Tenet - Box Office Discussion/Speculation

An original action espionage film releasing in IMAX on July 17, 2020.
User avatar
Forum Pro
Posts: 2704
Joined: January 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
blackColumn wrote:
December 21st, 2019, 3:34 am
You are right Nicolas. The box office performance was quite good for a WW2 movie.

But the studios don't care about that. They care about -

1) Okay this an original movie let's see how well it does.

2) Okay we are giving you an established IP (like Bond, Batman, Matrix), let's see how well it does.

Considering this we can safely assume that Inception's box office (since that an original movie) was where Nolan's career peaked.

Each original movie since then has performed less and less.
I'm pretty sure you have no idea what Warner Bros. execs truly think of Nolan, his work, the box office performance of his films, etc. Neither do I, mind you, but I'm really not sure what your argument is and what you base it upon other than... your thoughts.

And this argument that Nolan is losing his charm - what? And studio execs are disappointed by the BO performance of his latest films? So why the hell would they put their money up on a $250 million, completely original project that they won't even communicate what it's about? The fact that Dunkirk made $500~ million is not a disappointment, because you have to look at the context. Yes, Interstellar didn't have Inception numbers, but there are so many reasons for that. And Interstellar became a cultural phenomenon nevertheless. Maybe - this might be naive, but - Warner Bros. and the execs over there know exactly that Nolan has become one of the biggest names in modern cinema, on par with other living directors such as Spielberg, Cameron, Scorsese, Tarantino, etc., and maybe, just maybe this is more important to them than demanding from Nolan to deliver billions of dollars to them with each film.

Back when they trusted him with Batman, they took a risk, but it paid off and they cannot let go of this "treasure" they have in their hands. And you don't even have to like Nolan's films to see that he himself has become a cultural phenomenon and something no studio can let go of. They are completely aware of the hype surrounding his character and his past and future films, they can see that other franchises have been trying to get him ever since he finished his Batman-trilogy (like, the Bond-people had at least a dozen of meetings with Nolan) - there's no charm that is being lost here. And, once again, they trusted him with the largest rumored budget for an original project in recent years. And they have the balls not to communicate anything about it.

So, all in all, I just don't believe that the numbers of Interstellar and Dunkirk are proof that he is losing his charm. Obviously $600~ million for Interstellar is less then $800~ million for Inception, but... it's still profit. And it's profit that comes from completely original, almost experimental blockbuster movies. Not Marvel shit, not Star Wars, not Disney, not fucking Batman, it's one guy making profitable movies for a studio. It's a guy that made a 80-minute long film about a British event in WW2 with no famous faces and a tiny amount of dialogue profitable!!

User avatar
Posts: 191
Joined: August 2019
Location: China
Hats off.

User avatar
Forum Pro
Posts: 2143
Joined: January 2016
Location: Norway
blackColumn wrote:
December 21st, 2019, 9:51 am
You are taling about cinematic excellence in a thread meant to discuss box office.

In terms of pure box office numbers look at Avengers.

7.7B in 7 years.

Avengers movies secure insane budget even if they are garbage. Why? Because they perform exceptionally well on box office. Almost every Avengers movie has made more than the previous one or at least ~ as much as the last one.

So yes. I would like to see Tenet outperform Inception atleast.
This has to be your dumbest argument yet, and that says a lot.

It's not Nolan's job to create movies that can financially compete with the entire MCU. WB have subdivisions for that, one for DC and one for Harry Potter shit, amongst others.

The Nolan name has become a brand, and as a director he's financially more valuable than any other on the planet right now (ok let's not include bollywood just in case). In a few years we'll see if Cameron still got it. And I'll assure you that the execs at WB are stroking their dicks off at night just knowing that they have him under their roof.

User avatar
Posts: 223
Joined: August 2019
Sanchez wrote:
December 21st, 2019, 10:44 am
blackColumn wrote:
December 21st, 2019, 9:51 am
You are taling about cinematic excellence in a thread meant to discuss box office.

In terms of pure box office numbers look at Avengers.

7.7B in 7 years.

Avengers movies secure insane budget even if they are garbage. Why? Because they perform exceptionally well on box office. Almost every Avengers movie has made more than the previous one or at least ~ as much as the last one.

So yes. I would like to see Tenet outperform Inception atleast.
This has to be your dumbest argument yet, and that says a lot.
There you have it. Better average critics score. Better average audience score. Better, much better box office performance.

Image
Image

A stupid superhero movie more 'critically acclaimed' (your words), by more critics, than a WW2 film.

Better in every way.

Now disprove this.

[Everybody please excuse us. I want to see what this person comes up with now.]

