Barnack

It is a bit of a deception yes, 5 year's.... Biggest Chinese movie were doing around 200m max in 2013 and now some seem to be able to do 400/500m quite often even reached over 800m, if Hollywood franchise would have followed that growth it would have been the game changer some predicted.... But if it is considered a Wanda Chinese production and getting around 43% retention rate from that 150M it is quite a jump in some ways from the previous entry I could imagine.

I think most want to reduce the time when the movie is not playing in theater near most peoples anymore and not available to buy anywhere else yes, but do they have an issue to have their movies exclusively available in a high price and the only place they can charge a ticket by person watching theatrical windows as long has it is playing in most of them ? That where I would think the tension come from, lot of value for theater to have the movies not available anywhere for a long time even after it is not playing in theater anymore, less obvious for the studios that this is the case, studios know well that there is a ton of values in the theatrical window for them.

It did went quite the opposite way, I do not remember a movie close to be the most expensive of the year's bombing like it was common in the past, that franchisation/in line like production model of the biggest title seem to have made them quite safer, not riskier. Biggest we have are the King Arthur/Valerian level, the 250+m and more type movies pretty much all more than doubled their budget I think.

Part because is first theatrical run sold relative to is competition a very similar market share than say Star Wars, Titanic or E.T., you can still compare popularity by era by comparing how many ticket a movie sold versus the top 5 most popular movies of the 5 year's (2 year's before and after) of their time and so on. There was not less studios movies to compete with and they were also released in a world with 70% of the population going to the theater 50 time a year to see how special Gone with the Wind phenomenon was. That how people compare athlete of different year's, armies and pretty much everything that change over time.

I think more and more people being seriously dependent to the Internet and needing the theatrical experience to not watch their phone during a movie could help it, many people find they never like a movie if they watch it at home (because they never really achieved to watch it correctly)

TV did massively change the cinema theater business and destroyed attendance (urban sprawling going on at the same time probably had a role and the government anti-trust law ending the golden era of studios also, but TV was harsh and the main factor, nothing changed ticket sales really since TV in the late 40s, early 1950 depending of the country) TV transformed theater from 70% of the population or more was going at least one time a week, to 90 million ticket sold a week in is peak to be a major american expense to only 2% of the entertainment budget and really rare event since the 60s. To being presented news real and other public service at the same time as movies, TV would destroy cinemas fear cannot be just tossed by the hand because it kind of did and got really close to do it completely, opera still exist and will maybe always will but effectively they have been "ruined" and irrelevant, anything having 35% the impact of TV on theater again would ruin it. Nothing that ever came since TV got any close of the massive difference from nothing at all to everyone having television set (netflix vs hbo or other service on demand.... it is practically the same) and nothing in views short time either to change attendance, it would require an other massive change, say super VR headset more comfortable than watching tv and reproducing a close to the group crowd experience or something, but after a century of people preferring watching regular 2D screen to everything else it is unlikely.

You mean that in some era average ticket cost augmented faster than inflation that is true (some of it is an augmentation of people paying extra vs simple 2D screening too), but in general wage increase in a very similarpace than inflation, that why we are richer than ever, inflation adjusted household income broke an all time record in 2016 and would not be surprising for 2017 to beat it https://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/2017/09/19/u-s-household-incomes-a-50-year-perspective https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N

