Talk about an interesting case study… I won’t tell you that the most anticipated superhero movie debut since last summer’s The Dark Knight, and one of the most expensive because of its $130M to $150M budget, is a bomb financially. I also won’t tell you this non-sequel and non-remake big-screen retelling of a wildly admired graphic novel by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons sucked creatively. Because even I believe that sometimes films shouldn’t be judged on just those criteria. Instead, this is one of those rare times in Hollywood when the concensus complains that the director and the studio tried to stay too faithful to the source material in order not to offend the sensibilities of the fanboy core audience. (Don’t quibble with me about the ending being changed. That giant alien squid nonsense was a non-starter even with CGI up the wazoo.)
But, first, let’s consider if the pic will earn out. “It’s way to soon to tell,” one of the studio moguls involved tells me. “What counts is where a film finishes, not where it starts. We have to see what the holds are like and what the international does in the end. With decent holds, it should be fine.” Estimates I’m hearing are that Watchmen will make $130M domestic and that’s more than it will take in overseas. But remember: Warner Bros still owns most of the pic as producer and domestic distributor. And Paramount owns 25% plus is the international distributor. Then Legendary Pictures owns a chunk. Then there were all those courtroom fights between 20th Century Fox and Warner Bros. When the dust finally settled, Fox will receive up to 8 1/2% gross participation, and a piece of everything going forward (including any improbable sequel or spinoff), and a cash payment upfront including recoupment of its development costs and attorney fees. So cutting Fox in at the last minute played havoc with Warner Bros’ economics on the movie. Which is why there’s a lot of speculation that Warner Bros will seek to sue Larry Gordon, and he in turn seek to sue his law firm that made the deal (Bloom Hergott), which supposedly has a $10 million insurance policy which will end up in Warner Bros pocket.
Then let’s consider whether the pic will have legs. Warner Bros is encouraged. Sunday, the studio took an aggressive stand with an estimate of $11.5M and exceeded that. On Monday, the pic did $3.8M, nearly what the studio hoped for. And, for the 2nd straight weekend coming up, there’s no real competition against Watchmen. (Only Disney’s family film Race To Witch Mountain.)
As for overseas, most foreign moviegoers never heard of Watchmen. In fact, few did in this country except for old and young fanboys. There aren’t superheroes with household names. And the movie had no stars. So the result was no one really knew what Watchmen would make at the North American or international box office. The final figures were $55.2M here (pumped up by the $4.5M from 1,600 Thursday midnight and Friday 12:01 AM shows including all 124 sold-out Imax screenings, as well as the highest location count ever for an R-rated opening at 3,611 theaters), and $25M abroad.
Yet I can assure you that every Hollywood studio agreed before the release that the ambitious pic from 300 director Zack Snyder would have an enormous weekend opening. The expected range ran as high as $70M despite a long running time of two hours, 43 minutes because of what was a record number of theaters for an R-rated release and pent-up demand by mostly older male audiences with a lot of awareness among young males and even some females. Warner Bros believed it would end up “in the $60sM”. And an office betting pool by Paramount’s distribution department settled on a weekend total in the high $60sM. But by Friday night the Hollywood experts saw that even $60M would be impossible.
“It was a great opening despite what the gloom-and-doomsayers think. But even I had unrealistic expectations that it was going to do $70M,” said one of my studio marketing gurus who prides himself on very accurate box office forecasting. “I’d always pegged the movie at mid-$50sM. I’m mad at myself for ratcheting it up at the end. Not that I believed anybody’s hype. But I looked at the way pictures have been over-performing in recent months, and I bought into that notion that this is a tentpole and why shouldn’t it over-perform as well?”
As I noted before the weekend, Warner Bros spent its full-frills $50 million marketing budget for the movie — about average for a tent-pole these days — on a very aggressive campaign that spent big in the outdoor market and on TV advertising. But rival marketing execs were surprised, but also impressed, that the studio’s campaign for Watchmen stayed so true to the graphic novel andto fanboys of all ages – but left everyone else dazed and confused as to what the movie was about or even who the good or bad guys were. As one admired: “The campaign was about planting a big flag in the ground as if to say, ‘We are an event. And if you don’t understand that, then you’re not cool enough to get it’. ”
For instance, the Warner Bros team resisted the obvious tagline for Watchmen that “someone is killing off superheroes” in order not to oversimplify or oversell it. (As close as the marketing came was “We want our superheroes”.) That meant doing something movie marketers rarely do: accepting that Watchmen is an acquired taste based on a restrictive idea and written as an inaccessible story and then made into a movie that isn’t for everyone.
