|
|
Post by Batflunkie on Mar 20, 2020 11:01:26 GMT -5
The movie it self suffers from 2 things: Valiant/Bloodshot a big name comic and then the Covid Virus limiting audiences even more. I do wonder if Video on Demand will help increase the money it takes in?!? What upset me during the trailers was "Based on the best selling comic book" and they didn't even bother to name drop Valiant or they thought they didn't need to because who at Sony understands comics amiright? I remember Dredd doing absolutely poorly at the box office because of all the misinformation about it being a remake of the Stallone movie (which is an honest to grud shame because it was really REALLY good). But then it got a second wind when it released to DVD and Blu-Ray. I want to hope the same will happen for Blooshot, but only time will tell |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2020 11:25:29 GMT -5
The movie it self suffers from 2 things: Valiant/Bloodshot a big name comic and then the Covid Virus limiting audiences even more. I do wonder if Video on Demand will help increase the money it takes in?!? What upset me during the trailers was "Based on the best selling comic book" and they didn't even bother to name drop Valiant or they thought they didn't need to because who at Sony understands comics amiright? I remember Dredd doing absolutely poorly at the box office because of all the misinformation about it being a remake of the Stallone movie (which is an honest to grud shame because it was really REALLY good). But then it got a second wind when it released to DVD and Blu-Ray. I want to hope the same will happen for Blooshot, but only time will tell They must have a different definition of best-selling than I do. In January 2020, whenthe marketing push was in full press but before the pandemic altered or suppressed sales numbers, the best selling Valiant book sold 8959 copies and was the 206th book in terms of units sold in the Diamond catalog, and it wasn't Bloodshot, but Quantum and Woody. Bloodshot sold 6007 copies placing it 275th on the Diamond list. All of the Valiant books sold less than reorders for an issue of Amazing Spider-Man (#33)that was 5 issues behind the current one (37 & 38). That book had reorders 2-3 months later of 8,975 and ranked 206th. The following publishers had books that sold more copies than the best selling Valiant book: Marvel and DC (no brainers), Dark Horse, IDW, Image (also expected), Dynamite & BOOM! (not surprising as they have their own sections in Previews now), Oni & Ablaze (a company that is less than a year old), and Archie, Ahoy & Titan had issues selling better than Bloodshot as well. That's not what I would call a best seller. Valiant isn't a best-seller, it's a small niche in a larger but still niche market. But Saying based on a niche comic only 6000 people read is not quite the marketing hyperbole they can use to market a movie. -M |
|
|
|
Post by Batflunkie on Mar 20, 2020 11:31:13 GMT -5
They must have a different definition of best-selling than I do. In January 2020, when the marketing push was in full press but before the pandemic altered or suppressed sales numbers, the best selling Valiant book sold 8959 copies and was the 206th book in terms of units sold in the Diamond catalog, and it wasn't Bloodshot, but Quantum and Woody. Bloodshot sold 6007 copies placing it 275th on the Diamond list. All of the Valiant books sold less than reorders for an issue of Amazing Spider-Man (#33)that was 5 issues behind the current one (37 & 38). That book had reorders 2-3 months later of 8,975 and ranked 206th. The following publishers had books that sold more copies than the best selling Valiant book: Marvel and DC (no brainers), Dark Horse, IDW, Image (also expected), Dynamite & BOOM! (not surprising as they have their own sections in Previews now), Oni & Ablaze (a company that is less than a year old), and Archie, Ahoy & Titan had issues selling better than Bloodshot as well. That's not what I would call a best seller. Valiant isn't a best-seller, it's a small niche in a larger but still niche market. But Saying based on a niche comic only 6000 people read is not quite the marketing hyperbole they can use to market a movie. They might have been looking at how much/how well the original Duane Swierczynski run sold, because that's what Valiant was hyping for their "Bloodshot Definitive Edition" release |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2020 11:40:18 GMT -5
