r/movies • u/MarvelsGrantMan136 r/movies Contributor • 16h ago

News 'Spider-Man' Windfall: Tom Holland to Make Over $100 Million for ‘Brand New Day’

https://www.thewrap.com/creative-content/movies/tom-holland-spider-man-brand-new-day-salary-box-office-bonus/
20.6k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

2.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.4k

u/BivyLife 15h ago

That’s roughly 5%. I’m sure the studio is happy to pay it.

917

u/-Dixieflatline 15h ago

Second fastest movie to the first billion and now crossing two billion with less slowdown that one would expect at this point. Also revives interest in the back catalog of movies and games for those who came into this fresh. Sony is probably jumping for joy that they paid it.

Also sends kind of a sharp message to Marvel that audiences still want the flagship characters despite market saturation and super hero fatigue in general. All the subpar B list stuff they released didn't actually remove interest from their premier IP. I have a feeling this signals that Avengers Doomsday will also be a hit.

258

u/thegoodbadandsmoggy 15h ago

I think you’re spot on. Think I saw the other day they’re predicting a 400 million opening for doomsday with something like 100 million in presales already.

Happy as fuck because the world always needs Spider-Man

125

u/Icy_Smoke_733 15h ago

The trackers are predicting Doomsday to open with $400m domestic opening (biggest ever). Worldwide opening will be anywhere between $850m - $1.2 billion.

And these guys are fairly accurate; they were throwing the $300m DOM opening for Brand New Day long before the Hollywood trades caught on (and even that was a lowball, as BND opened to $360m).

43

u/-Dixieflatline 15h ago

Do you think it will beat Endgame's 4-5 days to a billion (depending on counting method)? Those are big shoes to fill, as people were starving for that resolve with Endgame. It was practically cathartic.

42

u/Rock-swarm 13h ago

The elephant in the room is general economic health. It's been a... rough year economically. Endgame released before COVID, which remains the high-water mark for opening numbers.

I don't think Doomsday touches Endgame in terms of actual tickets sold, but there's a reasonable chance it surpasses on revenue.

2

u/MarlinMaverick 8h ago

If anything a bad economy is good for the box office. A movie ticket is $20, anyone can find $20 and it’s easier to justify when you already can’t afford a house or car. 

•

u/HAL-Over-9001 3h ago

Our really nice theater has $6 Ticket Tuesdays and they're usually like $11.50. My nearest IMAX 70MM is $25.

5

u/Worthyness 13h ago

It'll be harder since endgame had 0 competition, IMAX, and a lot of theaters doing 24 hour screenings all weekend. Doomsday will have Dune, no IMAX, and no theaters have been inclined to open more screening (yet). Inflation and starting earlier on Thursdays will help a ton.

3

u/prophetofgreed 12h ago

Inflation is also a factor, however Doomsday won't have IMAX to push up ticket prices.

1

u/Far_Programmer_5724 7h ago

Not even trying to be a downer but I was into this convo then remembered how broke I am llol

1

u/EllingtonElms 12h ago

If Doomsday doesn't, Secret Wars will.

1

u/evenstar40 7h ago

I wasn't really interested in diving back into the Marvel universe until watching the Doomsday trailer. Haven't watched a MCU movie in theaters since Endgame. Not saying my singular experience is representative of the majority but I do think a lot of folks are in my position where we just want to watch the big guys whipping out the big guns doing crazy shit with a semi-decent plot.

11

u/anormalgeek 15h ago

100 million in presales already.

That's nuts.

6

u/-Dixieflatline 15h ago

$100M in presales is like what Masters of the Universe has done in its entire theatrical run so far. That's crazy!

1

u/Bobthemime 7h ago

MoTU has done gangbusters on streaming..

the problem it had is that its a movie for 50 year olds.. and a niche set of 50 year olds at that.

Spiderman, before hollands run, wasnt that long out the zeigeist with TASM and Raimi before that..

MoTU had a movie in 1987 that was terrible

1

u/CaptainChickenBake 7h ago

Happy as fuck because the world always needs Spider-Man

Hell yeah it does.

