Has NRS silenced the Mortal Kombat 1 critics?

[Vulgar]

Hi! I haven't posted here in ages but I read the threads sometimes because they're still a trip. This one has been interesting! Interesting enough that I'm going to write a very long comment here, so please bear with me.

First of all, I just feel the need to note amid all the MCU debate in here that Agatha All Along was not a 'bomb' at all. It was a critical hit, was nominated for major industry awards (it's likely to be in contention in a few categories at the Emmys, even), and wildly outperformed Disney's expectations, especially given its low budget versus previous Disney+ Marvel shows. They seem to be flirting with the idea of renewing it, even though it was intended as a one-off miniseries. It's basically the definition of a success, especially in the age of streaming where it's hard to make money on anything in television anymore. This show about women that changed the races of a few minor Marvel characters and features a lesbian romance? It was good, and people liked it.

Point is, this is a great example of why the idea that diversity or 'wokeness' or whatever dogwhistle one wants to use is what makes a story unsuccessful is a childish notion. Somehow the same people who always bang that drum don't seem to have a problem with a genderswap or a race change or whatever else if it's in a piece of media they otherwise happen to like. It's just an easy scapegoat for something you didn't like to begin with.

If someone doesn't like MK1, it's not because Cyrax is a woman in it. They already didn't like MK1, and female Cyrax is a convenient thing for them to meme about -- because, frankly, online fandoms are full of losers who can't wait to dogpile on a woman for no reason, especially a Black one.

I understand people feeling an attachment to fictional characters and not wanting them to change too much, but I find the complete devotion to nostalgia a bit strange. Like, I don't really like how Sindel plays in MK1, so I play Tanya. In MK11 Sindel wasn't in the game at launch, so I mostly played Jade. There's always someone interesting to play. I can't imagine rejecting a game entirely because 'my character' is in it, but not in the way I prefer.

For instance, I was initially bummed about the evil Sindel retcon in MK11, because I am the type of weirdo who cares about story in a fighting game. But it was still Sindel, and I still had a ton of fun with her -- and after I gave it a chance, I came to find the evil version of Sindel really hilarious! I also realized that making her a bad guy probably gave her more of a unique lane in the franchise than having her be a royal heroine from Edenia when Kitana, Mileena, and Jade are always going to be more popular characters. (Case in point: she was good again in this game... and so they immediately killed her off to make room for Mileena's future story.)

If MK1 is a failure, it isn't because superfans of Mortal Kombat lore staged a protest on behalf of Hanzo Hasashi or boy Sektor. It's because WB wanted the game out in 2024, and the game clearly was not finished.

It's because casual fans -- casual meaning non-competitive; I read this forum, but I'm not very good at video games and I've never attempted to play them competitively -- expect things from Mortal Kombat as a franchise at this point that simply were not present in this release. We expect lots of fun stuff to unlock. We expect all the bells and whistles. We expect heavy customization in an NRS game at this point. I spent hours dressing up my silly little characters in IJ2 and MK11. I spent eons playing the stupid Towers of Time mode in MK11 because I enjoyed unlocking little widgets that barely even changed anything about the character's appearance. It was just fun to unlock things and feel like I was making the character really my own. It was fun to show off my version of the character online even if I was just going to get my ass beat.

MK1 is a failure for the same reason SFV was a failure: because it launched in an incomplete state and in today's market the first impression is everything. Like SFV did, I would argue MK1 has eventually become a very good game. I have had fun playing it, though I'm particularly bad at assist fighters and feel worse at this game than I have at any previous MK. But I still haven't played the Khaos Reigns story, which is frankly crazy to me when I used to champ at the bit for a new NRS game. The bad launch for MK1 really left a sour taste in my mouth on this one, and I don't think I'm alone in that.

Unfortunately, I think the only real move is for NRS to keep their head down and focus on making MK2/MK13/whatever a really complete package that wows on first impression. No matter how good SFV became over time, nobody was willing to say Street Fighter was 'back' until SF6 had a strong launch.

It's a shame, because I think MK1, as a total reboot with really beautiful graphics on a nextgen console, had real potential to be a big wow moment for this franchise. It just needed about six months to a year longer in the oven, and WB would not let that happen. I sympathize with Boon and company, who clearly cared a lot about making this work and ended up sabotaged because they aren't their own publisher.

Hope all is well! (Vulgar, you've been cracking me up in here ngl. Never stop.)

This MF'er was spittin'.

Also Agatha All Along was fucking fantastic.

I'm almost positive that most people that hate it didn't actually watch it.

 

[Vulgar]

I love MK1
Hate the woke gender swap on the cyborgs.
MKX Sektor was so much fun.

What does the word, "woke" mean to you?

I'm trying to see something.

 

[zerosebaz]

This MF'er was spittin'.

Also Agatha All Along was fucking fantastic.

I'm almost positive that most people that hate it didn't actually watch it.

Oh, I think it was kinda meh, mot great, not terrible, but yeah, the hate definitely comes from people that didn't watch it.

 

[ImperatrixSindel]

As a postscript, it's always very funny to me to see people argue that the Cyrax and Sektor genderswaps are 'woke' or 'pandering' or whatever when it seemed clear to me it was the exact opposite: a way to get away with not having any female characters in the DLC packs at all.

'These cyborgs with no discernible features in their primary costume are technically women!'

 

[Trickywizard]

What does the word, "woke" mean to you?

I'm trying to see something.

What it means to everybody else.

 

[Trickywizard]

As a postscript, it's always very funny to me to see people argue that the Cyrax and Sektor genderswaps are 'woke' or 'pandering' or whatever when it seemed clear to me it was the exact opposite: a way to get away with not having any female characters in the DLC packs at all.

'These cyborgs with no discernible features in their primary costume are technically women!'

I’d much rather have random 3D mk female fighters than female iron man.

 

[Vulgar]

What it means to everybody else.

Which is? Be specific, now. Don't dodge the question.

 

[Trickywizard]

Which is? Be specific, now. Don't dodge the question.

Make everything or everyone gay, black or gender swap for the sake of inclusion and culture sensitivity.

 

[Vulgar]

Make everything or everyone gay, black or gender swap for the sake of inclusion and culture sensitivity.

Are Sektor and Cyrax gay in MK1?

I think Mileena and Tanya are the only gay characters in the game, and Mileena's been canonically bisexual since MKX.

Hasn't Cyrax been black since AT LEAST MK9?

And is inclusion and culture sensitivity a bad thing?

Again, don't dodge the questions. We're in it now.

 

[TomShane]

I'm not bringing him up, you keep bringing him up. Talking about people lacking accuracy, and meanwhile making lots of mistakes of your own, like saying I "Chrisisnice" Floyd.

And here you go lying again. I do not hate MK games, I do not bash the MK games with amazing story, I love Millena's MKX costumes, MKX actually has some of my favorite costumes, and see, the Taskmaster thing is great inspite of the genderswap, the brainwashpart is the best thing about it. It's so faithful to the character.
And see, things like you not being able to recognize such an obvious joke is what makes me think you could have never passed any sort of writing course. It doesn't have any sort of hidden meaning it's pretty evident. It makes me think you wouldn't be able to understand anything anything that's hidden between the lines, and if you can't do that, then how could you have passed a writing course?

