Barnack

It is a giant American industry and reducing the number of movie could have economic impact, they did it for TV that became massively regulated: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syndication_exclusivity Vertical Integration and Program Access in the Cable Television Industry https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1084&context=fclj Your are right about the movie making part too, but there is a reason many of the piece that Fox didn't include in the deal was not included in the deal, too make it easier on the competition law front. Justice Department Challenges AT&T/DirecTV’s Acquisition of Time Warner: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-challenges-attdirectv-s-acquisition-time-warner According to the complaint, which was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, the combined company would use its control over Time Warner’s valuable and highly popular networks to hinder its rivals by forcing them to pay hundreds of millions of dollars more per year for the right to distribute those networks. Movies Studio became extremely regulated in 1948 ending the golden age and making possible independent movie (and weakened the government censorship of movies at the same time): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Paramount_Pictures,_Inc. Making a lot of movies is one thing and it does not necessarily matter, but because they are also owning the mean of distributing such movie and having the gatekeeper power of privileging their own movies they make on those massive distribution channel they will own, they will gain the power to reduce the competition by making it harder for other movie producer to reach an audience.

Those are 2 of the biggest of all time draw too, Tom Hanks is in talk with Tom Cruise John Wayne level: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Ten_Money_Making_Stars_Poll Hanks made Quigley's top 10 17 time, #5 of all time above Clark Gable, Harrison Ford and Newman. Smith was shorter prime but extremely high, peak Hanks/Will Smith cannot be the bar or even near the bar of what constitute being a draw. And even them have a couple of Ali/Ladykiller/Seven Pounds/That thing you do in there type of miss, even if we are talking the prime of possibly a top 5 best draw of all time with Hanks and one of the best prime of all time with W.Smith. And that said Johnson track record is still extremely consistent, look how often he reached the 20m OW and he will do it again with Rampage. If we look at post Titanic DiCaprio, arguably the biggest draw of the last 20 year's of what it can possibly be at the highest nowaday: Title Rumored budget O or biggest weekend Total Ratio Inception 160 m 63 m 293 m 1.83 Revenant 135 m 40 m 183 m 1.36 Catch Me If You Can 52 m 30 m 165 m 3.17 Django Unchained 100 m 30 m 163 m 1.63 The Great Gatsby (2013) 105 m 50 m 145 m 1.38 The Departed 90 m 27 m 132 m 1.47 Shutter Island 80 m 41 m 128 m 1.60 The Wolf of Wall Street 100 m 18 m 117 m 1.17 Aviator 110 m 11 m 102 m 0.93 Gangs of New York 100 m 9 m 78 m 0.78 Blood Diamond 100 m 9 m 57 m 0.57 Iron Mask 35 m 17 m 57 m 1.63 The Beach 50 m 15 m 40 m 0.80 Body of Lies 70 m 13 m 39 m 0.56 J. Edgar 35 m 11 m 37 m 1.07 Revolutionary Road 35 m 5 m 23 m 0.65 Average: 85 m 24 m 110 m 1.29 Not directly comparing him to Johnson, is trying to sell much harder stuff to sell from time to time, but also a lot of those were great movie with big name director attached receiving big time award attention. He went below 20m OW 56% of the time, 15m or below 43.5% of the time, is movie didn't reach a 10m weekend 18.75% of the time. They were all decent kind of budget when not 9 figures production (half were 100m or more movies), almost all if not all studio/Weinstein when he was big release. He didn't do is budget back at the domestic box office 37.5% of the time, did 133% is budget domestic or better 50% of the time. That is what being really consistent will start to look like if not the biggest star, will probably never look like John Wayne run, is title has the biggest domestic box office phenomenom of all time is safe, (well maybe the Marvel universe could take that crown): http://www.ultimatemovierankings.com/john-wayne-movies/ (it just crazy what he turned into 100m adjusted domestic run and how often he did it, 51 times!! insane, 55% of is movies made that mark) Nor a 90s Tom Hanks, post Bad Boy too After Earth Will Smith level.

Does not seem to be working that well too, no ?

A bit out of your subject but he was in The Other guys for maybe 3-5 minute with Sam Jackson, not sure how much it count into is 100m domestic success list. Has for being a consistent draw, I think he became one but that it is relatively recent, with the fast&furious franchise. You are a universal draw if you bring significantly more people worldwide in theater than if you were not in the movies (DiCaprio, Denzel) and you can be a draw in a genre if you are able to do that in your line (Kevin Hart, Mccarthy, Dwayne Jonhson, type). I think that in recent year's he constantly did that and Baywatch/Rampage will be proving without a doubt he is a big draw I think at least in is action-comedy lane.