User avatar
Posts: 223
Joined: August 2019
DHOPW42 wrote:
December 21st, 2019, 10:29 am
blackColumn wrote:
December 21st, 2019, 3:34 am
You are right Nicolas. The box office performance was quite good for a WW2 movie.

But the studios don't care about that. They care about -

1) Okay this an original movie let's see how well it does.

2) Okay we are giving you an established IP (like Bond, Batman, Matrix), let's see how well it does.

Considering this we can safely assume that Inception's box office (since that an original movie) was where Nolan's career peaked.

Each original movie since then has performed less and less.
I'm pretty sure you have no idea what Warner Bros. execs truly think of Nolan, his work, the box office performance of his films, etc. Neither do I, mind you, but I'm really not sure what your argument is and what you base it upon other than... your thoughts.

And this argument that Nolan is losing his charm - what? And studio execs are disappointed by the BO performance of his latest films? So why the hell would they put their money up on a $250 million, completely original project that they won't even communicate what it's about? The fact that Dunkirk made $500~ million is not a disappointment, because you have to look at the context. Yes, Interstellar didn't have Inception numbers, but there are so many reasons for that. And Interstellar became a cultural phenomenon nevertheless. Maybe - this might be naive, but - Warner Bros. and the execs over there know exactly that Nolan has become one of the biggest names in modern cinema, on par with other living directors such as Spielberg, Cameron, Scorsese, Tarantino, etc., and maybe, just maybe this is more important to them than demanding from Nolan to deliver billions of dollars to them with each film.

Back when they trusted him with Batman, they took a risk, but it paid off and they cannot let go of this "treasure" they have in their hands. And you don't even have to like Nolan's films to see that he himself has become a cultural phenomenon and something no studio can let go of. They are completely aware of the hype surrounding his character and his past and future films, they can see that other franchises have been trying to get him ever since he finished his Batman-trilogy (like, the Bond-people had at least a dozen of meetings with Nolan) - there's no charm that is being lost here. And, once again, they trusted him with the largest rumored budget for an original project in recent years. And they have the balls not to communicate anything about it.

So, all in all, I just don't believe that the numbers of Interstellar and Dunkirk are proof that he is losing his charm. Obviously $600~ million for Interstellar is less then $800~ million for Inception, but... it's still profit. And it's profit that comes from completely original, almost experimental blockbuster movies. Not Marvel shit, not Star Wars, not Disney, not fucking Batman, it's one guy making profitable movies for a studio. It's a guy that made a 80-minute long film about a British event in WW2 with no famous faces and a tiny amount of dialogue profitable!!
When there are too many 'maybe, just maybe' involved, it's called wishful thinking.

Posts: 3324
Joined: September 2013
Location: Copenhagen
blackColumn wrote:
December 21st, 2019, 12:01 pm
When there are too many 'maybe, just maybe' involved, it's called wishful thinking.
Cut your bullshit and let this forum breathe.

User avatar
Posts: 8857
Joined: August 2009
Idk about you guys but I stop caring about Rotten Tomatoes percentage once I see the rating is fresh or certified fresh. Like who cares if Endgame has like 2 percentage points more than Dunkirk? Dunkirk was still a widely positive reviewed movie. My friends who don't even like Nolan much loved the film and it got awards nominations too.

At this point, it's just nitpicking.

User avatar
Forum Pro
Posts: 2704
Joined: January 2009
Location: Budapest, Hungary
blackColumn wrote:
December 21st, 2019, 11:56 am
A stupid superhero movie more 'critically acclaimed' (your words), by more critics, than a WW2 film.

Better in every way.

Now disprove this.
But... what is the argument here? So what?

User avatar
Posts: 175
Joined: May 2014
Location: Recife, PE - Brazil
blackColumn wrote:
December 21st, 2019, 11:56 am
Sanchez wrote:
December 21st, 2019, 10:44 am
blackColumn wrote:
December 21st, 2019, 9:51 am
You are taling about cinematic excellence in a thread meant to discuss box office.

In terms of pure box office numbers look at Avengers.

7.7B in 7 years.

Avengers movies secure insane budget even if they are garbage. Why? Because they perform exceptionally well on box office. Almost every Avengers movie has made more than the previous one or at least ~ as much as the last one.

So yes. I would like to see Tenet outperform Inception atleast.
This has to be your dumbest argument yet, and that says a lot.
There you have it. Better average critics score. Better average audience score. Better, much better box office performance.

Image
Image

A stupid superhero movie more 'critically acclaimed' (your words), by more critics, than a WW2 film.

Better in every way.

Now disprove this.

[Everybody please excuse us. I want to see what this person comes up with now.]
Well...

https://www.metacritic.com/movie/dunkirk - Score 94 (Universal acclaim)

https://www.metacritic.com/movie/avengers-endgame - Score 78

User avatar
Posts: 223
Joined: August 2019

Post Reply