I'm not sure this movie's failure should reflect on the state of cinema. I'm going to argue that its pompous self-importance turned people off.

I saw Top Gun: Maverick in theatre. It was a big screen action flick with lots of nostalgia (I saw Top Gun as a teenager in theatre).

I also saw Ticket to Paradise in theatre. It is exactly the kind of movie Matt Damon says is hard to make nowadays. Yet make it they did, and people went to see it. (see my comment on that movie's board for some numbers). I like George Clooney, and this movie had no special effects, no car chases, no explosions... just a nice rom-com.

Fabelmans was one of the opening trailers during our viewing of Ticket to Paradise. I said, out loud, "nah, not for me." The trailer presented a story that, to me, looked self-important and utterly uninteresting.

Spielberg is a human being. He's made some great movies, but not everything he does is great. The shock that this movie didn't do well isn't being chalked up as a rare miss, because it's Spielberg. If people aren't interested, well, then, surely, this must be THE END OF CINEMA.

FFS.

Cinema is just fine. Cinema survived TV. And VHS. And Betamax. And laser disc. And bittorrent. And streaming. Cinema as a medium is no longer the only game in town, but it still offers an experience that can't be directly displaced by any other medium.

Movie makers aren't entitled to our eyeballs. Earn it with a good story well told. If you fail, own it.

DRDMovieMusings--

As someone myself who enjoys watching a truly good film on the big screen, I sincerely hope you are correct that my fatalism regarding the longevity of the big screen is unwarranted.

However, I am going to have to push back a bit:

I am surprised that you don't share my pessimism about the survivability of the physical cinema, since I seem to remember that you, DRDMovieMusings, have yourself lamented the fact elsewhere on TMDB that you are finding it harder and harder to discern the financial success of many movies, since so many of them are no longer released theatrically, and thus you can no longer use box-office receipts as a tracker of profit or loss.

As far as The Fabelmans, I did not start this thread to lament that particular movie's failure. I just thought that since that movie dealt with love of cinema and the experience of actually going to the physical cinema itself, that this board was as good as any to start such a discussion on demise of said physical cinema, and that it would be ironic if The Fabelmans actually does better on VOD. To be honest, I am surprised that The Fabelmans is already being considered a failure as far as the physical cinema, since here in the U.S. it is only just now getting a wide theatrical release. Personally, I don't care if this particular movie fails-- I have no interest in seeing it, since I actually agree with you that:

The Fabelmans appears nothing more than a practice in narcissism from its director (don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed many films from Mr. Spielberg over the course of my life, but for me, he's hit-or-miss-- there have been plenty of his movies I've also had no interest in seeing).

As far as Ticket to Paradise-- as I said to you in another thread: a very enjoyable movie. But I feel strongly that, despite having such bankable actors as George Clooney and Julia Roberts, Ticket to Paradise would not have done so well if it had been released just a few years ago, when many more movies were hitting the physical theaters. I contend that because there is such a dearth of films being given theatrical release now, a "feel-good", non-tentpole/non-franchise movie could almost not help but to perform well in the current environment.

Again, DRDMovieMusings, I hope you are right, and that my prediction that we are in the final years of the physical cinema is unwarranted. But the overwhelming number of movies being released direct to TV/VOD-- and that the big studios themselves even seem to be pushing this, now ---seems to point to the demise of the brick-and-mortar movie house. And that, to this viewer at least, is sad.

@northcoast said:

DRDMovieMusings--

As someone myself who enjoys watching a truly good film on the big screen, I sincerely hope you are correct that my fatalism regarding the longevity of the big screen is unwarranted.

However, I am going to have to push back a bit:

Cool!

I am surprised that you don't share my pessimism about the survivability of the physical cinema,

I kinda do!

since I seem to remember that you, DRDMovieMusings, have yourself lamented the fact elsewhere on TMDB that you are finding it harder and harder to discern the financial success of many movies,

Indeed, I have!

since so many of them are no longer released theatrically, and thus you can no longer use box-office receipts as a tracker of profit or loss.

Yep. The industry is in the throes of trying to figure out this new paradigm.