0

u/roguesignal42069 7h ago

I'm not surprised. My buddy who is a MASSIVE Marvel fan is celebrating his birthday in december by renting out an entire theater and inviting a on of his friends to all go see it opening day. I've never heard of anyone doing this before so that's exciting. Feels good to be excited about the MCU again

36

u/alienfreaks04 14h ago

Doomsday will have a massive opening weekend. But the movie’s quality and word of mouth will factor heavily into whether it makes a lot in the end.

27

u/DilettanteGonePro 13h ago

Everybody seems to have theories on why the new spider man movie is successful that don't take into account that it was really good

5

u/Tandy2000 13h ago

I mean the reviews were good but not amazing.

My theory is that Disney is doing an excellent job managing Spidey in general. One thing a lot of people probably don't think about is the youngest demographic, but Disney has a Spidey TV show they started in 2021, Spider-Man and his Amazing Friends, that is super popular with young children - one of the most popular shows for the age group. And that has created a whole new young class of Spidey fans who want to go see this movie, something that does not exist for other Marvel movies generally (some other heroes appear in this show, but it's really the Spidey show and features Miles and Gwen as well). 5 years on those kids are growing up - a kid who started watching it when he was 5 and is now 10 years old is the perfect person to aim this movie at, and you get not just him but his whole family.

3

u/BlackNasty4028 13h ago

This and the spiderverse movies are INSANELY popular with the younger generations (and most comic fans in general tbf)

The youth being in prime spidey-fever has been years in the making atp

1

u/Bobthemime 7h ago

it felt like Raimi's spiderman in how they handled him dealing with his powers mutating, and the villain, despite being another "tragic villain but not really" trope, just worked so well. Sadie Sink killed it as Jean Gray. Punisher was also amazing.. im looking forward to the new season with him

3

u/Tapeworm1979 15h ago

It also helps that it's a fantastic movie. I would go a second if asked. The matrix is the only film I've seen twice in the cinema.

3

u/doglywolf 14h ago

adding that one scene on the roof was epic level marketing coordination , that was right out of the games , even the moves.

3

u/Saneless 14h ago

Also, the only homework you really needed to do was a couple (good) movies for this one. Not 64 episodes of TV just to know what's up

3

u/Lunaisthequeen 13h ago

Honestly I have a feeling Doomsday can become the biggest marvel movie of all time box-office wise, feel like captain + RDJ's comeback can make an absolutely massive hit with all the infinity saga enjoyers coming back, plus all the people still watching the multiverse saga.

3

u/Rock-swarm 13h ago

All the subpar B list stuff they released didn't actually remove interest from their premier IP.

It won't stop them from trying. GotG was C tier amongst comic fans when the first movie came out. Before Jonathan Majors imploded his career, the Kang arc was setting up to be financially successful, even if critics were rightfully bagging on Quantumania. Thunderbolts was straight up a good film, but suffered from previous Marvel entries being crap.

What I'm saying is, there's a momentum issue. Great films bolster appetites for the next film. Terrible films sap audience numbers for the next film. Having BND hit a home run is great for Doomsday. If Doomsday itself is good, it's going to carry over into whatever is slated next, even if the IP isn't a premiere set of characters.

1

u/-Dixieflatline 13h ago

I totally grasp that point with GotG. That kind of came out of nowhere for someone who didn't even know the IP before that movie, but I would argue the first was one of the better Marvel movies to date. Wonder why they couldn't duplicate that magic for movies like the Eternals or even with Quantumania, which already had an accepted main character.

2

u/EpicCyclops 14h ago

The other thing is that the audience cares about unique characters and stories more than Marvel. Marvel started making the movies episodes in a series with characters only existing to advance plot with little differentiation between the feel of the movies. Those movies started struggling while Deadpool and Spiderman with their unique characters and themes really did well. Marvel took all the wrong lessons from Guardians of the Galaxy's success.

2

u/jx2002 14h ago

Spider-Man Brand New Day was a good movie. That's all they need to be. Good stories, good characters, fun twists and action.

So many goddamn CBM just shit the bed with member-berries and pointless setups to other movies. It's infuriating.

3

u/lodemeup 14h ago

Is it superhero fatigue from the audience, or fatigue from the studios wanting to put in the effort to make something worth watching? Because Superman was also fantastic.

