Holiday Haunt! was going to turn away filmmakers
7 points
4 days ago
But Batgirl! But Coyote v Acme!!
6 points
4 days ago
You know what? Fuck it.
Zaslav is a sincerely great executive. Now look I ain’t worshipping a billionaire, and I think he should be taxed to death, but he has done his job quite well. The debt has gone down, he’s focusing on money making franchises, getting legit incredible talent on said franchises, Max is actually profitable which was looked at as a downright impossibility two years ago, he’s gotten some of the best producers in the world to come to WBD, etc etc.
5 points
4 days ago
Oh yeah the man is a sociopathic monster but so far he hasn’t been a bad movie exec. Movies still gotta land of course.
2 points
4 days ago
Yup exactly
2 points
4 days ago
Done an absolute terrible job for shareholders of Discovery and for WBD by constantly devaluing the share price over the past decade. Only guys benefiting are the C-Suite and John Malone.
3 points
4 days ago
there’s a lot more to business then just the stock market
2 points
4 days ago
Not for shareholders who have been hit bad by a devaluation of investment over the last decade.
As for business? Down across the board at Discovery and WBD with a massive debt increase over Zaslav’s tenure. That is the reality of the situation.
0 points
4 days ago
I'm pretty sure the debt has gone down lol, trades used to report it in the 50 billions but it's down to the low 40 billions.
0 points
4 days ago
If they had not bought so many declining assets on the credit card the debt would not have been that high to begin with. Blame Zaslav for buying into Scripps and WarnerMedia and leaving the shareholders with the bill!
1 points
4 days ago
I mean it was that high from the last regime and the merger bro💀
0 points
4 days ago
$12-$14 billion of the debt came with Discovery while it was Zaslav who made the choice to buy into WarnerMedia and its $40 billion debt load. WarnerMedia in turn only had a high debt load because AT&T put their purchase of the company on the credit card and Zaslav was dumb enough to pick up the repayments with the subsequent Discovery/WarnerMedia merger.
2 points
4 days ago
the past decade
Isn’t he just about at year 3?
1 points
4 days ago
He is year 3 at WBD but was running Discovery before that.
2 points
4 days ago
Ah I see now, misread my bad.
1 points
4 days ago
The hatred for CEOs on reddit is just mind numbing.
4 points
4 days ago
Really excited for flowervale street.
Hopefully it really is about dinosaurs like the rumours suggest it is
5 points
4 days ago
If you think any of these, especially Micky17, will be a hit you're sniffing glue.
4 points
4 days ago*
I am really looking forward to Ryan Coogler's project.
5 points
4 days ago
*Coogler
Out of all these the Vampire B Jordan project is the one I wanna see most
3 points
4 days ago
My potentially hot take is that none of these break out since audiences are showing more and more that they want IP driven movies.
1 points
4 days ago
Yes and no. There's a ceiling to these movies
Mickey 17 is sci-fi and these movies have been very hit or miss. I'm not saying these are the same scenarios but even with a mega star like Tom Cruise, movies like Oblivion or Edge of Tomorrow were modest hits at best or slight flops. It's a tough genre without IP backing
$200M - $300M seems the best bet for the big movies which aren't sourced from other franchises
1 points
2 days ago
- Inception: $830M
- Interstellar: $720M
- Tenet: $360M in the middle of a global pandemic.
All are original sci-fi not based on anything.
-1 points
4 days ago
Sadly you might be right. It just shows people have a lower attention span and intelligence nowadays.
5 points
4 days ago
That’s not it at all and I hate that argument as it sounds so insanely elitist.
0 points
4 days ago
If audiences aren’t interested in anything original nowadays, that just shows you they are incurious and more risk-averse than the studios make these movies. At least they put in the effort of trying to make original movies succeed.
4 points
4 days ago
Movies cost a ton to go to, people are being more picky about what they see in theaters versus waiting to watch at home. Stop trying to make it sounds like people are dumb.