As far as The Fabelmans, I did not start this thread to lament that particular movie's failure. I just thought that since that movie dealt with love of cinema and the experience of actually going to the physical cinema itself, that this board was as good as any to start such a discussion on demise of said physical cinema, and that it would be ironic if The Fabelmans actually does better on VOD. To be honest, I am surprised that The Fabelmans is already being considered a failure as far as the physical cinema, since here in the U.S. it is only just now getting a wide theatrical release. Personally, I don't care if this particular movie fails-- I have no interest in seeing it, since I actually agree with you that:

The Fabelmans appears nothing more than a practice in narcissism from its director (don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed many films from Mr. Spielberg over the course of my life, but for me, he's hit-or-miss-- there have been plenty of his movies I've also had no interest in seeing).

Well said. It took a very long time for me to stumble upon a Billy Wilder movie I did not love. Same thing with Quentin Tarantino. Mr. Spielberg does seem much more "hit-or-miss" to me, too.

As far as Ticket to Paradise-- as I said to you in another thread: a very enjoyable movie. But I feel strongly that, despite having such bankable actors as George Clooney and Julia Roberts, Ticket to Paradise would not have done so well if it had been released just a few years ago, when many more movies were hitting the physical theaters. I contend that because there is such a dearth of films being given theatrical release now, a "feel-good", non-tentpole/non-franchise movie could almost not help but to perform well in the current environment.

I agree with you. Remember the "four Ps of marketing"? Product, price, place, promotion. How a product is brought to market is part of the product. Daniel Craig's last Bond and Tom Cruise's Top Gun sequel were both in the can over a year before release. They were both the kind of movies that are made for the big screen viewing experience, and the studios smartly delayed release until they had a better shot of putting more butts in seats, which they both did rather handsomely. Timing is a part of the problem that studios have to solve, and Ticket to Ride apparently got it right - of the 21 titles in my database with George Clooney headlining, it is easily his highest ROI movie!

Again, DRDMovieMusings, I hope you are right, and that my prediction that we are in the final years of the physical cinema is unwarranted.

I wasn't saying that, per se. We agree that movie distribution has changed, and cinema is no longer the only game in town. My initial response to your conversation was simply that the Fabelmans shouldn't be seen as any kind of bellwether on the state of cinema; in a season in which all kinds of other types of movies are making lots and lots and lots of money, Fabelmans needs to own its failure, not blame it on larger issues that magically did not appear to affect other movies being released around the same time. Black Panther: Wakanda Forever is paying a higher ROI than the average for a first sequel; Terrifier made more money than I'm comfortable acknowledging. There are eyeballs out there and money to be made for movies that capture people's imagination.

And, I'll admit, there are lots of movies I loved that did not do good box office, and some that downright bombed. We've certainly discussed that box office is neither the only - nor the best - measure of the quality, value, or importance of a movie. Shucks, I've made lists here including Better than Box, and Box Shmox :-)

So, maybe, one day, I may revisit Fabelmans and realize it was a good story. (And that's happened to me plenty - I fell in love with movies like Blade, Devil, and even The Matrix long after they were out of theatre, on the recommendations of friends who said "you haven't seen...? You need to see it!"

But the overwhelming number of movies being released direct to TV/VOD-- and that the big studios themselves even seem to be pushing this, now ---seems to point to the demise of the brick-and-mortar movie house. And that, to this viewer at least, is sad.

Me, too!

@DRDMovieMusings said:

@northcoast said:

DRDMovieMusings--

As someone myself who enjoys watching a truly good film on the big screen, I sincerely hope you are correct that my fatalism regarding the longevity of the big screen is unwarranted.

However, I am going to have to push back a bit:

Cool!

I am surprised that you don't share my pessimism about the survivability of the physical cinema,

I kinda do!

since I seem to remember that you, DRDMovieMusings, have yourself lamented the fact elsewhere on TMDB that you are finding it harder and harder to discern the financial success of many movies,

Indeed, I have!

since so many of them are no longer released theatrically, and thus you can no longer use box-office receipts as a tracker of profit or loss.

Yep. The industry is in the throes of trying to figure out this new paradigm.

