Apple is 'very pleased' with its movie box office, says theater chain

AppleInsider

The CEO of the Cinemark movie theater chain says that despite comparatively low takings for the epic "Killers of the Flower Moon," Apple is seeing "real value."

Killers of the Flower Moon

Martin Scorsese and Eric Roth's "Killers of the Flower Moon" proved to be a box office flop -- despite initially promising early figures -- bringing Apple just $23 million in its opening weekend. That's $23 million against a reported $200 million production cost for the film, and an unknown marketing spend.

Nonethess, Cinemark CEO Sean Gamble told analysts during the firm's earnings call, that both Apple and Amazon are "very pleased" with the results of their theatrical screenings.

"There's real value they see in this space," said Gamble, according to Deadline magazine.

"[Apple is] really just getting going," continued Gamble. "They had been operating on a slightly smaller level, and now they're in business with major filmmakers."

"They've got three huge releases over the next five months, meaning 'Killers of the Flower Moon,' 'Napoleon' and 'Argylle,'" he said. "All are reaching theaters through distribution partnerships with major studios, but unlike 'CODA' or past Apple films, the trio will spend several weeks in theaters before streaming on Apple TV+."

"Napoleon" is due to be released in theaters on November 22, 2023. "Argylle" is scheduled for February 2024 in theaters.

As yet, Apple has not announced streaming dates for any of these films.

Read on AppleInsider

stabitha_christie

"bringing Apple just $23 million in its opening weekend"

That is 23 million domestically so you have left out over half of the movie's revenue. Was that done out of Ignorance or is the article intentionally misleading?

In the 14 days the movie has been out it has made almost 90 million dollars. 

mikethemartian

I was just happy to see a movie about something real playing on the IMAX. Earlier in the summer I got to see Oppenheimer on the IMAX and hopefully Napoleon when it comes out.

mpantone

Stabitha_Christie said:

"bringing Apple just $23 million in its opening weekend"

That is 23 million domestically so you have left out over half of the movie's revenue. Was that done out of Ignorance or is the article intentionally misleading?

In the 14 days the movie has been out it has made almost 90 million dollars. 

No, US domestic box office revenue is a longtime standard film industry metric, going many decades back. In the old days (before digital delivery), a lot of international releases were staggered due to logistics (e.g., mailing out heavy film reels via distributors). Furthermore, the movie industry uses the weekend metric a lot (defined as Friday-Saturday-Sunday) since that's where the bulk of the foot traffic is.

By contrast in 2023 Apple can release their film/TV content simultaneously around the world.

The film industry continues to use this benchmark because it's a pretty good indication of a film's popularity relative to the most important film consumer market in the world: the USA.

Note international releases can still be staggered, just like the old film days. If Studio X releases Film A in five international markets the first weekend while Studio Y releases Film B in 37 international markets that same weekend, the international box office revenue may not be reflective of the film's popularity.

The other major important film industry benchmark is revenue per screen. Some films have more limited distribution but if the theaters are full, that's good for the producer. Many art films have limited releases. 

As a direct-to-consumer streaming service, Apple's revenue cannot be tracked by revenue per (theater) screen.

Film industry analysts look at the two metrics (US domestic box office + revenue per screen) side-by-side for theatrical releases as well as the dropoff after the initial launch weekend.

A good recent example of this is how well Taylor Swift's Eras Tour concert film did. Not only did she dominate at the US domestic box office, she also crushed it in revenue-per-screen. Remember that this is an AMC Theater exclusive for 13 weeks in the US market. Ticket prices were a little higher which drove up the latter metric. Taylor did not release the concert film via a studio, so she pockets the proceeds after paying AMC. (She has her own production company.)

Likewise Apple does not deal with studios or theatre chains. They handle the entire distribution on their own content delivery system (paying any partners of course).

Thus $10 million in box office receipts for A.) an Apple TV exclusive, B.) Taylor Swift's Eras Tour concert film, and C.) the Exorcist film represents three very different distribution strategies with the latter being the most traditional. Apple and Taylor will pocket more proceeds in the end, with the Exorcist producers taking home the least.

It's important to remember concerning this particular film "Killers of the Flower Moon" is that Apple pays a much smaller fee for the streaming rights. It's expensive to release films in theaters which is why some titles on the end went straight to DVD, skipping movie theaters. However the first state of the Hollywood film industry continues to judge movie success by box office (theater) revenue rather than streaming revenue or the old DVD sales.

The longtime Boxofficemojo.com website has tracked box office figures for over twenty years. The site is now owned by Amazon (under their IMDB portfolio on content sites).

edited November 2023

chasm

As Mpantone and Stabitha (love that handle) have noted in their posts, the film is likely by the end of this weekend to have made back half of its total cost in cinemas, and Apple gets nearly every dollar of that.

Given that it will be available for years on Apple TV+ soon, I think it’s safe to say that Apple won’t lose a penny on this one. More importantly, it was never a “box office flop” — most films (even Taylor Swift!) see a dramatic drop in the second week in cinemas — what matters is how much the new normal is, and how long the film is likely to play in cinemas.