But that doesn’t widen the audience for this coming weekend when Watchmen‘s negatives — the complex story that was too murky, the hardcore sex and violence too noxious — are watercooler talk? “I hate to think that, after two fucking years of marketing, we’re a one-weekend movie,” a Warner Bros exec confessed to me a week ago. But that may be what happens. ”It’s impossible to change course now,” one studio exec says about Watchmen‘s long reluctance to even explain what the film was about in its movie trailers and TV ads. “The time to do that was in the last 10 to 12 days before the opening.”
Some other marketing gurus hold out hope that, since Watchmen‘s core audience of older males are not as obsessed with seeing pics like this when they first come out, they may buy tickets this weekend if the pic has received enough good word of mouth. At the same time, the execs point to missed opportunities. “The superhero genre is one that parents are most willing to take kids to. But all the blood and sex in Watchmen hurt what the opening could have been with families.”
Once the pic opened, “either you were familiar with the source material, or you had trouble following the bouncing ball,” one studio marketing exec analyzed for me. Exit polling showed that the audience didn’t really like the movie (as shown by a Cinemascore of only “B”). “Alan Moore always said that Watchmen the graphic novel couldn’t be successfully made into a movie. Maybe he was right. Because, at the end of the day, Zack Snyder’s slavish attention to detail in making Watchmen such a literal translation is what ultimately doomed the film. He cared more about the appeasement of the fanboys than in a cohesive, coherent movie meant for everyone.”
Yet even a sizable faction of fanboys railed online that Snyder’s take was too beat-by-beat faithful, with many expressing the wish that the Paul Greengrass version, which would have been set in the present day (instead of 1985 America against a Nixon-Kissenger backdrop) and involved multicultural terrorism (instead of the Cold War), had been made instead. (Oh, and they thought Zack’s music selection “zucked” by using all-too-obvious tunes like Hallelujah, Sounds of Silence, and Ride Of The Valkyries.) Though Snyder may have the last laugh (and help reverse the current Industry-wide DVD sales slide) because of all the talk that he’s been secretly making a 4-hour version for home release.
Inside Hollywood, some studio execs blamed the Warner Bros brass for — get this — being too hands-off because Snyder had given the studio such an incredible success with 300 and the moguls just figured he knew what he was doing with Watchmen. “This may have been one of those times when you second guess,” a Hollywood bigwig opines. “What distinguishes a great studio exec from every other studio exec is that they manage these filmmaker egos without letting them know they’re being managed. But,” the bigwig adds, “not everyone is Chris Nolan.”
WEIRD OR WONDROUS? Zack Snyder’s ‘Watchmen’ Clocks $55.6M Weekend






Fox makes a killing (obviously)
Warner comes out alive, probably makes a few bucks
Paramount comes close
Legendary loses $$30-$40M.
Legendary is the stooge again. Warners will let you “play producer” all day long until the hedge fund money runs out and you stop absorbing all their losses (and let them make disproportionate profits on the winners.
Whatever. The principals will be making steady money off this movie for 20 years easy. It it vulgar in the extreme to suggest that making 55 million dollars on anything in about 72 hours is a disappointment – especially something as complex as this property. This business is making money hand over fist right now on some awful awful disposable stuff. This one will endure and is also making money despite the Monday morning quarterbacking.
At least Warners appears to be making attempts at actually being in the moviemaking business. Snyder did a great job. The remarks about the lament of missing out on family auds is the most telling thing in this whole piece. If you want to make a family friendly version of this property then you pick a different property.
If the Watchmen is a faithful adaptation, then I really hate to see what would have happened without the altruistic intentions of Snyder and Warner Bros.
I realize the squid is not doable. But, what it was replaced with was a bit of a cop-out.
I didn’t mind the movie. Most fans of the book I know weren’t crazy excited by the film though, and didn’t feel like they needed to rush out to see it, because it’s going to be around for a while.
The idea that this could have been made into a PG-13 family film is ludicrous. That film version would have opened far lower than 55 million, and it would have been out of theaters quickly and made next to nothing overseas.
Like Joe said, if that is the film you wanted, then you don’t make Watchman at all. If the studio needed 1 billion worldwide to make money of this deal, then they are stupid for making the movie at that financial level, but there would be no way to re-jigger this story to turn it into a 1 billion dollar property. That’s delusional.
hey joe, the business is making REVENUE hand over fist from THEATRICAL right now. Everything else sucks and production and marketing costs are too high. Very very few films are turning an actual profit and the ones that are generally low cost junk like paul blart and taken.