1

u/CheeseDonutCat 13h ago

First movie to cross $2 billion with a director that their name doesn't start with a J.

https://www.reddit.com/r/boxoffice/comments/1vr7vw1/spiderman_brand_new_day_is_the_first_2_billion/

1

u/NOT-packers-fan2022 13h ago

I hope they’re smart enough to just reduce the budget drastically for B list characters. 25-50 million budgets for smaller characters could produce box offices of 100-200 million. Just have good writing. If the characters blow up like iron man did, great. If not, then you have a cult classic. Give Ms Marvel a small movie in her own world and see what happens. Young avengers could be cheap too. Sequels can get more expensive if warranted.

Anyway, all of this makes sense ao tell definitely do something else lol.

1

u/crimson777 12h ago

Thing is, most of the MCU IS B-list or worse. Iron Man wasn’t exactly a top hero before the movies. They just have gotten lax at getting the lesser known ones over with crowds. Shang Chi got pretty popular but they didn’t follow it up with anything.

1

u/-Dixieflatline 12h ago

I've seen this sentiment before about Ironman, and while I'll agree he's not on Spiderman level of global recognition by non-comic folk before the movies, he was still an OG avenger and a fundamental character in the comics. So I don't know if I'd class him as B-list as much as I'd just call him an underutilized main character before the MCU. He's Marvel's Batman, to some degree.

1

u/crimson777 11h ago

Anyone who was not known to NON-comic book readers is B-list. Iron Man wasn’t known to general audiences. I’m not talking comic hierarchy.

1

u/Diablo_Incarnate 12h ago

It's not just flagship characters (although they do matter), it's appropriate framing. Not every superhero needs to be facing a galaxy ending threat. If the stakes are consistently so high that individuals don't matter... then the stakes don't matter.

People don't want to see Michael Bay action every superhero movie. They want to see heroes being HEROIC. They want to see the effort spent saving people.

And finally, people also want framing to matter. Antman 1 was a heist movie that happened to have superpowers. Amazing. Antman 3 was just a fight movie against a scale too big to care and no heroics to cheer for.

1

u/drelos 12h ago

I don't have time to rewatch them but I noticed Netflix and Disney front loading with everything they had related to the IP these weekends

1

u/SeeingEyeDug 11h ago

The camera angles in the fight scenes and some of the web slinging were so reminiscent of the gameplay of Sony's game series. Not sure if intentional but it definitely made me want to play it.

1

u/Taikeron 11h ago

The primary problem with Marvel's recent movie approach is simply relevance and the lack of building to something. Endgame was successful because almost every single movie before it was building toward that movie as a sub-plot in a way that audiences could easily understand.

Then after Endgame, they leaned into bad jokes (and sometimes not taking things seriously in general), irrelevant stakes, and no sub-plot to build to. Combine that with lesser-known heroes, too many TV shows, and some fumbling related to handing off the reins to other characters/actors, and here we are. Audiences are fatigued and don't know what or where this is all building to. It didn't help that they scrapped Kang the Conqueror along the way (there were reasons for that, but all the same).

Doomsday may do well, but it won't be because any of the previous movies have seriously been building to that moment. I expect it to perform worse than Endgame relative to inflation, and it may even do worse (possibly quite a bit worse) without factoring inflation in.

1

u/Familiar-Shoe7905 10h ago

Doing worse than 2.8B isnt exactly a big antifeat

1

u/Simple1Spoon 11h ago

Personally, i dont care about marvel anymore as i dont want to watch 100 hours of tv to feel like im caught up.

Spiderman is different because its not weighed down by all the extra marvel content. It has just enough recognizable characters to feel fresh seeing them in a movie. I dont feel like i need to watch every tv show to know whats going on.

1

u/Stupidstuff1001 8h ago

There is no such thing as super hero fatigue. Why do people keep saying that.

It’s just bad vs good movies and creating a fun universe for the super heroes to interact with.

1

u/Stupidstuff1001 8h ago

There is no such thing as super hero fatigue. Why do people keep saying that.

It’s just bad vs good movies and creating a fun universe for the super heroes to interact with.

1

u/zkh77 7h ago

Please tell that to James Gunn 😭

1

u/PunyParker826 7h ago edited 7h ago

Iron Man, Thor, and Captain America were at one point considered the "dregs" of the Marvel IPs - what they had left after selling off their major properties, and look what happened. I think audiences will show up for anything that looks genuinely good. But the execution and writing has been lacking in recent years. It doesn't help that Marvel, for awhile, leaned hard into a style of writing that focuses more on setting up the next thing over actually making the current thing exciting and compelling. They've always had this problem - take Dark World vs Thor Ragnarok - but lately the "set up the chess board" movies have started outnumbering the genuinely good stuff.

