 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Universal Studios Home Entertainment has announced and detailed the Blu-ray release of Oblivion. The post-apocalyptic action thriller stars Tom Cruise, Morgan Freeman, Olga Kurylenko, Andrea Riseborough, Nikolaj Coster-Waldau and Melissa Leo, and is set to arrive via a BD/DVD/UltraViolet combo pack on August 6th.
The Blu-ray release of Oblivion features 1080p video, a DTS-HD Master Audio 7.1 surround track, and several extras:
Feature Commentary with Tom Cruise and director Joseph Kosinski
Deleted Scenes
Isolated Score
Promise of a New World - The Making of Oblivion:
Destiny: Conceptualization, development and pre-production
Voyage: The design and creation of the Bubble Ship (BD exclusive)
Combat: Action and stunts with Tom Cruise (BD exclusive)
Illusion: Post-production and visual effects
Harmony: The musical world of French electronic/shoegaze band M83
http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=11331
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jun 6, 2013 - 7:20 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ado
(Member)
|
I swear, people on this website are thrill-killers and wouldn't dare like something if their message board-adled lives depended on it. There is never any thoughtful, provocative, or jovial conversation here -- only blanket statements, box office worry, and anti-musical sentiment.
I can't wait to own this Blu Ray. This movie is head and shoulders above superhero crap like Iron Man 3, and I'm thankful that filmmakers like Joe Kosinski get bankrolled after their last filmed turned out to be financially successful and a cult continuation of a cult classic. You know who doesn't care that you didn't like TRON: Legacy and suspect it might have been a box office failure based on poor logic? FUCKING EVERYONE!
What "LOGIC" are you using, because it lost $25 million - by the logic of math, not street level sentiment that it is 'cool' and you like it. And as far as the rest of your rantings about the board, I love how people rant about how they hate this board ---- and keep reading it and writing on it. Hello, if you do not like it simply --go away.
As far as Iron Man 3 remarks, well it is not the best picture ever, it is certainly better than either Oblivion or Tron Legacy, and it has made more money than both pictures combined - by far, and it is extremely profitable.
It was a $200 budget, and worldwide made (so far) $1,182,023,292, yeah, that is a BILLION. It made $500 million more than both Kosinksi pictures- combined. So Iron Man 3 production is roughly $700 million into profit. That is very successful investment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jun 6, 2013 - 9:52 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ado
(Member)
|
A picture has to make around 2.5 to 3 times it's budget to break even due to marketing and the cut that distributors and exhibitors take off the ticket prices.
Given that;
Tron budget at $170 making your figure of $400 million worldwide gross it is still $25 million in the red, and that is assuming the more conservative end.
Can I see some marketing budget figures before you make such as assessment Ado? And you didn't mention dvd and blu-ray sales because I guess this movie died after its theatrical run?
And gee, I guess hollywood sure is making a ton of flops if they only 'break even' when a movie makes 3 times its original budget.
...You can certainly like the film but the majority of the audience did not agree with you and the picture did not make a profit.
The majority of critics (Rotten tomatoes), not the audience, that's a big difference there Ado.
As far as your remarks on RT, well- I have only heard two people defend Tron Legacy, and the box office numbers speak for themselves, It was not a big success.
Yes, Hollywood makes a lot of films that really do not make much money. Large films that make a lot of money like Iron Man 3 are the exception. They roll the dice on something like Oblivion or Tron or John Carter, assuming that it will make money, and make a franchise films in that series to create even more profits. The truth is that the marketing, advertising and talent in film make the money. Yes, in answer to your question, a tiny percentage of films actually come out in the black. The ones that make a lot of money are extremely rare, and yes, there are many flops to varying degrees. The fact is that Tron Legacy not Oblivion were not profitable, nor John Carter, nor After Earth, and probably Star Trek ID and a lot of others this year will not make any money in the end. However, if you are a talent in film, and you are being paid, then you probably do not really care if the film was successful. Do you think that Garret Hedlund or Tom Cruise are really worried that these films lost money? No. The fact remains that they were financial failures.
John Carter, Tron, and After Earth were designed as first in a series investments that will never pay off for the studio, because there were not more films in the series. That is because they were in the red. In the end Tron or Oblivion might make 15 or 20 million in home video sales, which is still not enough to make it profitable.
It looks like they spent well more than $100 on marketing on Tron alone, (see below) so a $320 million investment in Tron, which made $400 million, minus just the 30% distribution costs leaves it $40 million in the hole.