With how big some talked about that second weekend (30M), it should always been considered, not only 40M is never certain for an live action movie without a strong IP pushing it and everything need to go right to have those kind of number, but 30M is never certain and even 25M is almost never certain for them.

I know you are just joking but cinemascore exit poll showed Blunt was not even the biggest draw among A Quiet Place cast, that would make Krasinski twice the Rock drawing power: http://deadline.com/2018/04/a-quiet-place-blockers-ready-player-one-weekend-box-office-1202359716/ Those under 18 (14% per CinemaScore) and those under 25 (37%) gave A Quiet Place an A-. Krasinski (31%) and Blunt (21%) fans loved the movie as well with an A-.

Probably a little bit, like it probably did for 2016 Tom Hanks, people choosing Sully to get their America Dad fix, Inferno opening just a month later doing quite poorly for a 5m sales book: 10/28/16 Inferno Sony $34,343,574 3,576 $14,860,425 3,576 35 9/9/16 Sully WB $125,070,033 3,955 $35,028,301 3,525 14 4/22/16 A Hologram for the King RAtt. $4,212,494 523 $1,138,578 401 46

That a good point that it felt empty and a bit low scale/budget, feel like it should have been a 180m movie with crowds and big scale.

Today sales according to (friday the 13th crazy old for AQP ?It is selling online a 250% the rate of a new Blumhouse Horror movie that should be doing at least 13/14M, both being PG-13 horror movie making it maybe a bit valid to do a direct comparison in fandango sales) : http://akvalley.pythonanywhere.com/static/Fandango_track.txt Column1 Column2 A Quiet 22251 Avengers 17508 Rampage 13475 Blumhouse 8782 Ready Pla 6220 Blockers 5384 Black Pan 2851 Isle of 2788 Tyler Perry 1753 Chappaqu 1724 I Can Only 1266 Beirut 1004 The Mira 947 Super Troo 850 Sherlock 604 Love, Si 564 Pacific 554 A Wrinkle 498 The Metr 274 Sgt. Stu 251 Yesterday ratio Rampage 7891 Blumhous 4469 With a 2.4m and 750k box office respectively (Rampage did 3.2x Truth or dare box office while selling 1.76x time on fandango, way more walkup heavy, if the ratio stay similar with Rampage selling 1.53 what truth or dare it's selling today we could see a true friday 2.79 time bigger for Rampage). Could be a bad sign to see T&D gaining ratio on Rampage in pre-sales like this, specially that later this night it should become more toward the horror title, but it could be a Friday the 13th uptick and will replace itself saturday. If Rampage end up doing 2.8x Truth or dare that would be excellent, if T&D do 13m, that a 36m OW)

I think many would be interested to those source if you found have them. When you are talking about VOD, do you include SVOD/EST or only VODs ? And by market share you mean, if a movie made 12m in VOD what percentage came from each country or relative to the box office (i.e. a movie making 10m in a market box office will do in average 1.2 in VOD type of thing) ?

Well yes, and mayonnaise is just mayonnaise.....

I calculated the retention rate from the Sony leak of frontloaded movie versus leggy one once, have not seen a difference between the 2 group and heard from many that the system you are describing was abandoned after theater chain closed when it become too franchise/OW heavy.

Almost impossible to be close to a flop, with a 2.4 preview number it will open here (almost certain to go 27m+) and it is seem to be well received in China with possibly making 100m+ in that market alone, even Baywatch didn't end up any close to be a flop. This seem locked to double it's budget and almost locked to do quite more.

Decent for sure (that even above Pacific Rim Uprising and that was a sequel and quite higher than Tomb Raider 2.1, this should normally have a better multi), but should be more frontloaded multi wise than CI. You can have a bunch of comp here: http://www.boxofficereport.com/previewgrosses.html Since 2014 opening between 2.1 and 3.1: Title Preview opening weekend OW previewsulti San Andreas 3.10 54.59 17.61 Warcraft 3.10 24.17 7.80 All Eyez one 3.10 26.44 8.53 Cars 3 2.80 53.69 19.18 Lucy 2.74 43.90 16.02 Interstellar 2.70 47.51 17.60 Fantastic Four 2.70 25.69 9.51 The Mummy 2.66 31.67 11.91 The Purge: Anarchy 2.64 29.82 11.29 Ted 2 2.60 33.51 12.89 Neighbors 2.56 49.03 19.15 The Martian 2.50 54.31 21.72 The Divergent Series: Allegiant 2.35 29.03 12.35 Pacific Rim Uprising 2.35 28.12 11.96 Cinderella 2.30 67.88 29.51 The Revenant 2.30 39.83 17.32 The LEGO Batmanovie 2.20 53.00 24.09 John Wick: Chapter 2 2.20 30.44 13.84 Hercules 2.10 29.80 14.19 Annabelle 2.10 37.13 17.68 Pitch Perfect 3 2.10 19.93 9.49 Tomb Raider 2.10 23.63 11.25 14.74 Average opening weekend was around 15x time the previews, if we remove more family title like Cinderella/Lego batman/Car 3 that do logically less in night time, it goes down to 14x. So 2.4m can give a 33 to 36m OW like tracking suggested quite easily, if it does Lucy multi would go at 38.5m if it does Tomb Raider/The Mummy/PRu just 27m. Because it is not really a franchise title like those, I would imagine closer to 38m than 27m (around 33 to 36). If it does San Andreas good (17.6x), that would go to a big 42m !