“Napoleon,” being another overly long but major historical drama, will likely follow the same pattern — high opening weekend in cinemas, big drop the second week, steady business for the remaining theatrical run, then on to Apple TV+ for an indefinite stretch. One thing I can assure you of already — at no point will it be “a flop.”

marvin

mpantone said:

The film industry continues to use this benchmark because it's a pretty good indication of a film's popularity relative to the most important film consumer market in the world: the USA.

Seems like there's too many variables for it to be a reliable measure. The opening weekend total puts it behind Cocaine Bear:

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/2023/?grossesOption=totalGrosses&sort=openingWeekendGross&ref_=bo_yld__resort#table

But worldwide revenue for Cocaine Bear was $88m:

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/releasegroup/gr445207045/

Even though they are in the same range, Killers of the Flower Moon is already above this:

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/releasegroup/gr3466220037/

There's a big variation in the split between domestic and international from one movie to another because some movies mainly appeal to US audiences. Taylor Swift's movie, like Cocaine Bear, has a roughly 75:25 domestic/international split:

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/releasegroup/gr4238103045/

Oppenheimer is 35:65. Killers of the Flower Moon so far is around 50:50.

The opening weekend for Oppenheimer was just below Taylor Swift's but eventually made 2x domestically and 4.5x internationally.
Fast X domestic total was below Taylor Swift's but made 80% internationally.

Killers of the Flower Moon is 38th worldwide this year:

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/world/?ref_=bo_nb_yld_tab

The top 20 mostly makes sense. This movies feels like it should at least be in position 20-30 but that would need another $40m. If it has enough time left in the theaters, maybe it can make it.

It has good reviews at least so it should measure well on streaming and the more of this quality of exclusive content, the better the Apple TV service will be.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/killers_of_the_flower_moon
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/oppenheimer_2023

stabitha_christie

mpantone said:

Stabitha_Christie said:

"bringing Apple just $23 million in its opening weekend"

That is 23 million domestically so you have left out over half of the movie's revenue. Was that done out of Ignorance or is the article intentionally misleading?

In the 14 days the movie has been out it has made almost 90 million dollars. 

No, US domestic box office revenue is a longtime standard film industry metric, going many decades back. In the old days (before digital delivery), a lot of international releases were staggered due to logistics (e.g., mailing out heavy film reels via distributors). Furthermore, the movie industry uses the weekend metric a lot (defined as Friday-Saturday-Sunday) since that's where the bulk of the foot traffic is.

By contrast in 2023 Apple can release their film/TV content simultaneously around the world.

The film industry continues to use this benchmark because it's a pretty good indication of a film's popularity relative to the most important film consumer market in the world: the USA.

Note international releases can still be staggered, just like the old film days. If Studio X releases Film A in five international markets the first weekend while Studio Y releases Film B in 37 international markets that same weekend, the international box office revenue may not be reflective of the film's popularity.

The other major important film industry benchmark is revenue per screen. Some films have more limited distribution but if the theaters are full, that's good for the producer. Many art films have limited releases. 

As a direct-to-consumer streaming service, Apple's revenue cannot be tracked by revenue per (theater) screen.

Film industry analysts look at the two metrics (US domestic box office + revenue per screen) side-by-side for theatrical releases as well as the dropoff after the initial launch weekend.

A good recent example of this is how well Taylor Swift's Eras Tour concert film did. Not only did she dominate at the US domestic box office, she also crushed it in revenue-per-screen. Remember that this is an AMC Theater exclusive for 13 weeks in the US market. Ticket prices were a little higher which drove up the latter metric. Taylor did not release the concert film via a studio, so she pockets the proceeds after paying AMC. (She has her own production company.)

Likewise Apple does not deal with studios or theatre chains. They handle the entire distribution on their own content delivery system (paying any partners of course).

Thus $10 million in box office receipts for A.) an Apple TV exclusive, B.) Taylor Swift's Eras Tour concert film, and C.) the Exorcist film represents three very different distribution strategies with the latter being the most traditional. Apple and Taylor will pocket more proceeds in the end, with the Exorcist producers taking home the least.

It's important to remember concerning this particular film "Killers of the Flower Moon" is that Apple pays a much smaller fee for the streaming rights. It's expensive to release films in theaters which is why some titles on the end went straight to DVD, skipping movie theaters. However the first state of the Hollywood film industry continues to judge movie success by box office (theater) revenue rather than streaming revenue or the old DVD sales.

The longtime Boxofficemojo.com website has tracked box office figures for over twenty years. The site is now owned by Amazon (under their IMDB portfolio on content sites).

I'm not sure what you are "no-ing" The numbers in my post were correct and the number cited in the article was provided without context.

foregoneconclusion

Personally, I think it’s hilarious that these movies are criticized as being “too long” even though the current standard for TV series is to require viewers to watch multiple seasons of material to get a full story. 

humbug1873

Apple doesn't put these movies in cinemas to make money but to make Oscars (you have to have old fashioned screenings for their consideration). So as long as they can cover their costs for bringing it into cinemas it's probably ok.