Read this http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/how_a_sequel_to_a_28_year_old_flop_costs_320_million_inside_tron_legacy#
With the release date two weeks away, Disney are hoping for big things from their franchise reboot "Tron: Legacy" and have a lot at stake. With a reported $170 million budget, in addition to another $150 million for marketing worldwide (total cost: $320 million) the studio has a lot riding on the success of the film as does its helmer, Joseph Kosinki, who after making a name for himself in the commercials world, is making his feature directorial debut. In The New York Times there is a wonderfully entertaining piece on "Tron: Legacy" that shares intriguing information about the film, the director and how Disney's plans for 'Tron' extend far beyond the multiplex.
Here is info on film finance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting
Three main factors in Hollywood accounting reduce the reported profit of a movie, and all have to do with the calculation of overhead:
Production overhead – Studios, on average, calculate production overhead by using a figure around 15% of total production costs.
Distribution overhead – Film distributors typically keep 30% of what they receive from movie theaters ("gross rentals").
Marketing overhead – To determine this number, studios usually choose about 10% of all advertising costs.
Due to Hollywood accounting, it has been estimated[citation needed] that only about 5% of movies officially show a net profit, and the "losers" include such blockbuster films as Rain Man, Forrest Gump, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, and Batman, which all took in huge amounts in box office and video sales.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jun 6, 2013 - 11:15 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ado
(Member)
|
Well in that case I seem to have misjudged those box office numbers and it baffles me how for instance a movie like G.I. Joe Rise of Cobra would get a sequel (though I'm glad it did). So yes, after that explanation I wouldn't call Tron Legacy a financial success, but in all honesty I wouldn't call it disappointing either, that's still an impressive take in even if it barely breaks even. As for people liking it, I found most of the people I know raving about it (and they hadn't even seen the original). It's in the eye of the beholder I guess.
Francis,
It is a good discussion. I did not mean to offend you. Tron Legacy was a handsome picture for sure, well crafted. I liked Bridges, I liked the Daft Punk score. I though that the characters and story was lacking. But I can see why you like it.
Yes the business is a real mess. Picture are green lit that never should be. I mean I could look at After Earth on paper and tell you that it would fall flat on it's face.
The problem these days is that industry is pretty much driven on very large and very expensive tent pole franchises. And they always want more of them. Disney hoped to build a new franchise out of Tron Legacy and John Carter, but they were commercial failures, at different scales. John Carter was a huge failure, whereas Tron Legacy was a loss but at least not a huge loss.
Oblivion and After Earth will be a pretty large money loss. After Earth is probably the big bomb of the year unless something like World War Z falls flat too.
The cost of these films has gotten so high that it is very rare that they actually make money like Iron Man or Nolan's Dark Knight series did. These studios are rolling the dice in hopes of the next money machine like these, or another Harry Potter money maker. Paramount bet pretty large on Star Trek 2009 and ID. It looks like even though these were pretty well reviewed pictures Star Trek is probably still a net money loss for them on the features, but the actors and talent are bank happy I am sure.
We can learn from our sage Nick Meyer who in 1982 took over a very expensive Star Trek franchise with TV producer Harve Bennett. Together they made a very cheap, 11 million dollar Star Trek 2 The Wrath of Khan, it ended the run making around $80 million, actually turning a profit. And it is pretty much still regarded as the best of the entire ST feature line. Nick said back then that the tight money made them be more inventive and more story driven. There is a lot to be learned there.
There is this point now at which the feature costs are so extravagant that it requires an almost unreasonable amount of the world to see the film to make any money. So the investment was not worth it, nor the product particularly great either.
I would say that there are times when an art might be worthy of being so good that you should not worry about making any money at it. But I do not think it applies to very many movies or movie makers. If Kubrick were still alive it would apply to him, and perhaps David Lean. Otherwise these journeymen/visual/advertisting guys like Kosinski and M Night have to be limited and should tell better narratives about people. I would give the money these guys use to a Nick Meyer any day, and he could make 40 good films - Star Trek or not
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I decided to download this film from iTunes to watch whilst I am holidaying again in Sorrento, overlooking the Bay of Naples.
I am a long in the tooth Science Fiction afficiando since the early 70's and have seen what are to me very good SF genre films and some pretty poor ones. Fore me the pinnacle of achievement in this genre is 2001 and, for different reasons, Planet of the Apes (the original). I prefer hard SF but am not immune to liking Science Fantasy.
I thoroughly enjoyed both After Earth and Oblivion.I thought the plot was robust and enjoyable and the narrative thrust, cinematography and CGI pretty damned impressive. I will definitely be buying the bluray. Whilst not a fan of Cruise I have to admit he does turn out some impressive films, IMO.
I was also impressed with Daft Punk's score for Tron Legacy and am doubly impressed with the score to Oblivion. I have had it constantly playing on my iPod while reading a hard SF novel and sun bathing beside the pool. One small niggle, I thought the score somewhat overpowered the visuals in places by being a tad loud.
I was a follower of the Rotten Tomatoes site but am beginning to feel it doesn't chime with my assessments of quite a few films lately. But there you go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