And of course, the the movie was bad, but it was successful because of Taskmaster. She carried the movie on her shoulders, I wouldn't have been successful without her.

And Mathemathics and Computer Science, not gamedesing. Tobias didn't study gamedesing either.

You are the one being hypocrite, not making any sense, and lying here, not me.

And you are done with me? No, it's me that's done with you. Don't answer any further.

Wait wait wait wait wait wait. Now it's YOU being the one who didn't understand something that I said. I didn't say that you "chrisisnice" Floyd. I said that you made a comment towards chrisinice,the TYM member, about Floyd in MK1, and there's even a link to his post that you responded to within his name. And unlike with the guy I was talking to originally, Tricky Wizard, there is no typo here, yet you still got confused even without any typo.

So what? Can I say now that you truly don't understand script writing just because you didn't understand one mistake in reading a comment? Do you need me to quote his post so it will be more obvious to you?

And the fact that you make such a stupid connection between the two is beyond stupid. I didn't understand one typo from one guy on the internet because he wasn't accurate even the 2nd time, and therefore I can't understand story telling and script writing just because both things relate to reading and writing in general despite completely different types of context? So if you can't understand what I said about what you said regarding Floyd, I guess that means that you can't understand story telling either just because of this, right? I did passed the script writing class, you got nothing.

And what you said about Mileena's MKX design wasn't her custom, I saw your comment about her, what you hated was her having lips in MKX, not heir clothes. And the fact that you that you hate MK1 Cyrax just because of the gender swap but you like Taskmaster despite of it with no explanation why either the gender swap doesn't ruin it or the brainwash doesn't ruin shows how inconsistent you are. I gave the explanation why the brainwash doesn't work and why it ruined Task, you didn't do it for either. That's hypocrisy. And of course, you ignore the other examples that I brought up about your comments about D'Vorah and Goro, and not to mention you hating the stories. So yes, you do hate a ton of stuff in NRS/WB games, and even if you do like a few of their stuff, the fact that you hate more stuff than in them that you like in them (and I saw the comments) shows that you hate them in general. That's lying.

Oh and you say that Taskmaster is good just because she's gonna be used at Thunderbolts, I just checked the wiki page for that movie. Guess who else is gonna be there? Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow. So you say that Taskmaster was the only good character in the whole movie and that was only successful because of her and that's why she's gonna be used more, but Scarlett is gonna be back in that same movie, in the same role that she in all MCU movies before.

Yeah, I was right about you, the whole time. See ya, for real.

 

[Subby Z]

Are Sektor and Cyrax gay in MK1?

I think Mileena and Tanya are the only gay characters in the game, and Mileena's been canonically bisexual since MKX.

Hasn't Cyrax been black since AT LEAST MK9?

And is inclusion and culture sensitivity a bad thing?

Again, don't dodge the questions. We're in it now.

Ooo y’all don’t get this thread nuked. We’re having good discussion here now.

If we’re allowed to chat about it though I would argue “woke” is not a definition but more a set of rules and if you watch a lot of media (more recent media) you can see a lot of it. People wouldn’t have started using “woke” in its current definition if there wasn’t something to it. These things don’t just come out of nowhere.

How about this though @Vulgar. Separate yourself from your stance and make yourself completely neutral here. What would your definition or “rules” be if you could define woke yourself? I’m curious as to your answer.

 

[TomShane]

Hi! I haven't posted here in ages but I read the threads sometimes because they're still a trip. This one has been interesting! Interesting enough that I'm going to write a very long comment here, so please bear with me.

First of all, I just feel the need to note amid all the MCU debate in here that Agatha All Along was not a 'bomb' at all. It was a critical hit, was nominated for major industry awards (it's likely to be in contention in a few categories at the Emmys, even), and wildly outperformed Disney's expectations, especially given its low budget versus previous Disney+ Marvel shows. They seem to be flirting with the idea of renewing it, even though it was intended as a one-off miniseries. It's basically the definition of a success, especially in the age of streaming where it's hard to make money on anything in television anymore. This show about women that changed the races of a few minor Marvel characters and features a lesbian romance? It was good, and people liked it.

Point is, this is a great example of why the idea that diversity or 'wokeness' or whatever dogwhistle one wants to use is what makes a story unsuccessful is a childish notion. Somehow the same people who always bang that drum don't seem to have a problem with a genderswap or a race change or whatever else if it's in a piece of media they otherwise happen to like. It's just an easy scapegoat for something you didn't like to begin with.

If someone doesn't like MK1, it's not because Cyrax is a woman in it. They already didn't like MK1, and female Cyrax is a convenient thing for them to meme about -- because, frankly, online fandoms are full of losers who can't wait to dogpile on a woman for no reason, especially a Black one.

I understand people feeling an attachment to fictional characters and not wanting them to change too much, but I find the complete devotion to nostalgia a bit strange. Like, I don't really like how Sindel plays in MK1, so I play Tanya. In MK11 Sindel wasn't in the game at launch, so I mostly played Jade. There's always someone interesting to play. I can't imagine rejecting a game entirely because 'my character' is in it, but not in the way I prefer.

For instance, I was initially bummed about the evil Sindel retcon in MK11, because I am the type of weirdo who cares about story in a fighting game. But it was still Sindel, and I still had a ton of fun with her -- and after I gave it a chance, I came to find the evil version of Sindel really hilarious! I also realized that making her a bad guy probably gave her more of a unique lane in the franchise than having her be a royal heroine from Edenia when Kitana, Mileena, and Jade are always going to be more popular characters. (Case in point: she was good again in this game... and so they immediately killed her off to make room for Mileena's future story.)

If MK1 is a failure, it isn't because superfans of Mortal Kombat lore staged a protest on behalf of Hanzo Hasashi or boy Sektor. It's because WB wanted the game out in 2024, and the game clearly was not finished.

It's because casual fans -- casual meaning non-competitive; I read this forum, but I'm not very good at video games and I've never attempted to play them competitively -- expect things from Mortal Kombat as a franchise at this point that simply were not present in this release. We expect lots of fun stuff to unlock. We expect all the bells and whistles. We expect heavy customization in an NRS game at this point. I spent hours dressing up my silly little characters in IJ2 and MK11. I spent eons playing the stupid Towers of Time mode in MK11 because I enjoyed unlocking little widgets that barely even changed anything about the character's appearance. It was just fun to unlock things and feel like I was making the character really my own. It was fun to show off my version of the character online even if I was just going to get my ass beat.

MK1 is a failure for the same reason SFV was a failure: because it launched in an incomplete state and in today's market the first impression is everything. Like SFV did, I would argue MK1 has eventually become a very good game. I have had fun playing it, though I'm particularly bad at assist fighters and feel worse at this game than I have at any previous MK. But I still haven't played the Khaos Reigns story, which is frankly crazy to me when I used to champ at the bit for a new NRS game. The bad launch for MK1 really left a sour taste in my mouth on this one, and I don't think I'm alone in that.

