{"id":152139,"date":"2022-12-08T21:09:11","date_gmt":"2022-12-08T21:09:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/harchi90.com\/the-rocks-black-adam-box-office-damage-control-is-embarrassing\/"},"modified":"2022-12-08T21:09:11","modified_gmt":"2022-12-08T21:09:11","slug":"the-rocks-black-adam-box-office-damage-control-is-embarrassing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/harchi90.com\/the-rocks-black-adam-box-office-damage-control-is-embarrassing\/","title":{"rendered":"The Rock’s Black Adam Box Office Damage Control Is Embarrassing"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Image: Warner Bros.<\/figcaption><\/p>\n<\/figure>\n

A few days after Variety reported that the Dwayne Johnson-led Black Man<\/em> was looking like it was going to fail to return much of a profit\u2014if any\u2014Deadline has come out with a piece stating that the Variety article is wrong, actually, and Black Man<\/em> <\/em>is doing just fine in the box office. The star himself has also chimed in.<\/p>\n

\u201cWaited to confirm with financiers before I shared this excellent #BlackMan<\/a> news – our movie will PROFIT between $52M-$72M. Fact,\u201d the star tweeted<\/a>. \u201cAt almost $400M worldwide we are building our new franchise step by step (first Captain America did $370M) for the DC future.\u201d<\/p>\n

Read more<\/p>\n

He then linked to the aforementioned Deadline article, which cites \u201cfilm finance sources, meaning people who do this for a living and those close to the movie,\u201d a very<\/em> peculiar way of framing those sources. After going through the math to explain the modest profit the film would turn, the article additionally cites \u201cmerchandise\u201d as a form of back-channel profit in an attempt to sure up Black Man<\/em>‘s potential to make money instead of lose it, which is true… but doesn’t affect the dire box office numbers one bit, and isn’t really something worth counting in the conversation at all (one that also conveniently doesn’t t factor things like theaters’ cuts of ticket sales, and so on).<\/p>\n

But no matter what’s true, Variety’s reporting or Deadline’s, let’s really focus on that comparison between Black Man<\/em> and Captain America: The First Avenger<\/em> that both Deadline and Johnson highlight as somewhat nebulous proof that Black Man<\/em>‘s alleged meager profit could guarantee it a sequel.<\/em> It’s bonkers that anyone would look at these two films\u2014released 10 years apart\u2014and assume the millions in question are going to be a one-to-one comparison. yes, at the time, The First Avengers<\/em> grossed about $370 million globally, on a budget of approximately $140 million. However, adjusting for inflation, it <\/em>made around $490 million in today’s valuation. Plus, Captain America: The First Avenger <\/em>wasn’t even the highest-grossing Marvel movie in 2011\u2014Thor<\/em> beat it out with a whopping $450 million, which would be nearly $600 million today. So is Johnson saying he, a star much more powerful than Chris Evans or Chris Hemsworth were when they starred in their 2011 Marvel debuts, is on the same level?<\/p>\n