1994 Street Fighter movie starring Van Damme is still a money maker, according to latest Capcom shareholder meeting
- Thread starter Bishop89
- Start date
35 years I was led to believe that this was a terrible video game movie and when I finally watched it a few years ago it was quite entertaining and hilarious to boot.
And when discussing the Street fighter movie with my brother, my mom just casually says, oh yeah I saw Raul Julia when he played Dracula in a stage play. So random.
And when discussing the Street fighter movie with my brother, my mom just casually says, oh yeah I saw Raul Julia when he played Dracula in a stage play. So random.
The guy that played Vega went on you play the guy that says "copulate" a thousand times in Metal Gear Solid V.
You're not thinking like a Hollywood exec. The example of Men in Black is perfect as the film came out in 1997. It had a budget of $90million, and made over $550million worldwide box office, but it's apparently never made a penny of profit... the DVDs/Blu rays/streaming... all profitless.
Yet it's had 3 sequels, all of which similarly failed to turn any profit despite the box office being higher than the budget.
Hollywood studios do this for every film, as it cuts down taxes or something, so it's refreshing to see a company that isn't in that clique exposing some truths about movie profitability, especially as SF the movie only made $99million at the box office.
Gonna need both the arcade and Saturn versions ported! Im serious... gimme those ports.
Also, Id have honestly assumed SF The Movie lost money, but the ways its phrased is one to suggests that it made money and continues to do so... somehow.
Also, Im way more interested to hear about SFVI's performance per what was elluded to in the quote, I know it did strong numbers thanks to Akuma but Im curious just how good.
Confused Zangief is one of the best gags of the movie… I should really pull out my copy for a rewatch
It's always funny to think they used it to test out some of the big mechanic shifts of all games. I have a Saturn copy, it's a surprisingly solid game since it's just a SF2 reskin with minor revisions
Men in Black made a profit. I dont know why you think it didn't. You're talking about how participation statements don't actually reflect real numbers and aren't a reflection of actual profit. Which has nothing to do with actual accounting profitability. I don't think you quite understand what Hollywood accounting is. Hollywood does not do whatever nonsense you think they do. Just cause Ed Solomon has a shitty net profit deal on Men in Black that'll never pay really has nothing to do with whether the film is profitable or not.
Last edited:
According to the screenwriter it still hadn't turned a profit in 2019 when the 4th film came out(https://twitter.com/ed_solomon/status/1139031900931198976)
The screenwriter can tell you whether his shitty net profit deal is paying. It's not, they rarely if ever do. It has no reflection at all on actual film profitability. Men in Black would be profitibile long, long before that deal woild ever pay. Will Smith? Tommy LeeJones? They're statements pay money.
This reads to me like the screenwriter got shafted in the contract and isn't making any money. But just because he isn't doesn't mean the film didn't.
Streaming services at this point. Old catalogue movies/tv shows generate billions from Netflix/Amazon Prime and the rest. Wouldn't be much of a surprise if a cult classic like SF movie is worth a few hundred thousand dollars in streaming value each year (that would equate to tens of millions of yen).
Big blockbusters are worth millions of dollars per year in streaming value, the biggest are likely worth tens of millions of dollars per year as are major TV shows like Seinfeld, Office, Suits, etc. that generate loads of streaming viewership.
It's probably worth noting that the yen is so weak right now that one million yen is only like $6K USD. I would be shocked if any studio movie on a streaming catalogue wasn't worth at least $10K USD a year, or more than a million yen. We're not ultimately talking about that much money.
The behind the scenes was pretty crazy
'I punched him so hard he cried': inside the Street Fighter movie
In 1993, writer/director Steven de Souza battled a military coup, an ever-growing cast list and a self-destructing Jean-Claude Van Damme – and came out with a profitable picturewww.theguardian.com
I remember reading another long article about the fascinating train wreck that was this movie's production.
This movie is undeniably "so bad it's good" to me, but the story of how it was made is legitimately engrossing.
Yeah, there's no way this thing only brings in 10k of revenue. They probably sell more than that in DVD each year, ignoring all the licensing and EHV and whatnot.
Well, he didnt get shafted. Most writers get a net profit deal. It's the worst deal. It only pays if your film is truly a monster hit. But most writers do not get any better. So hard to say he got shafted. Not like him getting better was really in the cards.
Yeah, with no costs it shouldn't be surprising that an unpopular movie still makes a few hundred thousand dollars a year.
Iconic movie. I had both this and the Mortal Kombat movie on VHS and wore them both out. I can probably still quote both movies fairly well.
Damn, didn't see that coming, or should I say...
I love quoting this movie. So many great lines!
I'm not surprised it still makes money as it's an infamously fun movie. But tens of Millions? That's fucking wild. lol. I'm curious if there was a surge after Bison was announced for SF6? No doubt even back in the day before the movie came out the character was popular but I think that movie is why that character is popular enough to never truly go away. As entertaining as certain things unrelated to Bison in that movie are, Raul Julia is why watching that movie is actually a mostly entertaining and worthwhile experience. He's why that movie matters. As played out as the "Tuesday" quote is, it's still a truly great all timer villain line.
That's the point though. You cook the books to make it look like it never made a dime so you don't have to pay anyone shit.
It's obviously bullshit but Hollywood is really good at it. So on paper it's a great deal but in execution? It's horrible.
OP
OP
No. You don't have to cook the books. Do you even know what a net profit deal is? Cause you don't need to do anything funky to make that deal not pay. You guys heard Hollywood accounting and actually think that means they just cook all their books. Like really people? Need I say again wat that writer is looking at is not actual profitibility. It's something else.
'I punched him so hard he cried': inside the Street Fighter movie
In 1993, writer/director Steven de Souza battled a military coup, an ever-growing cast list and a self-destructing Jean-Claude Van Damme – and came out with a profitable picture
Best Chun-Li ever.
JCVD and Minogue are terrible in it. Raul Julia obviously nailed it, but the other cast weren't too bad.
Film itself not too bad. Worst thing is the special moves barely feature.
Film itself not too bad. Worst thing is the special moves barely feature.
Good info. Ultimately though, my read of that tweet is still that the screenwriter not making any money != the movie not being profitable, which appears to be correct.
Also, a systemic shafting is a still a shafting.
Do you even know that there's a whole Wikipedia page about this issue with multiple accounts of high-profile lawsuits?
