That's not how it works. The general rule in Hollywood is budget + $90m x2 = breaking even. A $220m marketing budget would mean the film has to hit $760m just to break even. There's no way Warner or Legendary make the film with that cost.

I am thinking this will do MUCH better and open close to $70m. Let's see if it gets a breakout opening mark of mine. Don't think legs will be enough to carry it past $200m still.

Maleficent:
Disappointing - less than $60m OW/ $160m total
Breakout - more than $80m OW/ $215m total

KJ BO Experts: Is TDS correct in this analysis and Variety wrong?

$55m- (disappointing) < OW (good range) < $80m+ (breakout)
$150m- (disappointing) < total (good range) < $220m+ (breakout)

Maleficient 65/165
Million Ways 30/90

I expect EOT to break $100m. Fault too.

Though really, if they were breakouts, EOT should be over $140m and Fault over $150m.

OW, EOT has to open to at least $35m. But to get to my breakout prediction, it would have to have stellar legs even without the reviews. So maybe something like Oblivion's OW but with decent legs.

Fault...should outopen the Vow I suppose. Like, again, has to open to at least $35m. $40m above would be breakout I think.

Fault in Our Stars :
Disappointing < $30m OW/$90m total
Breakout > $40m OW/$130m total (basically better than Vow)

Edge of Tomorrow:
Disappointing < $20m OW/$75m total
Breakout > $35m/$110m total

Anything over $80m for Fault is a true breakout. It's a 2 hour drama appealing to females mostly. It was probably made for peanuts compared to the typical Hollywood movie. It doesn't have a star that's a draw.

Comparing it to The Vow makes little sense as both Rachel McAdams and Chaning Tatum are household names (or at least to the audience TV catered to) and it was released right before Valentine's Day and profited a lot from from that fact. I don't get why for this movie to be considered a breakout it NEEDS to match ANOTHER breakout. Makes little sense. Why can't we have two breakouts in the same range?


The Notebook was WOM monster. Fault probably has more upfront demand and won't open as low as TN. But I'm not sure it will get the IM TN had if we look at the year so far. And using the adjusted numbers can lead to unreasonable expectations.

For instance Godzilla. It always seemed like a $200m movie tops to me. But right before it opened I saw that the 98 version adjusts to $230m. I was shocked by that fact. And at that time it was seen as an underperformance and disappointment. No reason why 2014 version should do less than that, right? Especially considering it's way better received. But look at how it performed in the end. To me it still seems like a perfectly reasonable and expected performance, but it will sell considerably less tickets than the 98 "bomb" version and by using those adjusted figures 2014 version should be considered an ever bigger failure then, right?

Throwing away large numbers just because there's some potential for a movie to do really well only leads to unnecessary WWW threads. I don't mind comparing stuff but we really do need to start putting things in today's perspective.