Jonwo

I imagine JL will stay put, I'm sure MGM and WB could release it in December 2017 or Spring 2018.

I think The Revenant could match Wolf of Wall Street's OW if not go higher, it's a lower rating and its 23 minutes shorter. It'll be interesting how much of an impact it'll have on Star Wars

Some parents are just irresponsible. I wonder why cinemas don't operate a policy where young children can't be brought into films after 9 or 10pm, R rated or not, it's not fair on the child who wouldn't understand it or find it upsetting. I wouldn't even being a young child to something like Jurassic World unless I know they could handle it.

£5-5.5m for SW seems likely which is still great. It'll be dethroned next week by The Revenant but I think it'll prevent Creed from getting the number 2 spot. I wonder if The Revenant can match Wolf of Wall Street's OW of £4.6m, I think it'll be close

I can't wait for IMAX or Arri Alexa to release a camera that can match or exceed Ultra Panavision. I think it'll be as soon a five years away. I suspect Tarantino, Nolan, Spielberg etc will still shoot on film and not switch at all. Someone like David Fincher is never going back to shooting on film because it doesn't suit his style of directing

I imagine the home entertainment release will be around Easter so it'll likely be gone from theaters from early March

It'll be interesting if it cracks £1m, losing over 100 screens means it's not going to open as well as Django. The Revenant has been promoted really heavily, I would not be surprised if this is number 1 next week

$40m might be doable, clearly Leo in the wild is appealing to audiences.

With its $135m budget, it's going not to make back its budget unless it does very well OS.

I wouldn't be surprised if it's number 1 in the UK dethroning Star Wars,

There was a documentary on the Blu-Ray of GWTW that said that the prints were sent to different parts of the country and some of them were a little worse for wear by the time they got to more rural areas. I saw the most recent remastering at the BFI IMAX and WB have a fantastic job restoring it but I guess it like Wizard of Oz is part of cinema history so the costs to remastering it are offset by people either wanting to buy it on Blu-Ray or television companies wanting HD copies.

Curzon aren't showing either so it must be related to the 70mm OLS exclusive screening

It's interesting because Empire has a IMAX, they can share big screen titles with OLS which didn't happen in the past. It doesn't happen all the time, Interstellar was exclusive to OLS for example but I imagine we'll likely see more sharing of big screens like with Batman v Superman or Rogue One. What the top ten has in common with the exception of Showcase and Vue Westfield is that they all have IMAX although Vue Westfield has its own PLF with VueXtreme. Location plays a huge factor with how a cinema does in terms of admission especially if you're situated in somewhere like a Westfield or a Bluewater.

Not related to GWTW but I assume that when they introduce Cinemascope, Ultra Panavision etc they bumped up ticket prices. When did multiplexes become more mainstream?

Interesting that Vue Westfield is only number 6 and neither OLS or Vue Westfield SC are not in the top 10 at all. How many screens is the Showcase at Bluewater? Metrocentre, Basildon, Kingston and Norwich beating big cinemas in London and Manchester is a surprise.

I wonder if Paramount will release in 2017 or 2018?

I think that's why the schedule isnt online yet as they usually online by today. I imagine they'll be a compromise of some sort

I imagine the distributor will back down. It happened with Alice in Wonderland a few years back when Disney wanted to limit the release window and cinemas initially refused to show it.

Clone Wars was just five episodes edited into a film. It only cost $8.5m to make and it still ended up being profitable for Lucasfilm and WB, the latter only paid distribution costs and P&A which they likely recouped

With TV rights, they're usually a cap when a film hits $200m so it's roughly $20m but a studio might throw in a few other titles as well as part of the deal. FX in the US as well as TNT are quite aggressive when it comes to acquiring basic cable rights to films. Star Wars I imagine will be highly sought after

OS in 1939/40 was pretty much Europe and Australia/New Zealand and even Australia wouldn't have had made a huge impact because the population was smaller than it was today, they didn't get the huge influx of Europeans and Asian immigrants until the 1950s. The overall cost for GWTW was $7.9m which was huge back then, The Wizard of Oz made a loss in 1939 because it had a $2.7m budget and only made $3m WW. It was only rereleases that made it profitable.

The tie-ins for Star Wars is pretty incredible, even before the film started, most of the ads were Star Wars related from Subway to HP, makes up for the fact that thanksfully SW has no product placement unlike Spectre, Avengers or JW.

I think that sort of film only clicks with audiences every so often e.g. Titanic. It wouldn't be four hour long either I suspect they would have split into two films and actually having seen it, it does end in time for the intermission where you could have a hook for the second part.

The big surprise of Christmas is Daddy's Home. Who'd thought it would outgross Snoopy and Charlie Brown? The Hateful Eight should do well this week but Star Wars will still be number 1.

GWTW's success is more incredible in that it's very long and was only shown once or twice a day in its roadshow release. MGM was getting 70% of the takings so I guess the film was already profitable before it hit general release. It's trickier to track the OS box office for GWTW but it played at the Empire in Leicester Square for 4 years and didn't go down to popular prices for at least a year. Had it not been for WWII, it probably would have been even bigger.