As far as The Fabelmans, I did not start this thread to lament that particular movie's failure. I just thought that since that movie dealt with love of cinema and the experience of actually going to the physical cinema itself, that this board was as good as any to start such a discussion on demise of said physical cinema, and that it would be ironic if The Fabelmans actually does better on VOD. To be honest, I am surprised that The Fabelmans is already being considered a failure as far as the physical cinema, since here in the U.S. it is only just now getting a wide theatrical release. Personally, I don't care if this particular movie fails-- I have no interest in seeing it, since I actually agree with you that:

The Fabelmans appears nothing more than a practice in narcissism from its director (don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed many films from Mr. Spielberg over the course of my life, but for me, he's hit-or-miss-- there have been plenty of his movies I've also had no interest in seeing).

Well said. It took a very long time for me to stumble upon a Billy Wilder movie I did not love. Same thing with Quentin Tarantino. Mr. Spielberg does seem much more "hit-or-miss" to me, too.

As far as Ticket to Paradise-- as I said to you in another thread: a very enjoyable movie. But I feel strongly that, despite having such bankable actors as George Clooney and Julia Roberts, Ticket to Paradise would not have done so well if it had been released just a few years ago, when many more movies were hitting the physical theaters. I contend that because there is such a dearth of films being given theatrical release now, a "feel-good", non-tentpole/non-franchise movie could almost not help but to perform well in the current environment.

I agree with you. Remember the "four Ps of marketing"? Product, price, place, promotion. How a product is brought to market is part of the product. Daniel Craig's last Bond and Tom Cruise's Top Gun sequel were both in the can over a year before release. They were both the kind of movies that are made for the big screen viewing experience, and the studios smartly delayed release until they had a better shot of putting more butts in seats, which they both did rather handsomely. Timing is a part of the problem that studios have to solve, and Ticket to Ride apparently got it right - of the 21 titles in my database with George Clooney headlining, it is easily his highest ROI movie!

Again, DRDMovieMusings, I hope you are right, and that my prediction that we are in the final years of the physical cinema is unwarranted.

I wasn't saying that, per se. We agree that movie distribution has changed, and cinema is no longer the only game in town. My initial response to your conversation was simply that the Fabelmans shouldn't be seen as any kind of bellwether on the state of cinema; in a season in which all kinds of other types of movies are making lots and lots and lots of money, Fabelmans needs to own its failure, not blame it on larger issues that magically did not appear to affect other movies being released around the same time. Black Panther: Wakanda Forever is paying a higher ROI than the average for a first sequel; Terrifier made more money than I'm comfortable acknowledging. There are eyeballs out there and money to be made for movies that capture people's imagination.

And, I'll admit, there are lots of movies I loved that did not do good box office, and some that downright bombed. We've certainly discussed that box office is neither the only - nor the best - measure of the quality, value, or importance of a movie. Shucks, I've made lists here including Better than Box, and Box Shmox :-)

So, maybe, one day, I may revisit Fabelmans and realize it was a good story. (And that's happened to me plenty - I fell in love with movies like Blade, Devil, and even The Matrix long after they were out of theatre, on the recommendations of friends who said "you haven't seen...? You need to see it!"

But the overwhelming number of movies being released direct to TV/VOD-- and that the big studios themselves even seem to be pushing this, now ---seems to point to the demise of the brick-and-mortar movie house. And that, to this viewer at least, is sad.

Me, too!

You could only find five movies for your 'Box Shmox' list?

@bratface said:

You could only find five movies for your 'Box Shmox' list?

Those five were just off the top of my head at the time I thought to make the list - more to come, and suggestions/recommendations welcomed!

@NeoLosman said:

@bratface said:

You could only find five movies for your 'Box Shmox' list?

One is tempted to add Friday The 13th '09 to that list of so-so flicks that broke the bank the first weekend of their release. Until we recall Julianna Guill's indelibly unforgettable scene

Paying $4.86 for this kind of movie (a brand-name slasher flick) isn't stellar, but then, paying $4.86 for this kind of shlock kinda is!

Hey now...wait a second...I KNOW YOU!

:-)

@DRDMovieMusings said:

@NeoLosman said:

@bratface said:

You could only find five movies for your 'Box Shmox' list?

One is tempted to add Friday The 13th '09 to that list of so-so flicks that broke the bank the first weekend of their release. Until we recall Julianna Guill's indelibly unforgettable scene

Paying $4.86 for this kind of movie (a brand-name slasher flick) isn't stellar, but then, paying $4.86 for this kind of shlock kinda is!

