>>3985
Соевый, ты почему утренний прием таблеток пропустил? Никаких "полтора ярда прибыли" Снайдер не принес Нетфликсу. Полтора ярда - это Снайдер насчитал у себя в голове "сколько бы заработал Ребел Мун в кинотеатре":

"Snyder explained at the time: "Say right now, [Rebel Moon has] like almost 90 million views...80 or 90 million accounts turned it on, give or take. They assume two viewers per screen, right? That’s the math..so that’s 160 million people supposedly watching; 160 million people at $10 a ticket, that’s $1.6 billion.""

За что его не обоссал только ленивый и пришлось оправдываться:

nyder responded: "Oh, no, I would say it’s kind of the opposite. What I was implying was, well, there are two things. One is I was just going by the numbers that I was given by Netflix. People are like, 'Oh, well, Snyder’s crazy' but literally I just am doing [math] with this, not anything else. If now we’re close to 100 million viewers, 100 million views times two is 200 million views."

He added: "So, people are like, 'Snyder’s delusional,' and I am just like 'I don’t know what to tell you.'"

The director continued: "Who knows what [Barbie’s] done on Max and all that. The cultural significance of Barbie was happening when it was in the theaters.”

He said: “That’s when we all took a bite of the Barbie apple, and happily. And so my only point is that I think there is a theatrical zeitgeist [and] even though maybe more people have eyes on something, the actual sort of cultural significance is dictated still by the theater."

If Rebel Moon had been released in theaters I seriously doubt that the amount of people that watched it on Netflix would have flocked to theaters to pay to watch it on the big screen.

Watching movies on Netflix is just more convenient for people. They are already subscribed to it, something new is released on the platform and people watch it. Had the film been released in theaters, I don’t think it would have come close to those Barbie or Oppenheimer numbers.