Budget: $120 million [source]

Opening weekend gross: $4 million

Factoring in marketing costs and the theaters taking their cut of the profits, Megalopolis would need to make at least $300 million to break even. I think it's safe to say that's not happening.

It would have been THE worst opening for a $100 million movie ever, had it not been for Pluto Nash's horriffic opening 22 years ago.

Even The New York Times is reporting near-empty screenings of Megalopolis!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 79 points 2 years ago (6 children)

Even adjusting for inflation, Pluto Nash still wins. It opened to $3.5M in today's money.

I feel like there hasn't been much marketing for Megalopolis. Could be a factor. I'd say the long run time doesn't help, but Oppenheimer counters that point.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 71 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Oppenheimer had the advantage of people knowing basically what the story was about. The poster for Megalopolis doesn't really tell me what it's about beyond Adam Driver apparently being an architect.

    It's the same reason everything is a reboot or remake: A lot of the marketing cost has already been taken care of with the first movie.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 45 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 23 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Agreed, not heard of it outside Lemmy. Perhaps I’ve insulated myself from ads a little too well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I only heard about this because Coppola gave an interview about hiring "cancelled" actors so he didn't seem "woke".

    Yeah no thanks, FFC. I still remember you defending and bankrolling a CONVICTED child predator.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago

    I've mostly heard about the controversies (the fake AI quotes in the trailer, some alleged #metoo stuff on set, ...). Reviews seem very mixed, some reviewers hate it, others love it, which makes me think some of them just don't 'get' it?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    Yeah but usually if something is good, people will want to discuss it. This has gotten no hype, no post release discussion. It's a ghost.

    Really odd for such a big budget movie.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    This is the second time I have heard about this film, the last time being the release of the first teaser trailer. Studios love to spend 70 million marketing budgets on broadcast TV advertising and completely missing their target audience. In the case of sci-fi, most of us are more responsive to online marketing campaigns and this film has the online presence of an Amish priest.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    In the case of sci-fi, most of us are more responsive to online marketing campaigns and this film has the online presence of an Amish priest.

    Even then, who is this movie for? Scifi nerds who liked Cloud Atlas but wished it was more incoherent and Roman themed?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    aubrey plaza was on the daily show talking about it, so i assume they were doing the usual TV talk show tour.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 2 years ago* (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    You need to adjust the Pluto Nash budget for iflation as well. It was a ~$100 million budget in 2002.

    Makes me wonder how many other movies did worse when we consider adjusting their budget to inflation.

  • source
  • parent