Hey now...wait a second...I KNOW YOU!

:-)

I'm glad someone else recognized mecha. He keeps denying it but...?

@DRDMovieMusings said:

@bratface said:

@DRDMovieMusings said:

@northcoast said:

DRDMovieMusings--

As someone myself who enjoys watching a truly good film on the big screen, I sincerely hope you are correct that my fatalism regarding the longevity of the big screen is unwarranted.

However, I am going to have to push back a bit:

Cool!

I am surprised that you don't share my pessimism about the survivability of the physical cinema,

I kinda do!

since I seem to remember that you, DRDMovieMusings, have yourself lamented the fact elsewhere on TMDB that you are finding it harder and harder to discern the financial success of many movies,

Indeed, I have!

since so many of them are no longer released theatrically, and thus you can no longer use box-office receipts as a tracker of profit or loss.

Yep. The industry is in the throes of trying to figure out this new paradigm.

As far as The Fabelmans, I did not start this thread to lament that particular movie's failure. I just thought that since that movie dealt with love of cinema and the experience of actually going to the physical cinema itself, that this board was as good as any to start such a discussion on demise of said physical cinema, and that it would be ironic if The Fabelmans actually does better on VOD. To be honest, I am surprised that The Fabelmans is already being considered a failure as far as the physical cinema, since here in the U.S. it is only just now getting a wide theatrical release. Personally, I don't care if this particular movie fails-- I have no interest in seeing it, since I actually agree with you that:

The Fabelmans appears nothing more than a practice in narcissism from its director (don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed many films from Mr. Spielberg over the course of my life, but for me, he's hit-or-miss-- there have been plenty of his movies I've also had no interest in seeing).

Well said. It took a very long time for me to stumble upon a Billy Wilder movie I did not love. Same thing with Quentin Tarantino. Mr. Spielberg does seem much more "hit-or-miss" to me, too.

As far as Ticket to Paradise-- as I said to you in another thread: a very enjoyable movie. But I feel strongly that, despite having such bankable actors as George Clooney and Julia Roberts, Ticket to Paradise would not have done so well if it had been released just a few years ago, when many more movies were hitting the physical theaters. I contend that because there is such a dearth of films being given theatrical release now, a "feel-good", non-tentpole/non-franchise movie could almost not help but to perform well in the current environment.

I agree with you. Remember the "four Ps of marketing"? Product, price, place, promotion. How a product is brought to market is part of the product. Daniel Craig's last Bond and Tom Cruise's Top Gun sequel were both in the can over a year before release. They were both the kind of movies that are made for the big screen viewing experience, and the studios smartly delayed release until they had a better shot of putting more butts in seats, which they both did rather handsomely. Timing is a part of the problem that studios have to solve, and Ticket to Ride apparently got it right - of the 21 titles in my database with George Clooney headlining, it is easily his highest ROI movie!

Again, DRDMovieMusings, I hope you are right, and that my prediction that we are in the final years of the physical cinema is unwarranted.

I wasn't saying that, per se. We agree that movie distribution has changed, and cinema is no longer the only game in town. My initial response to your conversation was simply that the Fabelmans shouldn't be seen as any kind of bellwether on the state of cinema; in a season in which all kinds of other types of movies are making lots and lots and lots of money, Fabelmans needs to own its failure, not blame it on larger issues that magically did not appear to affect other movies being released around the same time. Black Panther: Wakanda Forever is paying a higher ROI than the average for a first sequel; Terrifier made more money than I'm comfortable acknowledging. There are eyeballs out there and money to be made for movies that capture people's imagination.

And, I'll admit, there are lots of movies I loved that did not do good box office, and some that downright bombed. We've certainly discussed that box office is neither the only - nor the best - measure of the quality, value, or importance of a movie. Shucks, I've made lists here including Better than Box, and Box Shmox :-)

So, maybe, one day, I may revisit Fabelmans and realize it was a good story. (And that's happened to me plenty - I fell in love with movies like Blade, Devil, and even The Matrix long after they were out of theatre, on the recommendations of friends who said "you haven't seen...? You need to see it!"

But the overwhelming number of movies being released direct to TV/VOD-- and that the big studios themselves even seem to be pushing this, now ---seems to point to the demise of the brick-and-mortar movie house. And that, to this viewer at least, is sad.

