TServo2049

It's worse - Pocahontas turned out the way it did BECAUSE Katz wanted it to be their next Oscar winner. Apparently, it was going to be a more lighthearted movie originally - for example, look up the turkey that was going to be voiced by John Candy.

That's the thing. The boy-friendly ones are usually NOT the more successful ones. Aladdin and The Lion King increased, but they appealed to everyone, boys and girls. But the most successful Disney animated films tend to be the ones that appeal to females. That's why Frozen broke out. It wasn't a "fan" thing, at least I don't think. The film obviously had less appeal to most audiences. It didn't hit the sweet spot that the previous three did, and that Toy Story would later that year.

The difference is that BH6 is not EXPECTED to gross as much as Frozen - not even, I assume, by Disney themselves. It's a totally different kind of movie, it's not going to have tons of repeat viewings and obsessed fans, of COURSE it's going to drop from Frozen. Doesn't mean it won't be a success in its own right.On the other hand, Pocahontas was expected to be huge, especially after TLK - it was another Broadway musical type spectacular. In fact, before TLK exploded, some people at Disney thought POCAHONTAS was going to be the big hit/prestige picture. (From what I understand, while he was still at Disney/while the film was still in production, Jeffrey Katzenberg was honestly convinced it was going to win Best Picture, I am totally fucking serious.)Pocahontas was still a hit, it just felt smaller after TLK. But going in, Pocahontas seemed like it COULD be as big as TLK. This was when every Disney film was increasing from the last, and some thought the gravy train could keep rolling forever.BH6, however, has no chance of being as huge as Frozen, and nobody thinks it does.

Eh, not really. I guess it just caught people off guard. It caught ME off guard. Yes, but I remember hearing stories of people criticizing it. And Desolation of Smaug (which was unexpected, I remember people kind of upset there wasn't any kind of ending).Back to the Future Part II was COMPLETELY unexpected in 1989. For someone who spoils too much in his trailers, I agree with Zemeckis on one thing: It should have been advertised as "part 2 of the Back to the Future TRILOGY." But Universal advertised it as if it were a freestanding film - and why would anyone think otherwise? Even Empire Strikes Back had an ENDING, albeit open-ended. So when that "To Be Concluded..." popped up, people were caught off-guard.I'm not sure if that negatively affected the gross for III, or if it was negative reactions to II in general, or people not interested in a Western, or just that summer 1990 was shit in almost the same way this summer was shit. (Though BTTF3 didn't cost an arm and a leg, so it still made a handy profit.)But I digress, this has nothing to do with Potter, I now return you to your regularly scheduled HP discussion.

49 variant covers? New #1's? We've officially fallen into a time hole and ended up back in the 90s.

Agreed, I like being surprised.

I think he meant domestically, not WW. Remember, at this point in its run KFP2 was hit hard by Cars 2 and it was about to spend the next 3 weeks getting ganged up on by TF3, Horrible Bosses, Zookeeper and DH2. HTTYD2 is now pacing slightly ahead of KFP2, and I think it's going to hold at least marginally better through the rest of the summer.

Hey, Despicable Me 2 only gave the vaguest hints of its story in the trailers. In fact, most animated films do the same thing regardless of how they eventually perform.Wreck-It Ralph looked a lot zanier in the trailers. It's harder to sell stuff like pathos and drama and subtle character moments to kids. Even the Disney Renaissance trailers used broad strokes.

PG-13 didn't exist in 1981. That film would definitely get PG-13 now.You know, for all the shit Temple of Doom got, Raiders was almost as violent. The Nazi strongman getting chopped up in the propeller may have been mostly offscreen, but DAMN.

I hope so.Also keep in mind, at this point KFP2 had just had a 54% drop against Cars 2, and was about to have three more consecutive 45-50% drops + near-50% theater losses (against TF3, Horrible Bosses/Zookeeper and Deathly Hallows 2). Even with the onslaught of late-July/August releases, and with Planes 2 + Guardians + TMNT as direct or indirect competition, I think it's going to hold better because it's not facing multiple 4,000-theater juggernauts.HTTYD2 is now pacing ahead of KFP2 and will probably stay ahead for the time being (its 5th Monday is 1.8x Panda's).

