Jump to content

Premium and Gold members please go to this thread:

 

http://forums.boxofficetheory.com/topic/24403-paid-perks/

 

Copper and Silver Accounts please PM me if you have paid past August 1st and care about the "Custom Avatar" (or really larger avatar) perk.

Emperor Tele-Limai

BEAUTY AND THE BEAST WEEKEND THREAD | Late Sunday Numbers (Asgard) - 48-49M | Official Weekend Estimate: 170M; OS OW: 180M; WW OW: 350M

Recommended Posts

Ethan Hunt    16,057
7 minutes ago, MrPink said:

 

Home, starring Rihanna. Her power.

Yeah that's it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GiantCALBears    8,351

Interesting Watson got paid $3m upfront and is getting a lot more (likely backend) for hitting certain benchmarks. Seems like she should've gotten a lot more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
filmlover    25,109
1 minute ago, GiantCALBears said:

Interesting Watson got paid $3m upfront and is getting a lot more (likely backend) for hitting certain benchmarks. Seems like she should've gotten a lot more.

I like Watson but she hasn't done much since Harry Potter ended that would've justified a big salary upfront.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jake Gittes    8,910

I'm obviously in the minority but I find this shit soul-deadening. Never in my life would have thought that a movie making 170 fucking million dollars on opening weekend (and looking to make 500+ total) would just make me want to go bang my head against a wall but Disney managed it. I have seen some truly awful, wretched movies post enormous numbers over the years, and box office was still as exciting as ever, but I've never seen a movie make this much money by being so blatantly lazy, and the fact that it's just gonna continue depresses me.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Impossible    227
1 minute ago, GiantCALBears said:

Interesting Watson got paid $3m upfront and is getting a lot more (likely backend) for hitting certain benchmarks. Seems like she should've gotten a lot more.

 

I mean she did nothing successful outside of Harry Potter until now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GiantCALBears    8,351

She's a commodity, completely disagree it matters that HP was her only big work. That's ten years of film making in a pretty complex role as a kid. $3m is frankly pennies to both her and Disney, happy she will make $12m+ backend.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GiantCALBears    8,351
2 minutes ago, Jake Gittes said:

I'm obviously in the minority but I find this shit soul-deadening. Never in my life would have thought that a movie making 170 fucking million dollars on opening weekend (and looking to make 500+ total) would just make me want to go bang my head against a wall but Disney managed it. I have seen some truly awful, wretched movies post enormous numbers over the years, and box office was still as exciting as ever, but I've never seen a movie make this much money by being so blatantly lazy, and the fact that it's just gonna continue depresses me.

Jake AIW 1 didn't make you feel that way? Same with the other 2? They've been very meh as a group but still made a ton of dough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MrFanaticGuy34    1,549
3 minutes ago, Mr Impossible said:

 

It's only tracking mid 20s OW. Also why sadly? The film could be fun. 

Eh...he isn't that fond of upcoming Non-Disney/Pixar films with a lesser reception or that the latest Non-Disney/Pixar films hasn't impressed him lately, sadly. Save for Dreamworks, Illumination or BlueSky.

 

Although, i will probably like this movie if i get the chance.

 

Is it just me or does the latest Disney-films get overpraised like hell...and yet the latest Non-Disney films comes with lower reception?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
filmlover    25,109
3 minutes ago, Jake Gittes said:

I'm obviously in the minority but I find this shit soul-deadening. Never in my life would have thought that a movie making 170 fucking million dollars on opening weekend (and looking to make 500+ total) would just make me want to go bang my head against a wall but Disney managed it. I have seen some truly awful, wretched movies post enormous numbers over the years, and box office was still as exciting as ever, but I've never seen a movie make this much money by being so blatantly lazy, and the fact that it's just gonna continue depresses me.

Image result for you'll get over it gif

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Valonqar    1,884
8 minutes ago, GiantCALBears said:

Interesting Watson got paid $3m upfront and is getting a lot more (likely backend) for hitting certain benchmarks. Seems like she should've gotten a lot more.

 

I think they really wanted her badly and felt she was so perfect that the movie simply wouldn't have been such a huge hit without her. Disney in particular insist on wholesomeness and Emma has it in spades. Plus such feminist icon. That's a powerful combination. 

 

Look what this other wholesome girl did for TFA:

 

tumblr_omx5w1yGNv1u9ynp9o1_400.gif

 

She and Emma are types that children immediately identify with cause so youthful, child-like looking, women don't find threatening while guys find beautiful. Killer combo. 4 quadrant, boom!