They must have a different definition of best-selling than I do. In January 2020, when the marketing push was in full press but before the pandemic altered or suppressed sales numbers, the best selling Valiant book sold 8959 copies and was the 206th book in terms of units sold in the Diamond catalog, and it wasn't Bloodshot, but Quantum and Woody. Bloodshot sold 6007 copies placing it 275th on the Diamond list. All of the Valiant books sold less than reorders for an issue of Amazing Spider-Man (#33)that was 5 issues behind the current one (37 & 38). That book had reorders 2-3 months later of 8,975 and ranked 206th. The following publishers had books that sold more copies than the best selling Valiant book: Marvel and DC (no brainers), Dark Horse, IDW, Image (also expected), Dynamite & BOOM! (not surprising as they have their own sections in Previews now), Oni & Ablaze (a company that is less than a year old), and Archie, Ahoy & Titan had issues selling better than Bloodshot as well. That's not what I would call a best seller. Valiant isn't a best-seller, it's a small niche in a larger but still niche market. But Saying based on a niche comic only 6000 people read is not quite the marketing hyperbole they can use to market a movie. They might have been looking at how much/how well the original Duane Swierczynski run sold, because that's what Valiant was hyping for their "Bloodshot Definitive Edition" release It debuted at #77 on the list with 29,224 units sold in July of 2012. By issue #2, in August, it had dropped to 16,024 units and was #150, so essentially lost 50% of its sales in 1 month. #3 dropped to 14,517 but rose two spots to #148. By the end of 2012, it was down to 12,508 units and 158th on the list for December. So even at its highest point, it was 77th on the list and the only time it cracked the top 100. Still not what I would ever call a best-seller. -M |
|
|
|
Post by Batflunkie on Mar 20, 2020 12:07:27 GMT -5
It debuted at #77 on the list with 29,224 units sold in July of 2012. By issue #2, in August, it had dropped to 16,024 units and was #150, so essentially lost 50% of its sales in 1 month. #3 dropped to 14,517 but rose two spots to #148. By the end of 2012, it was down to 12,508 units and 158th on the list for December. So even at its highest point, it was 77th on the list and the only time it cracked the top 100. Still not what I would ever call a best-seller. Now I'm not stupid enough to think that they should be directly competing with the big two, but you'd think in almost 10 years, Valiant should have risen a little higher on the totem pole. I know Faith got a lot of publicity for a while from news outlets, but that was about it |
|
|
|
Post by hondobrode on Mar 20, 2020 19:51:49 GMT -5
I think by best selling they were referring to Valiant original glory days when they truly were best selling. It was the 90's and Valiant was a big part of the boom back then.
Bloodshot # 1 from 1993 sold 186,500 copies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Batflunkie on Mar 20, 2020 19:53:44 GMT -5
I think by best selling they were referring to Valiant original glory days when they truly were best selling. It was the 90's and Valiant was a big part of the boom back then. Bloodshot # 1 from 1993 sold 186,500 copies. Well getting mentioned in Wizard helped them a lot, also need we forget the speculator market |
|
|
|
Post by hondobrode on Mar 20, 2020 20:04:22 GMT -5
It doesn't matter.
They sold a lot of copies.
Does it matter if even one copy was read ?
No
"based on the best-selling comic book"
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2020 20:52:21 GMT -5
I would have preferred more transparency then, "Based on the best-selling comic from a company we had nothing to do with but raided its corpse to buy the brand name and IP from, who we are only a pale imitation of..." would be more accurate.
edit to add: now that I think about it, it should also add this line" ...imitation of...who was then bought out by a Chinese megacorp who fired all the people responsible for raiding the corpse and created the new Valiant in the first place, and whose product is a pale shadow (in sales) of the pale shadow of the original.
That pretty much sums up what the current Valiant is.