Me, too!

You could only find five movies for your 'Box Shmox' list?

Those five were just off the top of my head at the time I thought to make the list - more to come, and suggestions/recommendations welcomed!

You are probably a bit more objective than I would be? Could you leave me a link to your ROI listings?

@bratface said:

Could you leave me a link to your ROI listings?

My "database" is in Excel.

I'm not a programmer and, thus, don't know how I might go about making it available online - open to suggestions :-)

In the meantime, if you have any questions, I can see if I have a numbers and, if not, your question(s) might point me in a direction to track down more numbers/stats.

@bratface said:

@DRDMovieMusings said:

Hey now...wait a second...I KNOW YOU!

:-)

I'm glad someone else recognized mecha. He keeps denying it but...?

Right?! He's nothing if not both persistent and consistent. Question is, is he learning/growing?

@DRDMovieMusings said:

@bratface said:

Could you leave me a link to your ROI listings?

My "database" is in Excel.

I'm not a programmer and, thus, don't know how I might go about making it available online - open to suggestions :-)

In the meantime, if you have any questions, I can see if I have a numbers and, if not, your question(s) might point me in a direction to track down more numbers/stats.

Where do you get your info?

https://www.the-numbers.com/

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/2022W49/?ref_=bo_we_nav

https://www.screendollars.com/film-data/box-office-results/

@DRDMovieMusings said:

@bratface said:

@DRDMovieMusings said:

Hey now...wait a second...I KNOW YOU!

:-)

I'm glad someone else recognized mecha. He keeps denying it but...?

Right?! He's nothing if not both persistent and consistent. Question is, is he learning/growing?

I recognized him from his first posts as neo. And you know I don't believe he is. But that's to his detriment. I personally don't understand why he keeps coming back with new names & thinking that we will not know who it really is!

@bratface said:

@DRDMovieMusings said:

@bratface said:

Could you leave me a link to your ROI listings?

My "database" is in Excel.

I'm not a programmer and, thus, don't know how I might go about making it available online - open to suggestions :-)

In the meantime, if you have any questions, I can see if I have a numbers and, if not, your question(s) might point me in a direction to track down more numbers/stats.

Where do you get your info?

https://www.the-numbers.com/

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/2022W49/?ref_=bo_we_nav

https://www.screendollars.com/film-data/box-office-results/

I've used The Numbers and Box Office Mojo (which used to be better before Amazon acquired it and screwed it up too), but as for Screen Dollars, thank you! I'd never heard of it before, will check it out!

Also, Wikipedia (which has a high degree of rigor for sources - if there are numbers there, they tend to be reliable/authoritative).

Unfortunately, finding budget data is not a given - there are a lot of movies I couldn't enter into the database because I simply could not find a budget amount anywhere.

And, to be sure, whenever I come across an article talking about the most profitable movies, or the biggest bombs, the numbers they use may differ from the ones I'd found, but they're always somewhere within a ballpark of reasonable margin of error. These numbers are all approximations...but, as long as the approach to gathering them is consistent, we can have a reasonable conversation about a film's relative financial performance.

@bratface said:

@DRDMovieMusings said:

@bratface said:

@DRDMovieMusings said:

Hey now...wait a second...I KNOW YOU!

:-)

I'm glad someone else recognized mecha. He keeps denying it but...?

Right?! He's nothing if not both persistent and consistent. Question is, is he learning/growing?

I recognized him from his first posts as neo. And you know I don't believe he is. But that's to his detriment. I personally don't understand why he keeps coming back with new names & thinking that we will not know who it really is!

He thinks he's slick!

@DRDMovieMusings said:

@bratface said:

Could you leave me a link to your ROI listings?

My "database" is in Excel.

I'm not a programmer and, thus, don't know how I might go about making it available online - open to suggestions :-)

In the meantime, if you have any questions, I can see if I have a numbers and, if not, your question(s) might point me in a direction to track down more numbers/stats.

Here is something that might help turn your excel spreadsheet into a sharable link? I know it can be done because an old friend from IMDb turned all of my ratings there into a spreadsheet & sent it to me in an email. Although I don't know how. Maybe the YT link I sent can help.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1J3fwPNCqoE