Unfortunately, I think the only real move is for NRS to keep their head down and focus on making MK2/MK13/whatever a really complete package that wows on first impression. No matter how good SFV became over time, nobody was willing to say Street Fighter was 'back' until SF6 had a strong launch.

It's a shame, because I think MK1, as a total reboot with really beautiful graphics on a nextgen console, had real potential to be a big wow moment for this franchise. It just needed about six months to a year longer in the oven, and WB would not let that happen. I sympathize with Boon and company, who clearly cared a lot about making this work and ended up sabotaged because they aren't their own publisher.

Hope all is well! (Vulgar, you've been cracking me up in here ngl. Never stop.)

MK1 is NOT a failure. You said so much wrong stuff in this post that it's not even funny.

First of, Sindel in MK11 wasn't retconned, it was a plot twist. In the MK9 story mode, there are multiple indicators that Sindel in the 2nd timeline is evil from the start, you can see them all in the MK3 portion of the MK9 story.

As for MK1, that wasn't a failure. It launched a fully complete state. You did have TONS OF STUFF to unlock, just like in MK11 and IJ2. It's just that unlike these games, MK1 unlockables come in seasons, which means they come in waves, unlike in MK11 TOT's and IJ2 Multiverse, which both had the unlockable spread in different sections with small timers for each and you needed to come to each section fast so you can unlock why they got. Also in IJ2 specifically, the unlockables were not preset items, they were infinite duplicates of the same items for every character, and you could've even unlock items randomly by just winning matches, even online. MK11 didn't bring that to you, you could've only unlocked the preset skins and Gear pieces and only when and where the game had access to. Just like now in MK1, you can only unlock preset skins and Gear pieces when and where the game allows you to, except that now you can also unlock items from the character mastery in all places except story mode and CPU versus mode, but you can do it online, just like IJ2 allowed to unlock stuff online, on top of the Kombat League items, which MK11 had also

As for the customization, I also have spent hours customizing chars in MK11 and IJ2, and I've also spent TONS AND TONS AND TONS of time in MK11 TOT's and IJ2 MV, just like right now I'm spending TONS AND TONS AND TONS of hours in Invasions and TOT's.

But as far as MK11 specifically goes, we all have to be brutally honest: A ton of stuff that you had in MK11 didn't have that much stability in them.

Yes you had 3 Gear pieces for every char unlike MK1 which only has 1, but a lot of the Gear pieces in MK11, you couldn't even see them at all times. Only like 8 characters in the whole roster had all of their Gear pieces visible at all times, most had only 2, and some had like only 1. Same thing with intros and outros. You wanna be able to choose the intros and outros, but you skip the intros anyway after a while.

This is why MK1 has only one Gear piece for every character, to make sure that you will be able to see them at all times, and that's also why they changed the style of the intros and made so you can't customize them, so you will have a lot more incentive to actually watch the dialogue between the chars and not skip it. And obviously customizing just outros would be weird.

But if you wanna talk about just the raw quantity of unlockables, MK1 does have tones and tones of them. As a matter of fact, MK1 has way more skins than MK11, both colors and skins, as all the skins look truly different from one another in MK1, while in MK11 they just had repeats of the same skin but with only one item either added or missing to make it look like there's more.

Just look at the pictures, see in MK11 Johnny had repeats שא MK11' launch and it's only the DLC skins that were truly unique, while MK1 all skins were truly unique.








I even saw some people say that they would much rather have no Gear pieces at all but only skins, which MK1 kinda gives that already as you have tons of skins to unlock and then you got just one Gear piece that you can customize on top of that. So they already got their wish technically just with a little bit of extra.

Oh, and just because you expect something and it doesn't happen the way you want to, that doesn't mean it's a failure or it's bad.

As for SFV, that was indeed a failure, because that game TRUELY missed stuff that are supposed to be stables for not only an AAA-fighting game, like an Arcade mode and CPU vs. single fight mode, on top of having a roster that is too small with only 16 characters, and SF6 also has only 18 at launch, which is also too small.

SFV was a true failure, and MVCI was an even a bigger failure. As even though it did had a roster that was big enough in size and an Arcade mode, not only it didn't have CPU vs. mode, but the roster despite the size didn't have the star power that previous rosters in the series had, and of course that story mode being the main focus of the game while just being horrible, and even Arcade mode didn't have any endings in them. Not to mention the horrible presentation, both in terms of audio design and visual design.

MK1 has none of these issues, all it did was just cut some of the stuff that MK11 got that were no longer needed and replaced them with new stuff. Krypt didn't have enough replay value? Take it and fuse it with TOT's and we got Invasions. People skip intros and can't see a big chunk of the Gear pieces? Enable to customize only 1 Gear piece and not intros but also add way more skins and colors to unlock. People want don't choose between specific moves that are unique options for only that character with the Kustom Variations? Fuse the Variations with MK11 TOT's Konsumables and make them universal forf everyone, and we got the Kameos.

MK1 is NOT a failure, and the fact that MK1 still gets more sales than either SF6 or Tekken 8, even after all the overhype, shows just that. In fact, the only game here that is close to be a failure is Tekken 8, as even after 1 year, it still doesn't have 3 million copies sold.

So none of what you said was true, objectively.

 

[YagamiFire]

Your post only proves why companies should never listen to anyone on the interent. You parroting stuff like a mindless robot with no thinking whatsoever and that is embarrassing.

I actually took classes in writing, and I talked closely with professional writers who understand how writing works. And such I can confirm to you that none of the movies I mentioned were badly written at all. Also, funny that you left out Deadpool and Wolverine which I also mentioned in the paragraph you quoted, because that movie sits well with the interent "club opinion", not because of it's quality. You also failed to mention 2022 Batman, guess you got not enough parroting that stuck in your head for this one, huh?

So you've clearly got issues, huh? I guess I "got not enough parroting that stuck in your head". Bro get a refund on those writing classes.

"I can confirm to you that none of the movies I mentioned were badly written at all"

Lol. Lmao even.

Bro, a bunch of the movies mentioned internally contradict their own script work.

Also Deadpool and Wolverine is badly written as well. I didn't mention it because it made money, dingus. 2022 Batman was also decently written and made money...but it under-performed...likely due to damage done by previous DC efforts.

I also did mention Joker 2, and I said then that while it's not as good as Joker 1, it wasn't a bad movie, it just tried to go in a direction that no one expected it to go, but once you watch and analyze it you can see what the writers tried to do. This is called having an open mind, a concept which I can see is way too hard for you to grasp.

You talk like a redditor and it's embarrassing. Joker 2 I haven't seen yet so I made no qualitative comment about it. Way to jump to stupid conclusions though. Try to take a class on not doing that. It absolutely bombed though and general audiences hated it.

