Avatree

450m at least.

I know, but the point is, it was not a hit. "Not making a loss" doesn't count as a "hit", in my book - they need to make some actual profit, too...

Not when $450m was spent on it.

Grimsby should be a hit. Sacha Baron Cohen hasn't failed before and I don't think he is about to. Also don't completely count out Cameron Crowe's film (assuming it stays in 2015), we don't know anything about it so can't really judge.

Monuments Men wasn't really a hit. RoboCop wasn't particularly successful worldwide either... Oh, and Amazing Spider-Man 2. That was the opposite of a hit.

Another $100 million for Interstellar. This thing is on fire.

According to where?

I want to know Interstellar's OS

Why isn't it an opinion? The term is not something that has been officially defined anywhere; its meaning is dictated by what people believe it to be. I really don't feel that many people think the term "cash grab" means any product ever released. If that were the case, then the term would be void of all purpose, since it is necessarily true for every single film. People wouldn't use it, because it wouldn't distinguish one film from any other.

I think we have different ideas of what the term "cash grab" means. Coolio is right.

Shame that they are just dumping this in January. I absolutely adore that colourful fantasy style in films/games/anything else.

Just because films are meant to make money does not make them a "cash grab". A cash grab is something made purely for money, with no care for the quality of the product.

50 Shades will be 220+ Cinderella will get at least 200, similar to Maleficent with any luck. Doesn't have much of a chance of doing that. It should open higher than Avengers 1, but it can't repeat that 3x multiplier.

Edge of Tomorrow doesn't count, everyone knew it would flop for many months before it released. Also, Apes certainly did much better overseas, but it was hardly a failure dom - improved upon the first one, even if not by that much.

Lol, no. Pretty sure people felt sympathy towards her, not hatred.

Not really. The only people who really cared about Paul Walker knew him from Fast and Furious - and I have a feeling Fast and Furious fans might be watching F7 either way People try to compare him to Heath Ledger but it's just not the same, Ledger was a diverse actor who was in the public spotlight. Plus, Ledger only died a few months before TDK, whereas Walker died 1.5 years before Furious 7.

I do realise that I was bending the term 'guaranteed', as two of the films aren't quite there. The other 3 will open so far above $100m that any issues they run into will keep them above $100m, which isn't the case with JW and F7. I just put them there because they are more likely to do it than to not

Okay, how about 3 100% guaranteed and 2 95%? FF6 was so close to $100m that I honestly can't see how F7 will do less. As for Jurassic World - Godzilla opened to $93.2m so there's no way JW will get under $100m, given how much more popular it is.

Opening above $100m: Furious 7 Avengers: Age of Ultron Jurassic World Mockingjay Part 2 Star Wars That's 5 guaranteed, plus any others that get lucky (e.g. Bond 24).

Weren't there reports that Paramount was lying about the numbers?

Just looked at the clock and it's 5am. I think it's appropriate that I watched Insomnia earlier. (good night )

At the end of the day, I think perhaps the easiest answer would be to just admit that the first two films were freakish anomalies. No series has managed anything close to doing 3 $400m films. Maybe it was unreasonable to have expectations that it'd match CF/THG in the first place. I don't believe that. The only people who care about the books are Hunger Games fans - all of whom will watch Mockingjay regardless of the source material's quality. You can't seriously think there are Hunger Games fans out there who loved the first two books and films but don't want to watch the third one on screen.

Under 330

But, we should have at least 3 next year that is, assuming MJ2 makes it there.