kells

I think it's sort of been proven though that the earlier "midnight" showings really haven't resulted in higher box office midnights. People just go earlier, but the same number of people seem to go, whether midnights start at 8 or 12:00. But, midnights in general weren't as big back in 2008, so Divergent coming in under Twilight isn't the greatest sign. Should still go over $50 million, but I was expecting higher.

I'm also going to jump on the $50M Saturday train. What the hell.

What is this dark, sad place where I'm praying for Nikki's numbers to be right?

Weren't Breaking Dawn 2's numbers below expectations initially?

I can't believe I'm now just hoping this can beat New Moon for the November record.

You would think. When studios first started including even just 10:00 showings in the "midnight" numbers, I assumed we'd have tons of films breaking the midnight/OD records. But the extra showtimes don't really seem to have made any difference. Even BD2, as the only Twilight with early shows, didn't do noticeably better than Eclipse or BD1, which were "real" midnight openings.

You can't make that comparison though, because Twilight was making $13M by its 3rd weekend. It was a much smaller film than THG. But it ended up with a 2.77 multiplier and THG ended with a 2.67, so it's just inaccurate to say the first Twilight "dropped like a rock". If that's your criteria, then THG dropped even harder. Fact is both films had surprisingly strong legs. Now it just remains to be seen if CF will follow other sequels and be drastically more frontloaded, but I think most agree there's virtually no chance its legs are as bad as the Twilight sequels.

I'll always wonder what kind of "midnight" numbers Potter could've done with 8 and 10 pm showings. It's strange that with so many more showings, there seems to have been zero gain, even with BD2.

@NikkiFinke 11m Lionsgate very excited about 28% growth for 'Catching Fire' late shows vs first 'Hunger Games' late shows. Bodes well for humongous weekend. Am I the only one who always side-eyed the BD1/2 numbers? The way they both just BARELY edged out the previous installment reeked of studio fudging the numbers for "Record Breaking!" headlines.

I'm really surprised by that. Maybe the book fanbase for this is being really underestimated?

This ain't happening. http://www.eonline.com/news/456925/chris-hemsworth-talks-awkward-naked-movie-scenes-snow-white-sequel-with-kristen-stewart

I don't doubt that there was a lot Cassie Clare had no input on. I think the issue is that she was all too willing to associate herself with the film when she thought it was going to be a hit, but now she's backing off. I tend to think she's actually probably telling the truth now and was lying in the past when she was bragging about how she was involved in every aspect. But it for sure looks tacky when she was there on multiple red carpets, basking in the attention.

Abduction is totally seen as a flop. And while she wasn't headlining it, it was supposed to boost her career/profile. She had her PR relationship with Lautner and everything. But it tanked with critics and massively underperformed. That's not enough to tank a career, but it sure doesn't help. And then headlining two potential blockbusters and having both flop, while not being singled out in the least for her performances, isn't going to have her on the path towards competing for roles with JLaw, Shailene, or the Emmas.

It's ridic to insist that you can't judge a newcomer's career by continued failure to deliver. Depp, Hanks, etc. are obvious exceptions to the rule. Actors disappear all the time. We couldn't even come up with a real list because they're so quickly forgotten. But if you think hype that never materializes through multiple films doesn't affect careers, I would say give Gretchen Mol, Taylor Kitsch, Taylor Lautner, Joseph Fiennes, Chris O'Donnell, Kate Hudson, Heather Graham, Chris Klein, Josh Harnett, or Leelee Sobieski a call and ask if their opportunities diminished when they had a run of films that underwhelmed. I'm really speaking just for Collins here. I agree that Hemsworth has at least a few more years due to THG and this being his first real flop. But Collins has Abduction, Mirror Mirror, and now this. With no successes to break up the string of disappointments. I think it's naive to think this won't affect her future offers.

I think there's a difference in working your way up with a mix of solid performers/bombs, and in being heralded as the next big thing and repeatedly not catching on with the public. Right now I think Liam Hemsworth is in that first category and lily Collins is in the second. It's not that she has this ONE failure. It's that it's been years of trying to make her an IT Girl and no one's buying it. I do think the number of offers she's been getting are about to drop hard.

I don't get acting like if this barely breaks even that's enough of a success to justify a sequel. Did we not just see what happened when Percy Jackson tried that? If audiences aren't buying it now they're not going to buy it in 2 years when the plot probably gets even more convoluted. And this had a monster promo. They had basically Twi/THG level international premieres, mall tours, lots of tv spots. Sony had to have shelled out a lot.

Damn. The Butler dropped a lot from projections. I think it should have some strong matinee numbers though.

I think this review sums up Paranoia. http://www.pajiba.com/film_reviews/at-least-harrison-fords-worthless-paranoia-reaffirms-what-a-shamelessly-terrible-film-critic-pete-hammond-is.php

No, but I'm thinking YOU might be to be this defensive over Hutcherson. I'm hardly the only one who thinks he and Jen have zero chemistry. Even critics remarked on it in the first film.

I hope The Butler goes even higher. Really want this to at least flirt with $30 mill.

I don't get writing off Liam's career as charity from Chris. They were both moving up the ranks at around the same time. I think I saw Liam in that Nicholas Sparks movie before I saw Chris in anything. Anyway, he and Jen have good chemistry in THG which is more than I can say for her and the little guy.

I just wonder if Charlize is contracted for it. So much of the promotion was centered around her, so if she's a no-show in the sequel, their job just got even harder.

Considering GIJ2's WW total dropped from the original and will barely eke out a profit, is that really that compelling of an argument? SWATH had a stellar ad campaign and came out at the height of Twilight and Avengers hype. Now people know the movie sucked, Twilight's over...I guess they can still try to piggyback off The Avengers 2 though.

@TheFilmStage 'Fast & Furious 7' confirmed for July 11th, 2014 & sequels to 'Pitch Perfect' and 'Snow White and the Huntsman' will land in 2015.