Let's break it down, both the budget and the income at the box office

Please do because this is going to illustrate how wrong you are

1. Spiderman No Way Home (2021). Budget of $200 Million, income of $1.953 billion

Which goes to Sony, not Marvel. Look up their contract setup. Disney makes money on merchandising...not on box office.

2.Wakanda Forever (2022). Budget of 250 million, income of 859.2 million

Never said it bombed. I said it's badly written and shits on Chadwick's literal dying wishes while propping itself up by standing on his grave. Its grotesque.

3. The Batman (2022) a movie that you forgot to mention. Budget of 200 million, income of 772.3 million

Didn't mention because it was one of the only things they made that turned a profit. Missing this entire concept really suggests you're a dullard despite your vaunted "education with writers". Work on your reading comprehension. This movie under performed BTW. It was in a similar situation to Batman Begins which also under performed. Both were good but hampered by what came before. After the Penguin (which is excellently done, btw) the sequel will likely do much better.

4. Deadpool and Wolverine (2024) ANOTHER movie that you forgot to mention. Budget of 200 million, income of 1.338 billion

"hurp durp I missed your point again durrr" Good job. Anyway, yes it did well. The script is atrocious though.

5. Multiverse of Madness (2022), budget of 414 million (gross) and 350.6 million (net), income of 955.8 million

This is where we get into you being particularly stupid. A budget of 414 million is absurdly high. This also only counts production budget and not ADVERTISING budget. If you knew anything about actual movie numbers you'd realize that advertising budget is a thing...and also very high. Typically around half and even up to the same cost as production. Even if we low-ball it to $150 million that would put this at about $550 million in cost. This is also not counting costs for additional shooting they did which may have made it do even worse. Also that movie was fucking terrible with one of the worst scripts I've ever seen. Don't worry though and don't get excited because I'm going to further break down some basic economic math for you so you can feel dumber.

6. Guardians of the Galaxy 3 (2023) budget of 250 million, income of 845.6 million

Have not seen this yet but want to.

7. Across the Spider-Verse (2023) budget of 150 million, income of 690.8 million

Congrats. More money to Sony. None to Disney-Marvel. I like that you literally don't understand these are two different companies. By all means though, keep talking like an expert.

And these are only the movies that I mentioned. A crap of the movies you listed were also super successful, so let's bring all the successful ones:

8. Black Widow (Taskmaster was written bad, but everything else in the movie was good and it was still very successful commercially). Budget of 288.5 million, income of 379.8 million

The fact you think this is good is HILARIOUS.

9. Thor: Love and Thunder. Budget of 250 million, income of 760.9 million

And?

10. Shazam 1. Budget of 100 million, income of 367.8 million

Yes, badly underperformed. Very enjoyable movie though.

11. Eternals. Budget of 236.2 million, income of 402.1 million

You think Eternals made money. HOLY CRAP you are funny. This breakdown is going to be so fun.

12. Justice League (you also mentioned that movie twice, because there is only 1, directed by Zak Snyder. And no, the director's cut version isn't a 2nd one). Budget of 300 million, income of 661.3 million

...are you trying to say you think there's only one TRUE Justice League and it's by Snyder? This is hard to follow. Anyway, yeah this movie did not do well. At all.

13. Birds of Prey. Budget of 100 million, income of 205.5 million

Bomb

I can keep going if you want

Please do because you're so hilariously wrong it's great.

unacceptable humanly and socially.

I refuse to believe you're a real human being and not satire.

This is not about you having an opinion, this is you not understanding how movies, writing and marketing works. Which is w

Let's review that soon...

So, mr. bomb chicken, thank you for showing for companies why they should never listen to people on the interent like you, and why the FGC in general and MK interent community, can't be taken seriously, sadly.

So, let's calmly go over why you're a moron that should have taken classes on production or even Basic Economics 101 instead of 'writing'. Also you misspelled internet FOUR TIMES. And its wrong the same way each time. Fascinating. That's not even getting into your basic grammar mistakes all over the place.

Anyway, here's your free Movie Economics 101 class.

Movies have a budget for production. That's the thing YOU listed. Movies also have a budget for advertising. You DIDN'T list those. Advertising is generally 50% to 100% the cost of the initial budget depending on the film. If you have a brain, you can tell that that means that the price of a movie is actually more than the production budget of a movie. Now, use your brain for this one, if a movie has a VERY narrow window (quote unquote) profitability when you DON'T count that cost of advertising...what would that mean?

I'll give you time to think about that one. ... okay, caught up? If not, re-read it again until you start to understand.

Anyway, when you look at a movie like Avengers for instance...it had a production budget of $225m. Now advertising is trickier to nail down because it's shared less often, however we have been told by Marvel that Endgame's $200 million was $50 million more than their previous Avengers movie. So that's $150 million. If we low-ball and say they spent about $125 million on advertising for the first Avengers that would give us a total of $350 million.

Still following?

Avengers made $1.25 billion at the box office. Now, we're going to do some more basic business education for you. The box office is a place where people buy tickets. Those tickets cost money. That money is paid to the box office. The box office is a separate business entity from the movie studio. That means they need to make money! Shocking, right? Anyway, the typical split for theaters is (and this is typical and an average, so don't get your panties in a wad and jumping to try and reddit-ACKSHUALLY me) 50:50. So the theater keeps half the ticket sales. That's 50% btw. In China, this is actually more disadvantaged to studios and can be closer to 75:25 or 80:20 in favor of the theaters.

Anyway, that means HALF of that $1.25 billion at the box office went to the theater venue showcasing the Avengers to repay the time and cost of screenings. Take out a calculator if you're struggling to figure out how much half is. ... it's $625 million. So now some more fun math to teach you how to business.

Getting half of the money earned and subtracting what it cost gets you your actual profit. Wow! Neat! So $625 million minus the real cost of about $350 million gets us... $275 million. Now there's wiggle room in there of course for other stuff but there's your REAL number.

So let's look at some of your insipid claims and see just how dumb of a take they are

Wakanda Forever (2022). Budget of 250 million, income of 859.2 million. Advertising we'll say is $75 million TO BE NICE. It was like at least 100 million. $325 million total cost minus half of 860 (I'll be generous and round up). $105 million. Hmm much different number.

At this point red flags should be going off in your brain making you realize you said some profoundly ill-informed shit.

Multiverse of Madness (2022), budget of 414 million (gross) and 350.6 million (net), income of 955.8 million. Uh oh. UH OH. UH OH. $414 million...plus some advertising...and we'll be WAY generous here and say it was only $100 million (which is funny AF cuz it was definitely more than that) puts total cost at half a billion. Hey quick math...what's less than half a billion in total ticket sales divided by half? Is it more or less than half a billion in cost? Hmm.

Anyway...next...

Black Widow. Budget of 288.5 million, income of 379.8 million. Do...do you feel it dawning on you yet how OBVIOUSLY wrong you are about basic shit? Do you? Let's say they spent fifty fucking dollars on Black Widow's advertising. Cool. So we'll keep it at 288.5 million. Now divide the dismal $379.8 million dollar box office by half. Hey can I loan you $-98.6 million? You'd be happy with that, right?