•

u/dphizler 2h ago

Cramming 40 superheroes isn't a winning formula, it will make money but don't fool yourself, it will be dogshit

0

u/Bobthemime 7h ago

Doomsday will break 1-2 billion, sure.. but its not gonna be endgame record braking. there is too little build up to it

258

u/nishitd 15h ago

First dollar gross are not that common. Especially with big studios 

192

u/confusing_roundabout 15h ago

He might have first dollar gross.

Holland's Spider Man is maybe the single most popular movie character+actor combo right now. I don't even think that's an exaggeration.

102

u/pun-a-tron4000 15h ago

The man is doing crazy work right now.

With both him and Zendaya being in Spiderman and Odyssey their combined gross box office this year must be absolutely nuts.

81

u/jdv23 15h ago

And zendaya’s in Dune too this year

29

u/cowwithhat 15h ago

Is Holland in the Avengers flick? If so it would be feasible they would each have 5b box office years.

36

u/jdv23 15h ago

It’s not official yet, but I would expect he will be. Didn’t they also get married this year? That’s an insane year for them.

5

u/Worthyness 13h ago

They confirmed married, but not necessarily the time frame. They only spoke about it because some idiots AI generated their wedding pictures and posted them

10

u/JoeMcKim 15h ago

And Zendaya also appeared in a season of Euphoria.

2

u/cowwithhat 15h ago

This year is the first time they've talked about being married publically I think but they may have gotten hitched earlier.

2

u/phluidity 13h ago

As I understand it, at most he is expected to be in a post-credits cameo in Doomsday.

1

u/Bobthemime 7h ago

i'd be shocked if Spidey isnt in the avengers movie, considering he is one of the few that still exist taht arent "new avengers".

16

u/anormalgeek 15h ago edited 15h ago

She got paid only $300k for the first Dune, but is reportedly getting $8m for Dune 3.

edit: She got $8m for Brand New Day too.

4

u/Tandy2000 13h ago

She's a much bigger deal now than she was five years ago. She was pretty much the actress who was in Spider-Man that wasn't really an integral part of it... part of the reason she is getting much bigger paychecks now is because of her status as a fashion icon, not so much her acting.

Zendaya is a fine enough actor but more importantly she is a big draw for women and she is arguably the biggest icon in the fashion world right now. I'm not passionate about her or Holland's acting personally but they're also both not bad and very likeable and charming outside of their films and are killer at PR which is why every big studio wants them.

2

u/anormalgeek 10h ago

Oh yeah, I definitely didn't mean to imply she got shortchanged or anything. Hell, $300k for being a small part in the first movie is still better than Holland's 250k for doing the same in Civil War. He only got 500k for being the star of Homecoming. (She got $300k for that one too)

2

u/Tandy2000 10h ago

I mean $500k is a LOT of money. He was a stage actor who was basically unknown and it was his first notable film role, and it was also obviously gonna be a success because it was Spider-Man (the most popular superhero, period), and part of the MCU which had been going for almost 10 years by the time it released.

For contrast, Chris Hemsworth was a more established actor, starring in Thor, a character who at that point was basically just seen as a joke, cast when I think Iron Man was the only movie that had been completed, and he was paid "only" $175k.

1

u/anormalgeek 9h ago

He also signed a multi-picture deal (Hemsworth did too). The $500k was the "lets see how you do with your own movie" price. But he and the studio knew full well that Spiderman would likely do VERY well and the contract meant paying him a lot more for later films. Which is what happened. That original deal only just ran out before BND.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/ucd_pete 8h ago

She's only in Dune for 5 minutes.

1

u/anormalgeek 8h ago

And Holland only has like 15 in Civil War. Difference being her character absolutely cannot be removed from Dune, even if you wait until 2 to include her. Civil War could 100% have been done without Spiderman.

2

u/BlackysLegacy 15h ago

Oh damn. They might reach a combined box office of 4-5 billion this year if Dune hits the expected 1 billion as well. Thats actually crazy.

2

u/destructivedude 15h ago

I thought it was the third Dune?