Edited by Valonqar
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GiantCALBears    8,351

As a shareholder, it's fine for an extra $.001 of eps growth or whatever it is lol but pay that woman her money. People didn't go to see Dan Stevens or Josh Gad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sal    1,052
4 minutes ago, GiantCALBears said:

As a shareholder, it's fine for an extra $.001 of eps growth or whatever it is lol but pay that woman her money. People didn't go to see Dan Stevens or Josh Gad.

 

I know at least twelve people who went to see it because of Josh Gad.  Myself included.

 

Granted they're all theatre fans who thought Emma Watson should have been tanked in favour of a Broadway actress (or at least one who can actually sing).  A few of them primarily saw Moana because of Lin-Manuel Miranda.

 

I also know two people who went just because of Ewan McGregor.

 

I consider these an outlier though.  Most people I know seem to be going just because it's Beauty and the Beast.  I still can't persuade my gf to go yet because she's a theatre fan who thinks Emma Watson can't act.

Edited by Sal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GiantCALBears    8,351
Just now, Sal said:

 

I know at least twelve people who went to see it because of Josh Gad.  Myself included.

 

Granted they're all theatre fans who thought Emma Watson should have been tanked in favour of a Broadway actress (or at least one who can actually sing).

 

I also know two people who went just because of Ewan McGregor.

 

I consider these an outlier though.  Most people I know seem to be going just because it's Beauty and the Beast.  I still can't persuade my gf to go yet because she's a theatre fan who thinks Emma Watson can't act.

Clearly there was some hyperbole in there...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nova    6,966
3 minutes ago, GiantCALBears said:

As a shareholder, it's fine for an extra $.001 of eps growth or whatever it is lol but pay that woman her money. People didn't go to see Dan Stevens or Josh Gad.

People didn't go to watch Emma Watson either. They went to go watch a Disney classic. Besides for all you know Disney offered a larger contract...say $10M and she decided to take less with a backend deal instead. She wasn't going to get both a huge contract and a back end deal. In the end, it's not like she's suffering. Everyone knew this movie would be huge (hence her taking a back end deal) but it was all a question of how huge. But let's not sit here and pretend that everyone flocked to see this movie to go see Emma Watson. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Noctis    21,491

 

8 minutes ago, Jake Gittes said:

I'm obviously in the minority but I find this shit soul-deadening. Never in my life would have thought that a movie making 170 fucking million dollars on opening weekend (and looking to make 500+ total) would just make me want to go bang my head against a wall but Disney managed it. I have seen some truly awful, wretched movies post enormous numbers over the years, and box office was still as exciting as ever, but I've never seen a movie make this much money by being so blatantly lazy, and the fact that it's just gonna continue depresses me.

 

eIhYe3n.gif

 

Soul-deadening? That's fucking dramatic.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, GiantCALBears said:

She's a commodity, completely disagree it matters that HP was her only big work. That's ten years of film making in a pretty complex role as a kid. $3m is frankly pennies to both her and Disney, happy she will make $12m+ backend.

She gets 15M of BaTB does numbers similar to Maleficent.Obviously this is making more so Watson is maybe looking at something at 1thev8-20M range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
filmlover    25,109
3 minutes ago, Noctis said:

 

 

eIhYe3n.gif

 

 

  Hide contents

Soul-deadening? That's fucking dramatic.

 

Where in the hell is this gif from? :lol:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Jake Gittes said:

I'm obviously in the minority but I find this shit soul-deadening. Never in my life would have thought that a movie making 170 fucking million dollars on opening weekend (and looking to make 500+ total) would just make me want to go bang my head against a wall but Disney managed it. I have seen some truly awful, wretched movies post enormous numbers over the years, and box office was still as exciting as ever, but I've never seen a movie make this much money by being so blatantly lazy, and the fact that it's just gonna continue depresses me.

 

Excellent post, but watch out for all the Disney loonies who attack you :ph34r:.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GiantCALBears    8,351
3 minutes ago, Nova said:

People didn't go to watch Emma Watson either. They went to go watch a Disney classic. Besides for all you know Disney offered a larger contract...say $10M and she decided to take less with a backend deal instead. She wasn't going to get both a huge contract and a back end deal. In the end, it's not like she's suffering. Everyone knew this movie would be huge (hence her taking a back end deal) but it was all a question of how huge. But let's not sit here and pretend that everyone flocked to see this movie to go see Emma Watson. 

Are you saying it doesn't matter who would've played Belle just so we can be clear? To say it's a Disney classic and that gets it to $170m by default is nuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Noctis    21,491
12 minutes ago, GiantCALBears said:

As a shareholder, it's fine for an extra $.001 of eps growth or whatever it is lol but pay that woman her money. People didn't go to see Dan Stevens or Josh Gad.

 

She is getting $15m. It's pretty good. If she knew how much this was going to do, she could have gone for $30m. Do you think they might give her $20m instead of $15m?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.