Usually the movie making branch of the studio are not what they are looking for, but more the distribution part of them, people love to not have too much vertical integration that why you have syndication in tv to separate making tv shows and distributing them or law for railroad to not make winner/looser among industry that ship materials and so on.

For RT audience score it is important to compare them with Rt score at similar release day's, they tend and very often go down after the previews, after the first weekend and again after home video release has you get less and less the perfect enthusiast target audience to watch the movie.

http://akvalley.pythonanywhere.com/static/Fandango_track.txt Last pulse 2018-04-12 21:00:00 720 A Quiet Place 2018-04-12 21:00:00 320 Blumhouses Truth or Dare (2018) 2018-04-12 21:00:00 309 Rampage (2018) 2018-04-12 21:00:00 301 Avengers Infinity War 2018-04-12 21:00:00 189 Blockers 2018-04-12 21:00:00 141 Ready Player One 2018-04-12 21:00:00 79 Isle of Dogs 2018-04-12 21:00:00 67 Black Panther 2018-04-12 21:00:00 60 Avengers Infinity War 3D 2018-04-12 21:00:00 60 Rampage 3D All today sales (combined all format 3d, imax, together), AQP seem to have promising hold going on: A Quiet 13830 Avengers 11468 Rampage 7891 Blumhous 4469 Ready Pl 3977 Blockers 3424 Black Pa 1766 Isle of 1730 Tyler Pe 1090 Chappaqu 984 I Can On 771 The Mira 550 Super Tr 548 Beirut 529 Pacific 405 Love, Si 358 Sherlock 358 A Wrinkl 334

I don't know the veil had Jessica Alba and ended on VOD, Creep is Duplass and played in festival (more than just testing, actually played with those crowd) to be sold and simply didn't got a buyer other than a video on demand one, if someone would have wanted to release it in theater I imagine they would have said yes.

That was kind of true 15 year's ago, it is almost always flat rate now, even Star Wars does not get 75% of is early run.

Well it would be an assumption, but if someone with that good of a track record at the box office decide to go strait to video (and some of those with big name involved), we can think he did not "hit it" with those.

Well obviously if you have seen a movie you do not need a critics to tell you anything like that (I am not even sure what you even mean by that ?).

Maybe not, that a good point a 4M horror movie can maybe turn a profit direct on video/streaming or at least not loose money if it has the big name blumhouse usually get on them. Just saying that is that a good movie that work in theater success rate do not seem higher than other productions company, how big is success are and how low is failure cost is what make is business model so special in my opinion, much more than the success rate. Is loosing 3/4m on is failure and making 10m-50m-100m on is success, he does not need to bat for .333 to make a lot of profit and is closer to .500%

Are people not eating pop-corn at your star wars screening ?

That because you are looking on box office mojo ? Were you see only is best movie, those who tested (or their trailers tested) well enough to get a theatrical release, for 4-5m movies that is a very important factor. You do not see the flops that goes strait to video there or do so little in theater it is not tracked by mojo. Blumhouse was involved in 67 movies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blumhouse_Productions#Films 24 made less than 1 million 14 made between 1m and 13 million 29 were giant success making over 25m That around a bit over 50% success rate at doubling it's budget in theater, similar to Sony success rate, big difference is how giant Blumhouse successs are relative to how small is failure cost, not really is success rate I think. It is very openly is business model doing a lot, to a fix price, and keep what stick on the wall, that mean not trying to fix or still release in theater those who didn't work.

Force Awaken, Thor 3, guardian of the galaxy, John Wick there is a long list of just fun popcorn movie dbeing very strong consensus to be 7, or 8/10 that make over 90% on Rotten tomatoes is quite common. Kong Skull island got a 76% for is very outthere popcorn fun non sense, critics seem to be judging movies most of the time somewhat under what the movie was trying to be and they find that this one failed at being a good popcorn movie, while Marvel achieve to make them.