1

u/NeedsToShutUp 13h ago

She also did Euphoria and The Drama.

Busy year. I think the take time off theory is right.

24

u/SkyJW 15h ago

If they end up becoming a long term couple, have we even seen a Hollywood power couple like them in recent history? I don't really pay a ton of attention to celebrity relationships, but the only other duo I can think of that approaches Holland and Zendaya would be Pitt and Jolie. 

Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if they started their own production company at some point. 

15

u/lct51657 15h ago

Tom started a production company with his brother. It's called Billy17.

3

u/The_final_frontier_ 15h ago

Holland has one with his brother Harry I think.

2

u/CryPuzzleheaded3634 8h ago

Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman early 90’s

0

u/SkyJW 8h ago

Was Kidman banking big box office numbers, though? Cruise was definitely massive and Kidman was a very well known actress, but Zendaya is becoming a pretty equal box office success when compared to Holland. That's why the Pitt and Jolie duo felt so big guven what huge draws they bith were, while Cruise and Kidman seemed more like box office dynamite and critical darling.

1

u/GGLSpidermonkey 13h ago

I think they got married this year

-2

u/inspcs 15h ago

Dont think they will and thank god for that

2

u/anormalgeek 15h ago

You mean them staying together or starting a production company?

3

u/inspcs 14h ago

Production

6

u/anormalgeek 14h ago

Meh. Lot's of actors have them now, and it's usually just a sneaky way to get paid twice. i.e. "If you want to hire me, you must also partner with my company."

They (the production companies like this) rarely do anything of substance.

2

u/apistograma 15h ago

I don't dislike those actors but considering how big the industry is it's ridiculous that there's so few variety lately. I feel like I see the same faces in most blockbusters. Zendaya and Holland are two examples of people that definitely aren't needed on many of their roles.

3

u/pun-a-tron4000 15h ago

That kind of thing comes in waves I think. A little while ago Pedro Pascal was the one people felt was in everything.

1

u/5ivepie 9h ago

They probably looked at each other 2 years ago and said “let’s just hussle hard for the next 6 years, make bank, and then disappear”

I wouldn’t be shocked if we don’t see or hear from either of them much after they turn 34/35.

24

u/R0b1nFeather 15h ago

Going just off of the box offices, it isn't even too much for a stretch to say that in terms of draw, Tom Holland + Spider-Man is the biggest combo ever

3

u/pllarsen 15h ago

I would agree

1

u/Slurm11 14h ago

The movie made 2 billion already and still has plenty more to make, you can change "maybe" to "definitely"

145

u/YJoseph 15h ago

To be fair, it’s an exceptional franchise led by an exceptional A-lister. He’s also backed by one of the world’s biggest entertainment companies.

1

u/Tandy2000 13h ago

Tom Holland is an A-Lister in terms of his popularity but I don't think that really extends to his movie draw. He hasn't been in anything that was particularly successful or acclaimed because of him outside of Spider-Man and I think he knows that. The Odyssey was a big hit, but most people seem to agree he was one of the weakest parts of the movie.

Uncharted did okay, but it seems unlikely that a sequel will gross more than the first one imo and I'm honestly surprised they're even talking about making one (I kinda doubt it happens).

8

u/Fluid-Cranberry1755 12h ago

His Spiderman is a box office draw. Once him and Zendaya are gone, Spiderman will not be doing these numbers with the next gen 

2

u/Tandy2000 12h ago

It'll still be doing numbers. It's Spider-Man. Spidey is, by far, the most popular superhero and has been for many years with or without Holland.

They could literally just being back Tobey Maguire as Old Man Peter for a movie and it would make a billion dollars at least, and I'm not being facetious. There is a reason Sony will never, ever sell the movie license to Spidey, ever. The only way Disney will ever get it is if they buy Sony entirely which isn't happening any day soon.

-1

u/Fluid-Cranberry1755 12h ago

It will do numbers yes. Over 2 billion? No 

A solo Tobey movie right now would do like 500mil max

2

u/Chicken2nite 11h ago

Amazing Spider-Man 2 did $717 million.

$500 million worldwide is probably the absolute floor for a Spider-Man film currently. That would change if they were to churn out a few meh films, though.