It gets better (but worse for you)

Eternals. Budget of 236.2 million, income of 402.1 million. The fact that you would list Eternals REALLY highlights how bad you are at this. 402 million on a 200+ million budget is FUCKING TERRIBLE and anyone should realize that. You, apparently, don't. Impressive. Anyway, crunch the basic numbers. It lost a shit ton of cash.

Justice League. Budget of 300 million, income of 661.3 million. Oh hey hope they only spent less than $30 million on advertising their biggest movie ever otherwise they lost a shit ton of money. Guess what? They lost a shit ton of money.

Birds of Prey. Budget of 100 million, income of 205.5 million. Rinse and repeat with non-moron-math. Oops. A loss.

Here's the receipts.

https://observer.com/2021/09/marvel-black-widow-hit-flop-disney-plus-box-office

In which they discuss that Black Widow may have broken even by that point. Breaking even is TERRIBLE for a movie like this because of the amount of money being tied up in it. It failed. Multiple sources talk about the hybrid release failure of Black Widow and its star even sued over it. The movie did poorly.

https://www.looper.com/1605153/why-dc-movies-bombed-box-office

"the film earned $661 million worldwide, costing the studio nearly $100 million in losses."

OOF

https://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinereid/2023/10/03/revealed-the-marvel-movies-that-failed-to-cover-their-production-costs-at-the-box-office

Eternals literally didn't even cover its PRODUCTION COSTS. The fact that you would cite this movie as a "Gotcha" against me with the numbers you quoted illustrates you have no fucking clue what you're talking about. At all. To an absurd degree. To a satirical degree.

https://screenrant.com/birds-prey-harley-quinn-movie-box-office-bomb

BOMBED.

A cursory search...hell a couple seconds on Wikipedia would have confirmed a lot of this information but, in your arrogance, you stupidly PARROTED a bunch of box office numbers and are so economically illiterate that you somehow thought it proved your point instead of bolstering mine.

And just to wrap this up

I did took these classes.

Yes, you sure "did took those classes" on writing. You may have a valid lawsuit for being scammed if you did. What was the class title? 'Barely Coherent Gibberish 101'?

Take your , clown.

 

[zerosebaz]

Wait wait wait wait wait wait. Now it's YOU being the one who didn't understand something that I said. I didn't say that you "chrisisnice" Floyd. I said that you made a comment towards chrisinice,the TYM member, about Floyd in MK1, and there's even a link to his post that you responded to within his name. And unlike with the guy I was talking to originally, Tricky Wizard, there is no typo here, yet you still got confused even without any typo.

So what? Can I say now that you truly don't understand script writing just because you didn't understand one mistake in reading a comment? Do you need me to quote his post so it will be more obvious to you?

And the fact that you make such a stupid connection between the two is beyond stupid. I didn't understand one typo from one guy on the internet because he wasn't accurate even the 2nd time, and therefore I can't understand story telling and script writing just because both things relate to reading and writing in general despite completely different types of context? So if you can't understand what I said about what you said regarding Floyd, I guess that means that you can't understand story telling either just because of this, right? I did passed the script writing class, you got nothing.

And what you said about Mileena's MKX design wasn't her custom, I saw your comment about her, what you hated was her having lips in MKX, not heir clothes. And the fact that you that you hate MK1 Cyrax just because of the gender swap but you like Taskmaster despite of it with no explanation why either the gender swap doesn't ruin it or the brainwash doesn't ruin shows how inconsistent you are. I gave the explanation why the brainwash doesn't work and why it ruined Task, you didn't do it for either. That's hypocrisy. And of course, you ignore the other examples that I brought up about your comments about D'Vorah and Goro, and not to mention you hating the stories. So yes, you do hate a ton of stuff in NRS/WB games, and even if you do like a few of their stuff, the fact that you hate more stuff than in them that you like in them (and I saw the comments) shows that you hate them in general. That's lying.

Oh and you say that Taskmaster is good just because she's gonna be used at Thunderbolts, I just checked the wiki page for that movie. Guess who else is gonna be there? Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow. So you say that Taskmaster was the only good character in the whole movie and that was only successful because of her and that's why she's gonna be used more, but Scarlett is gonna be back in that same movie, in the same role that she in all MCU movies before.

Yeah, I was right about you, the whole time. See ya, for real.

Wow, editing your comment to make me look bad. I honestly didn't think you would sink so low. But I shouldn't be surprised, you are nothing but lies.

You lie about me not liking Mileena's costume, and then change it to her lips.

You lie about me hating MK and WB, when I love Mortal Kombat, and like lots of WB games and media.

You lie about having passing a writing course, which of course you didn't.

You lie about Ed studying game design when he didn't.

You lie about Scarlett Johanson being black Widow again, when she is only a producer in the movie.

You lie to all of us here by pressenting yourself as a new user when you are a returning one.

First of, Sindel in MK11 wasn't retconned, it was a plot twist. In the MK9 story mode, there are multiple indicators that Sindel in the 2nd timeline is evil from the start, you can see them all in the MK3 portion of the MK9 story.

Another lie. Sindel WAS retconned. There are no such hints to her being evil, because she wasn't. Even in her and Ermac's ending she is shown to be good. They retconned their retcon, yet you lie about it as well.

And you lied about being done with me before, and now you lie by implying you won't answer again, which you will, although, seriously, don't.

 

[Jynks]

Eternals literally didn't even cover its PRODUCTION COSTS.

 

[TomShane]

So you've clearly got issues, huh? I guess I "got not enough parroting that stuck in your head". Bro get a refund on those writing classes.



Lol. Lmao even.

Bro, a bunch of the movies mentioned internally contradict their own script work.

Also Deadpool and Wolverine is badly written as well. I didn't mention it because it made money, dingus. 2022 Batman was also decently written and made money...but it under-performed...likely due to damage done by previous DC efforts.



You talk like a redditor and it's embarrassing. Joker 2 I haven't seen yet so I made no qualitative comment about it. Way to jump to stupid conclusions though. Try to take a class on not doing that. It absolutely bombed though and general audiences hated it.



Please do because this is going to illustrate how wrong you are

1. Spiderman No Way Home (2021). Budget of $200 Million, income of $1.953 billion

Which goes to Sony, not Marvel. Look up their contract setup. Disney makes money on merchandising...not on box office.

2.Wakanda Forever (2022). Budget of 250 million, income of 859.2 million

Never said it bombed. I said it's badly written and shits on Chadwick's literal dying wishes while propping itself up by standing on his grave. Its grotesque.

3. The Batman (2022) a movie that you forgot to mention. Budget of 200 million, income of 772.3 million

Didn't mention because it was one of the only things they made that turned a profit. Missing this entire concept really suggests you're a dullard despite your vaunted "education with writers". Work on your reading comprehension. This movie under performed BTW. It was in a similar situation to Batman Begins which also under performed. Both were good but hampered by what came before. After the Penguin (which is excellently done, btw) the sequel will likely do much better.