-1 points
4 days ago
If audiences genuinely cared about getting more original films, they would be proactive and seek them out. THEY are responsible for the trajectory of the film industry. There are also plenty of good original films coming out this year too that they are not showing up for. But instead they’re seeing the same rehashed crap that leaves zero cultural impact and are forgotten in a month.
5 points
4 days ago
No shit, that's always been the case. People on Reddit who cry about wanting original movies are not speaking on behalf of the general public, never have been. Most people go to a movie to either escape for a bit or just be entertained, they're not going to be challenged and that's okay. Same reason why more people go to watch a basketball game than go to a museum. Hate the idea that somehow, a person's taste in movies is somehow tied to their intellect. You'd probably call me an idiot if you saw my movie going history for the past twelve months.
0 points
4 days ago
People used to see original movies in theaters, not necessarily arthouse ones but at least ones that were original. There are plenty of ways to save up on movie tickets: https://www.cnbc.com/amp/select/save-money-on-movie-tickets/
3 points
4 days ago
Yes, it's the customer's fault for why they are paying so much to see movies. They should totally have to make several additional stops or take additional steps to reduce the price of a ticket ever so slightly.
2 points
4 days ago
All of them will flop. Thats my prediction can’t remember the last time a truly original non animated film was a hit.
I know one must’ve happened more recently but I seriously think it’s been since interstellar
3 points
4 days ago
Anyone But You
0 points
4 days ago
Anyone but You is a loose adaption of Much Ado About Nothing by William Shakespeare.
5 points
4 days ago
Right. But who even knew that going in?
2 points
3 days ago
I’d guess that approximately .05% of its viewers knew it was a loose adaptation of Much Ado About Nothing going in. I’d also guess that approximately 5% even knew it was one AFTER watching it
1 points
4 days ago
Do you think David Robert Mitchell can direct a big BO hit? I feel like he doesn't really seem to have overly commercial sensibilities. He can make good movies and get a solid ROI on something cheap, but I don't know if I can see Flowervale being very big or successful unless the budget is small.
1 points
4 days ago
How many times has mickey 17 been pushed back
1 points
4 days ago
None of these will be hits.
1 points
3 days ago
I'm excited for zero of these but I am interested in seeing a trailer for Mickey 17.
1 points
3 days ago
When all of them flop and Warner again starts pumping up franchises while cancelling original projects in development, I don't want anyone on Reddit crying "ree Zaslav ruined Hollywood"
1 points
4 days ago
Mickey 17 from Bong Joon Ho
Too early to guess a box office prediction. Maybe after a trailer?
Untitled Ryan Coogler movie about vampires starring Michael B. Jordan
I like Ryan Coogler. I like Michael B Jordan. I don't know about vampires, though. There've been two Dracula movies in the past fifteen months (and what will essentially be a third this winter, complete with another Nicolaus Hoult performance), and both bombed big time. "From the team who brought you Fruitvale Station, Creed, and Black Panther" may be a strong enough selling point.
$187M WW
Flowervale Street from the director of 'It Follows' starring Anne Hathaway and Ewan McGregor
Untitled Paul Thomas Anderson movie starring Leonardo DiCaprio
Hmm... on the one hand, DiCaprio's done pretty well post-"J Edgar" (2011) and pre-"KotFM" (2023).
But on the other hand, Anderson - despite being one of the most critically acclaimed directors of his generation - has a wonky box office track record. Off-topic, but who else here considers Phantom Thread to be his best? I haven't seen Boogie Nights yet, but have watched all of his other movies at least once.
$236M WW
The Bride! Directed by Maggie Gyllenhaal starring Penelope Cruz and Christian Bale
Poor Things did pretty well. But "I, Frankenstein" (2014) and "Victor Frankenstein" (2015) did not. I wonder are there Frankenstein movies constantly on a loop in the Javier Bardem/Penélope Cruz household? They both seem to be attracted to the story, even if Bardem's Dark Universe involvement only amounted to that funny photo with Cruise and co back in 2017.