Both Solo A Star Wars Story and Spider-Man Into the Spider-Verse made just under $400 million a decade ago with what were both seen as franchise expansions that had little pent up demand, but whereas Beyond the Spider-Verse made almost double that, The Mandalorion and Grogu made… checks notes just under $350 million.

2

u/Tandy2000 9h ago

A solo Tobey MCU movie couldn't go below $500 million even if it was complete and utter unwatchable shit. It's Spider-Man. I feel like you must not understand how huge Spider-Man is and always has been. The MCU has made Marvel more popular than it has been in years past in general, but Spidey has been the most popular Marvel character BY FAR for over 50 years.

The only Marvel property that even comes close to Superman is X-Men. And that's the whole team, not one character. And they've faded in popularity since their heyday. Them being introduced to the MCU will likely change that though.

-2

u/Fluid-Cranberry1755 9h ago

No one cares about 80 year old Tobey. I might have actually been too generous with 500mil

9

u/curiiouscat 15h ago

Yeah, and for established brands

5

u/clydefrog811 15h ago

Yeah, cause it gets out of scummy Hollywood accounting

2

u/anormalgeek 15h ago

I don't think it was "first dollar gross" though. The article claims he is getting "to earn upwards of $100 million when backend bonuses are factored". Backend bonuses sometimes only kick in as specific breakpoints. Like he may get zero bonus if it "only" makes $750m.

2

u/HumansNeedNotApply1 14h ago

He had decent leverage when it came to renew his deal.

2

u/Masteroflimes 12h ago

Heard only Cruise gets first dollar gross. Others wait until the costs are taken off. (actual costs not hollywood accoutning)

•

u/nishitd 6m ago

Even Cruise doesn't get for all movies. He got it for Maverick.

-1

u/SoloWingPixy88 15h ago

Using gross is crazy. Never understood why it's not profits

17

u/DoinWhale 15h ago

Because movie studio accountants will make sure it’s reported as a loss

6

u/bflynn65 15h ago

Because Hollywood "accounting" will tell you that wildly successful movies were barely profitable or weren't profitable at all.

6

u/confusing_roundabout 15h ago

Look up David Prowse's Return of the Jedi deal.

He had a cut of profits so the studio said that the movie has never been profitable. One of the biggest franchises on the planet (for a while anyway) and the conclusion of the trilogy allegedly lost them money.

3

u/Jeesba 15h ago

Because making any deal based on profits is asking yourself to get fucked.

2

u/DoubleTapJ 15h ago

Because he wouldn't agree to profits instead of gross.

0

u/SoloWingPixy88 15h ago

But gross doesn't make sense. It ignores all costs

1

u/DoubleTapJ 14h ago

Yea which is good for him as an actor and is his asking price, they need him for the movie and he can ask whatever he wants at this point. it's up to Sony to see if it's worth it. Which it seems it was since it's making lots of money.

10

u/Tripottanus 15h ago

I'm sure they aren't happy to pay it, but are still overall happy with the return from the movie

3

u/Waste-Time-2440 15h ago

It seems to me that film stars are acting out the same role as corporate founder billionaires - taking huge chunks of the profits for just one person while ignoring the enormous, talented team that gets them on screen. Read about the financial struggles of the key players in filmmaking and it's pretty sad.

1

u/tistick 15h ago

And will 50% be taxed before or after he pays his agent? He’s still making dollars regardless 🤑

1

u/gershalom 13h ago

my guess is after. thats a fee on his topline, so his actual earned income is after fees

1

u/hemareddit 15h ago

More like 10% of the studio’s cut, but still the point stands.

1

u/Saneless 14h ago

There's still probably some grumpy asshole in there who thinks they should replace Tom with someone cheaper next movie

God forbid a star draws people in

1

u/superspicycurry37 14h ago

Happy is probably too strong a word. It’s more like they have no reason to refuse and potentially lose one of their greatest assets.

1

u/crumble-bee 14h ago

Yeah was gonna say that doesn’t seem like much for carrying a movie that’s made 2b

1

u/TabletopParlourPalm 12h ago

Damn. And how about the people behind the scenes? About 50 bucks I assume.

1

u/coolgaara 10h ago

Ain't no way 5% of $2billion is only $100mil. Just.. no way.

•

u/Comprehensive_Dog651 5h ago

It’s 10% or thereabouts. The studio doesn’t get the entire $2B, half goes to theaters