Yes, it has South Korea, Germany, Italy, Spain and China.

It was only a disaster in that DreamWorks needed it to be bigger because Guardians/Turbo/Peabody underperformed. Unlike those three, this one won't require a writedown, and if DWA's previous films other than Croods had done better, this wouldn't be AS alarming....wait, WHAT?! The Power Rangers movie is going to involve ORCI?! Talk about "disaster on every conceivable level" right there, I wasn't excited about it before but now I'm even less excited.

This is actually happening in the comics, it has no more bearing on the movies than Miles Morales in Ultimate Spider-Man, or that period in the Batman comics when Bruce Wayne was missing-presumed-dead.

With Mal, Fast 7 and JA in this month, Dragon 2 might have had to sustain three straight weeks of losing half its theaters like KFP2 did. (Remember, first Cars 2 hit it, then Paramount took away half its locations for TF3, then it lost half of those against Horrible Bosses/Zookeeper, then half AGAIN against Deathly Hallows 2.)Planes 2 will hit Dragon, and it will lose theaters, but I can't see it bleeding them AS fast as KFP2 (or like Monsters University did when Turbo and then Smurfs 2 dropped). Even with the August pile-up.

Well, the existence of the third films were made clear. What wasn't was the cliffhanger ending. Split films like DH1+2 at least have an excuse.Remember how people got pissed at the Catching Fire cliffhanger? (And didn't the same thing happen for Matrix Reloaded, even though in that case the teaser made it clear that two films were coming out 6 months apart?)

At least it was made clear there were going to BE two parts. I still can't figure out why Universal didn't mention that Back to the Future Part II was going to lead directly into Part III, or why Disney repeated THE SAME MISTAKE with Dead Man's Chest 16 years later. In both cases, the cliffhanger pissed a bunch of people off because there was no advance warning that the film wasn't going to have an ending.(Though actually, I do wonder if critics would have had just as much of a problem with BTTF2, and ESPECIALLY DMC, if "this is part one of a two-part finale" had been publicized beforehand a la DH1+2.)

Oh geez, now you got me thinking about THAT SCENE from Clerks II again. "Now THAT would have been an Academy Award-worthy ending!"

Wow, really?I was 7 when I saw TS1, 11 when I saw TS2, and 22 when I saw TS3. I grew up with these, so I was crying tears of pure joy at the end of 3.You're only 15, so it probably wouldn't have the same effect on you.

She seems to still be on great terms with WB, so let's just assume "a lot." (Otherwise we'd hear about her suing WB or complaining about them in the press or something.)And as explained, she did a Bill Gates and gave a lot of it to charity.

Not just, I heard some families left after the monkey scene.People always focus on the incinerator, I think the torture stuff was just as intense.

So DH2's admissions were lower than COS and GOF? 3D aside, I guess it just FELT bigger because so many admissions were frontloaded into the midnights/OD/OW.And to Jack: That reminds me, I still want to see the footage of Rik Mayall as Peeves. 13 years and we still haven't seen it. That cheeses me off because Mayall is hilarious, and I was looking forward to that as soon as he was announced - but never got to see it.

I'm not sure how big of a problem "too scary" is. HTTYD2 is struggling to get to $175m, but TS3 cleared $400m no problem. GA interest in the film seems to matter more than "too scary" worries. (Otherwise, "too scary" WOM would have also negatively affected TS3, and it really didn't.)

Incest is icky. Why, fans, why?And don't forget the people who ship Elsa with Jack Frost from Rise of the Guardians...because ice powers?I find it crazy that shipping starts before the movie even comes out. So I assume there's Anna x Hans artwork out there from pre-release? (More embarrassing than anyone who was on Team Luke!Leia back in 1983...)

No, she wasn't. That's a long-standing Hollywood myth - someone else modeled the modern logo. http://www.wwltv.com/news/10pm-Hoss-Columbia-Pictures-Logo-Artist-176043361.html

Cool!Off-topic: The guy who played John Connor on The Sarah Connor Chronicles was born the exact same DAY as me. As in, we were born only HOURS apart. Bizarre.