4. Deadpool and Wolverine (2024) ANOTHER movie that you forgot to mention. Budget of 200 million, income of 1.338 billion

"hurp durp I missed your point again durrr" Good job. Anyway, yes it did well. The script is atrocious though.

5. Multiverse of Madness (2022), budget of 414 million (gross) and 350.6 million (net), income of 955.8 million

This is where we get into you being particularly stupid. A budget of 414 million is absurdly high. This also only counts production budget and not ADVERTISING budget. If you knew anything about actual movie numbers you'd realize that advertising budget is a thing...and also very high. Typically around half and even up to the same cost as production. Even if we low-ball it to $150 million that would put this at about $550 million in cost. This is also not counting costs for additional shooting they did which may have made it do even worse. Also that movie was fucking terrible with one of the worst scripts I've ever seen. Don't worry though and don't get excited because I'm going to further break down some basic economic math for you so you can feel dumber.

6. Guardians of the Galaxy 3 (2023) budget of 250 million, income of 845.6 million

Have not seen this yet but want to.

7. Across the Spider-Verse (2023) budget of 150 million, income of 690.8 million

Congrats. More money to Sony. None to Disney-Marvel. I like that you literally don't understand these are two different companies. By all means though, keep talking like an expert.



8. Black Widow (Taskmaster was written bad, but everything else in the movie was good and it was still very successful commercially). Budget of 288.5 million, income of 379.8 million

The fact you think this is good is HILARIOUS.

9. Thor: Love and Thunder. Budget of 250 million, income of 760.9 million

And?

10. Shazam 1. Budget of 100 million, income of 367.8 million

Yes, badly underperformed. Very enjoyable movie though.

11. Eternals. Budget of 236.2 million, income of 402.1 million

You think Eternals made money. HOLY CRAP you are funny. This breakdown is going to be so fun.

12. Justice League (you also mentioned that movie twice, because there is only 1, directed by Zak Snyder. And no, the director's cut version isn't a 2nd one). Budget of 300 million, income of 661.3 million

...are you trying to say you think there's only one TRUE Justice League and it's by Snyder? This is hard to follow. Anyway, yeah this movie did not do well. At all.

13. Birds of Prey. Budget of 100 million, income of 205.5 million

Bomb



Please do because you're so hilariously wrong it's great.



I refuse to believe you're a real human being and not satire.



Let's review that soon...



So, let's calmly go over why you're a moron that should have taken classes on production or even Basic Economics 101 instead of 'writing'. Also you misspelled internet FOUR TIMES. And its wrong the same way each time. Fascinating. That's not even getting into your basic grammar mistakes all over the place.

Anyway, here's your free Movie Economics 101 class.

Movies have a budget for production. That's the thing YOU listed. Movies also have a budget for advertising. You DIDN'T list those. Advertising is generally 50% to 100% the cost of the initial budget depending on the film. If you have a brain, you can tell that that means that the price of a movie is actually more than the production budget of a movie. Now, use your brain for this one, if a movie has a VERY narrow window (quote unquote) profitability when you DON'T count that cost of advertising...what would that mean?

I'll give you time to think about that one. ... okay, caught up? If not, re-read it again until you start to understand.

Anyway, when you look at a movie like Avengers for instance...it had a production budget of $225m. Now advertising is trickier to nail down because it's shared less often, however we have been told by Marvel that Endgame's $200 million was $50 million more than their previous Avengers movie. So that's $150 million. If we low-ball and say they spent about $125 million on advertising for the first Avengers that would give us a total of $350 million.

Still following?

Avengers made $1.25 billion at the box office. Now, we're going to do some more basic business education for you. The box office is a place where people buy tickets. Those tickets cost money. That money is paid to the box office. The box office is a separate business entity from the movie studio. That means they need to make money! Shocking, right? Anyway, the typical split for theaters is (and this is typical and an average, so don't get your panties in a wad and jumping to try and reddit-ACKSHUALLY me) 50:50. So the theater keeps half the ticket sales. That's 50% btw. In China, this is actually more disadvantaged to studios and can be closer to 75:25 or 80:20 in favor of the theaters.

Anyway, that means HALF of that $1.25 billion at the box office went to the theater venue showcasing the Avengers to repay the time and cost of screenings. Take out a calculator if you're struggling to figure out how much half is. ... it's $625 million. So now some more fun math to teach you how to business.

Getting half of the money earned and subtracting what it cost gets you your actual profit. Wow! Neat! So $625 million minus the real cost of about $350 million gets us... $275 million. Now there's wiggle room in there of course for other stuff but there's your REAL number.

So let's look at some of your insipid claims and see just how dumb of a take they are

Wakanda Forever (2022). Budget of 250 million, income of 859.2 million. Advertising we'll say is $75 million TO BE NICE. It was like at least 100 million. $325 million total cost minus half of 860 (I'll be generous and round up). $105 million. Hmm much different number.

At this point red flags should be going off in your brain making you realize you said some profoundly ill-informed shit.

Multiverse of Madness (2022), budget of 414 million (gross) and 350.6 million (net), income of 955.8 million. Uh oh. UH OH. UH OH. $414 million...plus some advertising...and we'll be WAY generous here and say it was only $100 million (which is funny AF cuz it was definitely more than that) puts total cost at half a billion. Hey quick math...what's less than half a billion in total ticket sales divided by half? Is it more or less than half a billion in cost? Hmm.

Anyway...next...

Black Widow. Budget of 288.5 million, income of 379.8 million. Do...do you feel it dawning on you yet how OBVIOUSLY wrong you are about basic shit? Do you? Let's say they spent fifty fucking dollars on Black Widow's advertising. Cool. So we'll keep it at 288.5 million. Now divide the dismal $379.8 million dollar box office by half. Hey can I loan you $-98.6 million? You'd be happy with that, right?

It gets better (but worse for you)

Eternals. Budget of 236.2 million, income of 402.1 million. The fact that you would list Eternals REALLY highlights how bad you are at this. 402 million on a 200+ million budget is FUCKING TERRIBLE and anyone should realize that. You, apparently, don't. Impressive. Anyway, crunch the basic numbers. It lost a shit ton of cash.

Justice League. Budget of 300 million, income of 661.3 million. Oh hey hope they only spent less than $30 million on advertising their biggest movie ever otherwise they lost a shit ton of money. Guess what? They lost a shit ton of money.

Birds of Prey. Budget of 100 million, income of 205.5 million. Rinse and repeat with non-moron-math. Oops. A loss.

Here's the receipts.

https://observer.com/2021/09/marvel-black-widow-hit-flop-disney-plus-box-office

In which they discuss that Black Widow may have broken even by that point. Breaking even is TERRIBLE for a movie like this because of the amount of money being tied up in it. It failed. Multiple sources talk about the hybrid release failure of Black Widow and its star even sued over it. The movie did poorly.

https://www.looper.com/1605153/why-dc-movies-bombed-box-office

"the film earned $661 million worldwide, costing the studio nearly $100 million in losses."