I think that the Watchmen will at least become an underground cult film, like The Fight Club (which also bombed at the box office).
“It it vulgar in the extreme to suggest that making 55 million dollars on anything in about 72 hours is a disappointment – especially something as complex as this property. This business is making money hand over fist right now on some awful awful disposable stuff. This one will endure and is also making money despite the Monday morning quarterbacking.”
Couldn’t have said it better Joe. But if I might add a theory. If the Warner brass had any balls and brains they would’ve released the director’s cut in the first place which adds an extra 30 minutes to the proceedings. The film feels long because there’s no connective tissue to some of the subplots. For example, the Dr. Manhattan origin and how it affected his girlfriend Janey is much more moving in the novel, details they left out of the movie that would’ve made it more emotional for the audience — Laurie’s issues with her mother and her eventual acceptance of the truth of her parentage, again in the movie it was too rushed. Movies with complex storylines have to be able to breathe in order to achieve their maximum impact.
Think about the Godfather — Coppola wanted to cut out the entire Michael hiding out in Sicily segment, but Evans forced him to keep it in giving Michael’s descent into darkness more gravitas.
Some movies don’t benefit from the 3 hour length, another example, Curious Case of Benjamin Button, a film that I think would’ve been much more powerful at a lean 2 hours. Superman Returns — much more effective with a short running length.
With the Warner Bros, STUDIO CUT, they were trying to appeal to the common denominator with material that is anything but common. But I’m not crying for these studio assholes — they’ll be making dough off this flick for years on end once the director’s cut comes out and hopefully will add a lot more details from the novel therefore giving critics another opportunity to reasses their original gripes. We’re talking a Blade Runner cult on this one. Watch…you’ll see.
I could see the film doing well in France; it’s already gotten a lot of press and the French love ‘bande dessinnee’ AND noir and have a lot of respect for Zack Snyder. I think it will do well in Asia also…but more on dvd than theatrical release…
Films have been overpeforming because people want to forget what’s on the front page of the newspaper. But just because “Hotel for Dogs” was a smash doesn’t mean “Watchmen” will be. The audience wants a narcotic, not a dystopia. And they certainly don’t want to see the people who are supposed to save the day dying off.
This movie is “Speed Racer”.
“I’d always pegged the movie at mid-$50sM. I’m mad at myself for ratcheting it up at the end. Not that I believed anybody’s hype.
oh no, of course not.
If you want to sell something, sell it to a salesman.
I am sick of all the studio catering to the “family-friendly” crowd. Yes, the movie business is just that, but enough already with the intellectual dishonesty of squeezing and trimming to fit material grownups (anyone 17 or older) might appreciate into an extremely unrealistic PG-13 girdle. And I’m not talking about the torture porn that has been passing for horror. I’m talking about the kinds of sophisticated material that Warner Bros. and Paramount made 30 years ago — “Chinatown,” “Klute,” “A Clockwork Orange,” “Tbe Untouchables” anyone? All were rated R. In those days an R rating was a plus, not a negative. Of course that’s just wishful thinking on my part. Those days are too long gone, and it appears that pandering to the “family-friendly” political crowd who don’t buy movie tickets but take loud umbrage at the slightest provocation remains the order of the day. Gag me.
I thought the movie was unexpectedly fantastic and I found myself really enjoying its complexity and depth. I’m really annoyed that now probably there will never be anything like that encouraged again because of some low opening numbers.
This fangirl thought it wasn’t that bad – it could have been much worse than it was. Casting was good for the most part, with Haley as the standout. Yeah, not all of the little details from the book made it in the theatrical cut, but the director’s cut on DVD will make up for those cuts.
I thought that the film ending was a vast improvement over the book’s. The ending of the book is one of its main weaknesses – it was half assed and lazy after all the effort Moore and Gibbons put into the first 3/4ths of the book. I really didn’t care that the Black Freighter wasn’t included in the film cut – I don’t like it in the book because it seems to be out of flow with the rest of it. I did love the opening credit montage and Sally’s flashbacks as Snyder’s way of including the Minutemen backstory.
I don’t think Nikki and other doubters were the target audience. I think they were the people dragged along by the fans and their pessimistic viewpoint colored their perception of the movie. I think most people who had read the book which is more than Nikki thinks would be happy with a semi faithful adaptation. I don’t expect complete fidelity to the source material, but to convey its spirit the way its original creators intended. I think Watchmen accomplished that for me.