-M
|
|
|
|
Post by hondobrode on Mar 25, 2020 22:46:15 GMT -5
I would have preferred more transparency then, "Based on the best-selling comic from a company we had nothing to do with but raided its corpse to buy the brand name and IP from, who we are only a pale imitation of..." would be more accurate. edit to add: now that I think about it, it should also add this line" ...imitation of...who was then bought out by a Chinese megacorp who fired all the people responsible for raiding the corpse and created the new Valiant in the first place, and whose product is a pale shadow (in sales) of the pale shadow of the original. That pretty much sums up what the current Valiant is. -M
Yeah because that would have been Marketing brilliance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2020 23:31:22 GMT -5
I would have preferred more transparency then, "Based on the best-selling comic from a company we had nothing to do with but raided its corpse to buy the brand name and IP from, who we are only a pale imitation of..." would be more accurate. edit to add: now that I think about it, it should also add this line" ...imitation of...who was then bought out by a Chinese megacorp who fired all the people responsible for raiding the corpse and created the new Valiant in the first place, and whose product is a pale shadow (in sales) of the pale shadow of the original. That pretty much sums up what the current Valiant is. -M Yeah because that would have been Marketing brilliance.
People are going to find out their claim was essentially bogus anyways. I know they wouldn't use the transparent marketing I suggested, but their claim is only going to lose them credibility with anyone who knows how to do a google search and has a passing interest in the movie or comics, so it the claim is simply setting themselves up for failure and audiences losing faith in their credibility. That itself, is worth more than anything else when trying to build a franchise. You lose the faith of the audience on something in your initial offering, you are never going to get that back. Audiences are fickle and they expect a certain amount of hyperbole in movie marketing, but if you go too far or they feel you are deliberately misleading them, they feel disrespected and they're gone, and you ain't going to see their asses in the seats for anything else you do. You have to adjust your marketing to the reality of a world where people have instant access to search engines and know immediately when you are trying to blow smoke up their ass. If they wanted to play on their history and not alienate fans something like "Based on the comic from the company that revolutionized the comic landscape in the 90s and continues to thrill comic audiences of today" or something along those lines that promotes their past success but doesn't deliberately mislead audiences and risk alienating them before they ever see the movie. -M |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2020 0:58:03 GMT -5
Sadly, Valiant is one of the handful of publishers that gave the complete pencils down order to all their creatives, and from what I understand won't be paying them for work already done on unfinished issues. Creators weren't told the books they were working on were on hiatus, but instead were told all projects moving forward have been cancelled and their status will be evaluated at a later date. Many creators are taking this as an indication there will be no pencils up order forthcoming on the other side, and Valiant seems to be the poster child for publishers who folks think will not emerge from the current industry wide hiatus and will be one of the casualties of the pandemic (Aspen is the other). Apparently the Chinese financier who bought them out was having some cash flow issues before the pandemic hit and is making several moves to cut expenses and shut down less profitable divisions under their umbrella. It's all rumors and speculation right now, but the under-performance of the Bloodshot movie (not necessarily it's fault under the circumstances, but that's no consolation for lost revenue or losing money on the project overall) and it's mediocre at best critical and audience reactions have added fuel to that fire.
I hope this isn't the case, simply because I hate to see less opportunities out there for creators, but even when we get to the other side, the marketplace for comics is going to be a vastly different landscape than it was going in to the pandemic-caused shutdown.
-M
|
|
|
|
Post by Batflunkie on Apr 4, 2020 8:53:49 GMT -5
Whelp, so long Valiant, thanks for the memories
|
|
|
|
Post by hondobrode on Apr 18, 2020 23:19:18 GMT -5
Just downloaded the movie and watched it again and liked it more the second time.
I thought it was pretty impressive for being done on a thin budget with a character practically no one has ever heard of.
Rumor has it that John Cena might be playing X-O Manowar. He certainly looks the part.
As far as Vin Diesel, I like that he's a little older, like some of us, and isn't perfect perfect and still pulled off a killing machine role.
|
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Apr 23, 2020 16:22:44 GMT -5
Just watched it.
Meh.
|
|