OOF

https://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinereid/2023/10/03/revealed-the-marvel-movies-that-failed-to-cover-their-production-costs-at-the-box-office

Eternals literally didn't even cover its PRODUCTION COSTS. The fact that you would cite this movie as a "Gotcha" against me with the numbers you quoted illustrates you have no fucking clue what you're talking about. At all. To an absurd degree. To a satirical degree.

https://screenrant.com/birds-prey-harley-quinn-movie-box-office-bomb

BOMBED.

A cursory search...hell a couple seconds on Wikipedia would have confirmed a lot of this information but, in your arrogance, you stupidly PARROTED a bunch of box office numbers and are so economically illiterate that you somehow thought it proved your point instead of bolstering mine.

And just to wrap this up



Yes, you sure "did took those classes" on writing. You may have a valid lawsuit for being scammed if you did. What was the class title? 'Barely Coherent Gibberish 101'?

Take your , clown.

WOW, just WOW.

I can't remember the last time I've seen someone having so many excuses to validate an argument with so much bullcrap in my life.

The fact that you said that Deadpool and Wolverine is written badly shows how little you understand writing even on the basic level. Same with Batman.

Also, it doesn't matter if the distributor was Disney or Sony, the only think that matters is that movies were amazing and did not flop and were all very well written. Also you don't understand how movie distribution works. Spider-Man No way home was distributed by Sony but was produced by marvel just like the MCU that were distributed by Disney were produced by Marvel. So the money in both cases goes to Marvel Studios. Just like in the gaming industry, a studio can develop games for more than one publisher. Cyber Connect 2 has developed Naruto Ninja Storm games and Dragon Ball Z Kakarot for Bandai Namco, but also developed Demon Slayer 1 (and also working now on Demon Slayer 2) for Sega and Aniplex. So the money always go for CC2 but each publisher also get money but for the games that they published.

Oh and a having a 200 million for production and making 402 in box office, you're calling this terrible????? So making double the amount of production costs is bad???

Same thing with Doctor Strange, 955.8 million is excellent numbers with 414 million for budget are excellent numbers.

And if you do wanna include marketing numbers you also need to bring ancillary numbers too, and none of us have either of these numbers.

The fact that you don't know that and actually using this as a talking point is pathetic.

Also Chadwick didn't have a dying wish, he was referring to a kid's wish just before he himself passed away

https://extratv.com/2020/08/31/chadwick-bosemans-friend-says-the-last-time-they-spoke-the-actor-talked-of-fulfilling-a-childs-dying-wish/Also you

And as for the articles that you brought up, you bring that Black Widow article to say that it failed even though at the very end of it the article said that it didn't flop. And even in the breaking even part it says "if it didn't break even already".

Then in the 2nd article you bring only a half of one sentence, here is the full sentence:

"$300 million into the production. Spending so much meant that the break-even point was around $750 million, which was a high bar to reach. In the end, the film earned $661 million worldwide, costing the studio nearly $100 million in losses"

So he brings up the 750 number with no actual source, and then on that number out of nowhere he says that they lost 100 million. Again, how much Justice League cost in marketing? He doesn't bring up the actual number of the marketing, or the ancillary numbers he just made the 750 number up.

Then the 3rd article throws a number of it's own out of nowhere, saying that 236.2 "$201 million share of the box office left it with a $52.6 million loss after deducting its $253.6 million net spending. " Except where did he got the 201 million number from? And even in his diagram he shows that Eternals costed 253 million and got a box office number of 189 million, while it was actually a budget of 288.5 million, income of 379.8 million. And you quoted me one that. So you ignore the quotes that you take from me.

And the final article doesn't even bring any concrete income numbers for Birds of Prey, all it says is 300 million is REPORTED to be the number needed to break even, but it doesn't bring the actual income number, and it even later says "If that $300 million figure is indeed Birds of Prey's break even point", as it only makes assumptions, not conclusions.

So none of these moves were bombed or written badly, you just take stuff up without even reading it probably.

I knew the MCU bashers on the interent are so out of touch just to stay angry, but man, now to actually experience it first hand, it's really baffling how just wanna validate your hate towards something.

So you wanna use the Joker emoji on me? Well guess what, joke's on you pal.



And since this is an MK site, I'm not talking to you anymore, at least not regarding the MCU or DCEU. If you wanna keep talking about it, you can hit do it via messaging, and even then you have to bring actual good points, instead of parroting mindlessly.

 

[TomShane]

Wow, editing your comment to make me look bad. I honestly didn't think you would sink so low. But I shouldn't be surprised, you are nothing but lies.

You lie about me not liking Mileena's costume, and then change it to her lips.

You lie about me hating MK and WB, when I love Mortal Kombat, and like lots of WB games and media.

You lie about having passing a writing course, which of course you didn't.

You lie about Ed studying game design when he didn't.

You lie about Scarlett Johanson being black Widow again, when she is only a producer in the movie.

You lie to all of us here by pressenting yourself as a new user when you are a returning one.




Another lie. Sindel WAS retconned. There are no such hints to her being evil, because she wasn't. Even in her and Ermac's ending she is shown to be good. They retconned their retcon, yet you lie about it as well.

And you lied about being done with me before, and now you lie by implying you won't answer again, which you will, although, seriously, don't.

And yet you also said you're done with me, and yet you responded, again. So I guess you're a liar too.

Also I like how you keep saying "don't respond further", because you know I make you look bad, and you making yourself look bad by ignoring all the points I bring up and you don't even try to debunk, and even when you do, you make even more stuff up and make yourself look even worse. I got confused because typo that Tricky did, and you got confused after something I said without any typo. And that's only one example. I can admit when I was wrong, you can't.

You're the liar here, not me. I was truthful in everything (And before you bring up Black Widow, I only just now saw on the wiki page that she's a producer, someone perhaps changed it by accident and then it was fixed, but at the moment I looked at it, it said she is in the movie itself, so I was still truthful about that also). You're just in denial and ignoring the facts. So how about you go and learn more about MK9 story (for Sindel) and Black Widow the movie, and on the way there, take a writing class and pass it, if you can, like I did, it will only help you, trust me.

 

[zerosebaz]

And yet you also said you're done with me, and yet you responded, again. So I guess you're a liar too.

Also I like how you keep saying "don't respond further", because you know I make you look bad, and you making yourself look bad by ignoring all the points I bring up and you don't even try to debunk, and even when you though, you make even more stuff up. I got confused because typo that Tricky did, and you got confused after something I said without any typo. And that's only one example.

You're the liar here, not me. I was truthful in everything, including Sindel. You're just in denial and ignoring the facts. Go and learn more about MK9 story and on the way there, take a writing class and pass it, if you can, like I did, it will only help you, trust me.

Making me look bad? Dude, everyone here is laughing at you, just like they laughed when you used your Roy Arkon account. You are lying by presenting yourself as someone new, but you are not even fooling anyone. It's quite funny. Did you think if you made a new username people wouldn't laugh that much? I mean, if you did, it didn't work.