I think after Watchmen the only comic book properties remaining for screen adaptation are the DC Vertigo titles like Sandman, Preacher, and Y the Last Man. Preacher was killed recently by HBO as a miniseries, which was probably the best way to adapt it due to its scope and the CGI costs. Sandman seems easier on paper than Watchmen to adapt due to Gaiman’s relaxed take on adaptations based his work (Stardust) compared to Moore’s. The problem is the scale and scope of it and how much it would cost for FX and CGI. Y is the most likely of the titles mentioned to be put into production in the next year due to its more realistic setting and creator’s own willingness to cooperate in an adaptation.
It’s unfortunate that all the press is on Watchmen’s opening. We berate the studios for not taking any chances or producing anything original, and when they do take a chance, we analyze the box office. It just gives them more ammunition to continue dipping into the remake/adaptation/reboot well.
I’m aware that Watchman is an adaptation, but it was a hell of a risk. And true, it did cost a lot of money. But the long view is Warner Brothers will be making money off this film long after it’s out of the theaters.
Shawshank opened 9th on its opening weekend, and now it’s considered a classic, and I’m sure its made it budget back a couple of times over.
So even if Watchmen is no Dark Knight, box office-wise (and what could be?), I congratulate Warners for at least trying to break some new ground and go for something different. Hopefully this weekends drop off won’t be too steep.
Excellent post Nikki. This is why I read your blog everyday. Please keep the pro-SAG ad nauseum crap to a minimum…
It wasn’t Snyder being concerned about the fanboys, it was Snyder believing the story was perfect as it is in the book.
Joe is right. Talk about damned if you do and damned if you don’t. What fascinates me is that the article and the comments reek of cynicism at all costs. Yes, the movie was visually stunning, and yes, dramatically it is by the numbers, because the novel doesn’t fit into a two-hour plus movie format, and the obligatory young casting (not by too much, though) is a bit at odds with the premise. But come on, who are you kidding? Marketing knew exactly what it was doing. They rolled the dice on a non-family friendly story, hoping to bedazzle the Indians into the multiplexes. Call it hubris, but I hope it succeeds so that it makes it a trend for hands-off and risk-tasking.
Joe just hit it right on the nose. 55 Million dollars in a few days is a GREAT box office. The movie was LOOOONG. You can only show a long movie so many times. It was violent and sexual. It is what it is. And because it was so long people are having to find the time to see it. I think it will do well at the box office for a number of weeks.
The movie delivered what a lot of us go to the movies for — to be in a different world and see something we’ve never seen before in an interesting entertaining way.
I know many who plan on seeing it again in the theater because it’s so dense (and/or buy the DVD when it comes out as there’s supposed to be a ton of stuff that was cut out (sadly.))
It’ll make its money back. Snyder filmed the unfilmable. Congrats all around.
I still think its going to do well this weekend. I have friends who really want to see it but never, ever go to movies on the opening weekend. Too many people who think they are watching the movie in their living room, talking, kids, etc.
It is simple. WB and everyone else overestimated the number of Watchmen fanboys, and the general public seemed to feel that this movie based on a graphic novel they never heard of, starring actors they never heard of dressed in goofy costumes, wasnt something they wanted to see. They should have never spent $150M production + $50M marketing on this.
The idea that Snyder is to blame for being too faithful is stupid. You either remain faithful to the source material, or like Joe above said ‘you pick a different property’
The movie will be lucky to hit $110M domestic. But it could turn out to be a cult hit on dvd/cable. I applaud WB/Snyder for taking a chance on an “unfilmable” movie, but dollar signs clouded their judgment as to how big this would ever be.
“If you want to make a family friendly version of this property then you pick a different property.”
Totally. As a fan of the source material and of Zack, even I was surprised at the high opening numbers. Watchmen IS an acquired taste, definitely not family friendly, and WB was over a barrell marketing-wise, as every other idiot was going to see it thinking it would be some lightweight POS like Spider-Man 3.
Fortunately, folks like Chris Nolan and Bryan Singer (at least with X-Men 2) have shown broadened the audience’s palette, showing them you CAN take a man/woman in tights seriously, and that just because people are superheroes (or just dress like them) they can still be flesh-and-blood characters.
It won’t make a billion dollars like Dark Knight, so Hollywood haters will call it a bomb, but as long as WB doesn’t yank its promo, it’ll do well.
it was mainly a mixed bag hedging closer to a disappointment. Rorshach and the music were the best parts.
Glad I downloaded it instead of paying almost 10 bucks.
i wanted to like watchmen so badly…
Even if the finished product wasn’t what anyone expected, I admire Snyder’s dedication to making a fanboy flick, and the studios for backing him up, well aware of the risks. I just hope everyone comes out of this still willing to tackle challenging properties like “Watchmen” in the future.