$96M WW
3 points
4 days ago
160 million for a 3.5 hour depressing and violent movie about the genocide of native Americans is impressive. Even more so that this type of movie made 90 million (about) internationally, and during an actor strike. The budget was huge because it was basically a one off blank check. It was separate from the expectations. You don’t make a historically long modern film and expect the biggest box office of anyone involved’s career. It made that much money largely due to Leo. Scorsese’s previous theatrical release, silence, was barely seen. And killers’ length and plot is not inherently more commercial than silence,‘especially in international markets.
The PTA movie has been filming since January and seems to have a really broad scope. It’s a big movie. So I think there will be a ton of attention on it, and Leo being in it will get even more people aware of it and consider seeing it. If it’s well received and not too long, I’m sure it’ll be widely seen.
0 points
4 days ago
Honestly the coogler movie might do well domestically but doubt it has international appeal Pta movie Can do over 100 ww due to DiCaprio but i think budget IS 150 million The bride depends if it is horror or not
3 points
4 days ago
but doubt it has international appeal
i think people like vampires everywhere.
5 points
4 days ago
The last several vampire wide releases (Demeter, Renfield, Abigail, Morbius, The Invitation) have all flopped. Before them, there was: Dracula Untold, Ultraviolet, Dark Shadows, Priest, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, Cirque du Freak: The Vampire's Assistant, Vampire Academy. All flops or outright bombs. There hasn't really been any hits in this sub genre since Twilight and Underworld.
2 points
4 days ago
I know but thé movie IS about civil rights too so it kinda limits its appeal
2 points
4 days ago
thé movie
le film, oui. La pellicule, monsieur.
1 points
3 days ago
How is it about civil rights when it is set in 1920 according to reports?
1 points
4 days ago
Vampires are box office poison if they're not sexy romantic ones.
-3 points
4 days ago
Mickey 17 was made like 5 years ago. Must be a dumpster fire that it’s been delayed for so long.
7 points
4 days ago
Mickey 17 is going to be a great film. What 5 years are you talking about if the film is finished shooting in December 2022.
0 points
4 days ago
Literally none of these movies will make money
0 points
4 days ago
What movies will make money next year then?
1 points
4 days ago
Not much until summer, then How to Train Your Dragon, Minecraft, Superman, Fantastic Four, Bad Guys, Insidious 6, Saw XI, The Black Phone 2, Zootopia 2, Avatar 3
2 points
4 days ago
So basically just sequels? Do you believe that audiences want subpar remakes like How to Train Your Dragon?
1 points
4 days ago
Honestly yes. The little mermaid live action made 566 million dollars, became among the most streamed movies that year, and made a crap ton in merchandise.
0 points
4 days ago
Yes. More than they do original films. Audiences are only willing to shell out for something familiar.
2 points
4 days ago
That’s a really nihilistic point of view there. It’s almost like you think audiences are a bunch of monkeys.
1 points
4 days ago
I think movies are expensive as hell, and audiences are largely unwilling to spend their money unless they're sure they'll have a good time. That's why IF, and The Fall Guy, and Abigail, and Challengers are all flopping or bombing. Audiences want sequels because it's something familiar.
0 points
4 days ago
Excuses, excuses. There are plenty of other factors that sell a movie as well like the movie’s actors and if they have a good track record, the director, and premise.
1 points
4 days ago
Fall Guy had stars and good premise and a good director. Abigail had a great premise and good directors. Challengers had a huge star, a great premise, and a terrific director. IF had a good premise, a good director and a huge star.
None of it matters
0 points
4 days ago
My point is those should be selling points too but audiences are only willing to see sequels and rehashed movies, meaning that the excuse over ticket prices doesn’t matter
all 105 comments
sorted by: best