 

[YagamiFire]

Batshit insane and obviously-contrary-to-reality stuff

So yeah since you can't even attempt to be rational or reasonable, the gloves are off.

The fact that you said that Deadpool and Wolverine is written badly shows how little you understand writing even on the basic level. Same with Batman.

...I said Batman was decently written. Are you fucking illiterate?

Also you don't understand how movie distribution works. Spider-Man No way home was distributed by Sony but was produced by marvel just like the MCU that were distributed by Disney were produced by Marvel. So the money in both cases goes to Marvel Studios.

Holy fuck you're dumb as shit. That is literally 180 from reality. Marvel used to get 5% of the box office from Sony's Spider-stuff and they split the merchandise sales. This went from 1999 to 2011. In 2011 Sony gave up their merchandising cut and Disney-Marvel gave up their box office cut.

https://www.investopedia.com/disney-could-profit-from-spiderman-merchandise-5213902

This has been the case for over a decade, you absolute buffoon. You think the box office money goes to Marvel Studios...when they have never got more from this deal than 5%...and that hasn't even happened since 2011. So you're entirely wrong.

Oh and a having a 200 million for production and making 402 in box office, you're calling this terrible????? So making double the amount of production costs is bad???

Yes, dumbass. I just explained how theaters take 50% of the fucking box office revenue. Are you too stupid to realize that if a movie costs $50 to make and makes $100 in ticket sales but the person selling it keeps half of that $100 that you would only break even at best? Are you honestly too dense to realize HALF of the box office going to the theaters means you have to more than double your budget to have any hope of making money? Children that sell lemonade at stands understand this level of basic economics.

That is why a rule of thumb for movies is that they have to have a box office of 2x to 2.5x the production cost to break even and start profiting.

Residuals, royalties, theater cut. These are all things that have to be considered as they are removed from the box office gross.

Here i'll unga-bunga it for you because clearly you have a double digit IQ

Movie cost $800
Theater sell $1600 of movie tickets
Theater keep half of $1600. This equal $800.
Movie studio only get $800 left over.
Movie now have spent $800 and got back $800. + and - $800 make $0.
Now take away residuals and royalties.
Negative money cuz no more money after $0 money.

Did I dumb it down enough for you to follow along or should I start constructing a muppet to explain it to you with?

And if you do wanna include marketing numbers you also need to bring ancillary numbers too, and none of us have either of these numbers.

Ancillary numbers are additional costs like revenue and royalties, goober. That means the studio makes LESS money, not more.

Except where did he got the 201 million number from?

This is explained in the article, dumb ass. For fucks sake, its explained in the preceding and subsequent sentences.

"He interviewed 1,235 film professionals in 2014 and concluded that, according to studios, theaters keep 49% of the takings on average. "

This is consistent with ALL available information everywhere and has remained the standard. They get about half of the money from the box office. The box office take was $402 million. Half of that is $201 million. This is literally in the paragraphs right before the number that is fucking mystifying you. It is also consistent with what I just fucking explained about basic economics.

"This gave Disney around $201 million from Eternals and in order to calculate whether this covered its production cost we need to know how much was spent on the movie which would usually be a closely-guarded secret. This is because studios' financial statements typically combine the costs of all of their movies without itemizing how much was spent on each one.

Movies filmed in the UK are an exception and Eternals was one of them."

"Eternals was made by a Disney subsidiary named Olympia Productions UK in a nod to the heroes' home world and, according to its latest financial statements, a staggering $292.2 million (£241.6 million) was spent on the movie. "

So you're either not reading, functionally illiterate (as already suspected), or outright lying to cover your wrong-ass statements. UK tax filings tell us exactly what they spent on the movie.

If you can't follow along with this shit or are willing to be so unbelievably dishonest that you'll just lie about it outright, everything you say should be dismissed.

So you wanna use the Joker emoji on me? Well guess what, joke's on you pal.

So you're just the ChrisChan-style Lolcow of the site?

What an absolute clown.

 

[YagamiFire]

(And before you bring up Black Widow, I only just now saw on the wiki page that she's a producer, someone perhaps changed it by accident and then it was fixed, but at the moment I looked at it, it said she is in the movie itself, so I was still truthful about that also).

Holy fuck! Dude legit just tried to pull "All of a sudden I got a computer virus and got scared and ran away and my pants fell down" on @zerosebaz

It's official, TYM has its own lolcow

 

[TomShane]

Making me look bad? Dude, everyone here is laughing at you, just like they laughed when you used your Roy Arkon account. You are lying by presenting yourself as someone new, but you are not even fooling anyone. It's quite funny. Did you think if you made a new username people wouldn't laugh that much? I mean, if you did, it didn't work.

I didn't presented myself as someone new, because I never actually introduced myself as anyone. I just came in and started to post here.

And FYI, I've already started talking with Crimson Shadow to get my original account several days ago.

And while you think everyone laughs at me, I'm the one who laughs at you. You can't admit that you're wrong about something and you try so hard to get any gotcha moment on me, derailing this thread to no end.

There's a reason why I left originally, because this site is so derailed beyond any belief, and then you wonder why no one can take this site or MK interent community seriously. The only reason I tried to come back is because Aquaman wanted to gather info about MK1 after Kombat Akademy got shut down, and I wanted to contribute because I'm passionate about MK1, so on the way, I thought I will add some different perspective than the usual toxic negativity that this is site known for, regarding the story and single player content in MK1.

So no, you didn't expose me or anything. The fact that you bring this up, while ignoring all what I got on you and not trying to debunk any of it, says more about you than me. Oh and speaking of accounts, I guess that's why you got that avatar, you're ashamed of yourself.

 

[TomShane]

Holy fuck! Dude legit just tried to pull "All of a sudden I got a computer virus and got scared and ran away and my pants fell down" on @zerosebaz

It's official, TYT has its own lolcow

This comparison is a truly a bad sign for your IQ level, my friend.

Oh and I saw your little insignificant response. Not only you didn't bring it to private messaging, but you didn't even bring up any good points, both of which I asked you to do.

So the joke is still on you.

 

[YagamiFire]

I didn't presented myself

interent

all what I got on you

Not only you didn't

Passed a writing class Bee-Tee-Dubs

@TomShane Do you write your own comic about a hedgehog version of Liu Kang? Please tell me you do. "Go out and Bicycle Kick to the extreme!" "I will! Thank you, father!"

 

[TomShane]

Passed a writing class Bee-Tee-Dubs

@TomShane Do you write your own comic about a hedgehog version of Liu Kang? Please tell me you do. "Go out and Bicycle Kick to the extreme!" "I will! Thank you, father!"

Boring. Joke is still on you.

 

[YagamiFire]

Boring. Joke is still on you.

Hey so if a movie cost $200 million to produce and the box office total was $300 million and the theaters take 50% of the box office, how much money did the movie make?

Take your time, TomChan