Jump to content

FlipsLikeAPancake

Free Account
  • Posts

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    USA

Recent Profile Visitors

453 profile views

FlipsLikeAPancake's Achievements

Straight-to-DVD

Straight-to-DVD (2/10)

13

Reputation

  1. Disney isn't North Korea, they don't control the media. And the media tend to be sensationalist, which makes sense. Which draws more eyes, an article predicting a big opening or a *record* opening?
  2. I think the effect of wider IMAX release is more than countered by the decreasing 3D share.
  3. I know Iron Man 2 only had a 135% increase on its first Friday, so I get why you think that a 143% increase would be optimistic...but Spider-Man 3 had a 190% jump. So personally I don't see your weekend numbers as optimistic.
  4. I hope that all the current principle actors are kept around for Avengers 3. After that I would prefer any new Avengers movies have an entirely new cast. I know recasting is inevitable, but I think it would be weird to have, say, Avengers 3 and 4 have the same Black Widow, Hawkeye, Hulk and Ant-Man, but different Captain Americas, Thors and Iron Mans. I agree with you. While I like the X-Men, frankly I do not like that they inhabit the same universe as the rest of the characters. It never made sense to me. People fear mutants, but if you got your powers through cosmic rays like the Fantastic Four, then you're celebrities? Odd. But I don't expect X-Men will ever revert anyway. Similar with Spider-Man. I would have thought Fantastic Four might, but they are rebooting it in 2015. In terms of commercial drawing power, Wolverine and Spider-Man are the only characters I could see added to the Avengers lineup that would excite general audiences, but it just never will happen. Fantastic Four would be cool for its villains, and that adding them would allow for bigger scope plot lines like Civil War that would be hard to do otherwise.
  5. Can't infer a lot just from a big monday drop. IM1 dropped 73.4% on Monday, and still had an over 3 multiplier.
  6. C'mon that's not a fair comparison for numerous reason. 1) Actual readership of the Iron Man comics is far lower than those that read the Harry Potter books 2) Comics are serialized, whereas Harry Potter was one series, so naturally the final installment was going to see a boost. 3) Harry Potter was able to keep the same cast for 8 movies. By the time Iron Man becomes Iron Man 8, RDJ will be long gone 4) Iron Man's weak rogues gallery is already an issue, by hypothetical movie 8 they'll really be scraping the barrel.
  7. That's like saying it's a bit sad that Harrison Ford's biggest six movies were only two characters.
  8. I agree that I would be very surprised to see the film go under $400m but I find your sense of perspective amusing. $350m is a lot of money! That's $100m more than what Batman Begins adjusts to. Obviously The Dark Knight Rises had a much bigger budget, but it's also going to make a ton more overseas than Batman Begins did. So the 'disaster' would still make a lot more money...than the successful initial installment. Also, last year not a single film made the $400m in the US that we both believe to be the film's floor. Only 2 films hit the $350m that you say would be a disaster. Just because the Avengers hit $600m doesn't mean that $350m is chump change! Point is, that whatever gross The Dark Knight Rises ends up with, I'm sure it'll be profitable and popular. No one expected The Dark Knight to hit $533m. If the sequel doesn't match it, it doesn't mean it's not a success. Not meeting expectations is different from being a disaster. John Carter and Battleship, two films with similar budgets as the Dark Knight Rises, now those were disasters.
  9. Sure a lot of people dismissed TASM's chances, but there's no need to gloat! On a completely unrelated note, I'm reading book four of George R.R. Martin's fantasy epic, A Song of Ice and Fire...
  10. Yeah yeah yeah he used to be fat. But he's been skinny for 6 years.
  11. I think I'd consider the "true" record holder to be the film with the highest adjusted gross in the modern era.I say modern era because I think it's an apples to oranges comparison to anything before that point. Films that didn't compete with cable TV and home video/DVD just shouldn't be considered as being the same. That's not to say that films like Gone With The Wind don't deserve credit (after all, the population was half of what it is today in 1939). I just consider it a separate record.I think that tickets sold is an interesting thing to keep track of, but personally not what I judge films on. Part of it is that it's not something that's actually tracked. Everyone can come up with estimates, but that's all they are: estimates.Ticket prices have increased faster than inflation. I know several friends that almost never go to the theater anymore because of that. Hence why I think the adjusted gross is more important that tickets sold, because it represents how much real value customers were willing to spend to see the movie.But on topic:Amazing to see Avengers hit $1B today, though we'll see if those estimates hold up. I didn't think the overseas would see such a small drop.
  12. My good sir, you should watch your typos! Also, T is nowhere near P on the keyboard...mystifying! The number that shattered the opening weekend record coming back to shatter the 2nd weekend mark...I like it.
  13. No worries. I figured that's what you meant, just wanted to be sure.
  14. I'm confused...are you saying it fell more than 50% or less than 50%?
  15. Just curious...where would 60M place it all time in SK?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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