I think there's an underlying logic here we aren't getting into the conversation yet.
When Erroneous talks about how happy the studio is/isn't by gross alone, a few things are neglected. I would mention the difference between a strong opening weekend and subsequent grosses since the system in the movie industry changes the amount of profit for the studios (the first weekend produces more percentage of the profit for studios than the second weekend gross, for example). But that could go either way. Beyond that - the viability of a franchise. The viability of a franchise goes through different checkpoints than sheer gross. You can look at every franchise starter and would-be franchise starter for evidence. I think Kenshin is really on the money for this one. Bad pun intended. Spider Man 3 and X-men 3 are best examples because they made a lot of money. The studio should have fast-tracked a direct sequel to each. The studio should have tried to extend each franchise with a fourth movie. Instead, they chose to reboot each franchise. It's possible this has to do with contract clauses in the cast and crew, except contractual obligations are no longer cut and paste 'three picture' deals the way they might have been in the blockbuster heyday. The studios could have continued these franchises had they wanted to, but they didn't. I'm not positive why they didn't, but I'm inclined to agree with Kenshin's conclusion.