Most profitable 2018 (wait for the It, secret life of pets and so on) Deadline series started with Get out at number 10: http://deadline.com/2018/03/get-out-box-office-profit-2017-1202345412/ This year look like it could be extremely brutal for the margin if get out is not a weird exception, if a movie like that has a $77m world P&A I would not expect them (it is true it got a lot of award season spending but still, not a big release outside some markets) to have declined this year and the world home entertainment sound just nuts: Just 34m in revenues for a movie like Get out (what the hell...............), in 2017 home entertainment was still has big or bigger than theatrical for every annual report I saw and raw spending in the US was still around the double in home video than at the box office: http://deadline.com/2018/01/u-s-home-entertainment-spending-rises-to-20-5-billion-1202239252/ At least world TV seem to have maintained quite well. Wonder how accurate that is, but if a movie like Get Out revenues are lower than is box office, that a really thought new world, would have been 150-170% of them at least not so long ago. Prediction for the top 3 and the order ? Beauty, Despicable Me 3, It, Jumanji sound like strong candidate here depending of their respective bonus structure., Star Wars being always a possible and who knows about Wolf Warrior ... maybe they will not consider non hollywood entry. P.S. Sorry if it was already posted elsewhere.

Very wide range 20-30M: http://variety.com/2018/film/news/pacific-rim-uprising-black-panther-streak-1202729298/ For the review embargo, movie will start to play in not too long in some major market I think (it play wednesday early morning their hours for example), must lift around then at the latest if ever.

Inflation does not change the money purchasing power you pay (you make as much more money at work), you are not stopping going to theater now even if it cost 12 times more than in 1963 at face value to buy a ticket. Theater ticket price didn't change that much over time and probably will not that much in the future either (except for the dinner/long chair experience/4D stuff):

Sheridan as yet to make something bad imo, director of Suburra seem like an obvious match, the sicario characther is not developped at all in the first entry and has a lot of room. The story below the border just started at the end of the first movie with an obvious interesting premise here, starting a rival cartel war to hurt them. First movie was a big home video success making a sequel at that price point an obvious move to do. Not sure a get the issue with the title either... Obviously many writer/director matching the material perfectly did fail in the past, never and nothing is safe but.... combination of them and the movie looking good visually having a lot of choppers involved in the production (look like they fully use of New Mexico 25-30% tax credit + quite reasonable above the line budget for a sequel) make it an excited to see movie in theater for me.

The way it is stated, it is not because bankruptcy void them but because they are deciding to stop enforcing them (something they could always has done at any time), that is probably 2 independent event (maybe a last PR move knowing the liquidator would not have cared about them anyway).

I would really doubt that (except if explicitly stated in them that they are voided in that case), I would imagine that they would be owned like everything by the successor/liquidator. It is possible that those new owner of the asset will not care about enforcing them too, making them effectively void or even actively cancel them as a PR move or they could want to keep enforcing them if they consider that it would hurt the value of the asset they have to sell while trying to save investor life saving, employee retirement fund if they have some, production company still waiting for payment and so on.

Considering that some year the correlation between metacritic and the box office is a negative one (if you do not correct by genre and budget) is it specially for horror ? See below That said horror biggest success of all time The Excorcist (86%on RT, 8/10 average) Sixth sense (85% on RT, 7.6/10 average) IT (85% on RT, 7.2/10 average) Amityville Horror (29%, 4.4/10 average rating) Alien (97%, 9/10 rating) The Omen (86%, 7.2/10) Blair Witch project (87%, 7.7/10) Were not badly received by critics at all (could even say mostly critically acclaimed). Conjuring, Paranormal Activites , Halloween and so on, long list of case audience/critics taste matches and like for everything else long list they didn't, it certainly exist some special taste type of aesthetic that critics and the audience that love it will not match. Certain emotions are extremely easy to create if you are ready to do it, disgust being one of them (filming yourself putting cats in a microwave would work really well), jump scared being an other one, that yes if movie please a certain of people because they love those they cannot received any merit for just succeeding at that.

Why, is the Sunday drop particularly bad (they do look similar to Back Panther) or those weekend abnormally really big because of some holiday ?

Being so close to Tomorrowland (that finished at 93.4m) should give us some clue real soon: https://www.the-numbers.com/movies/custom-comparisons/Wrinkle-in-Time-A-(2018)/Tomorrowland Need to gain 3m to match Tomorrowland and after that nearly 7M for 100m. Wrinkle in time second WE: 16,256,879 (-51% of the first) Tomorrowland: 14,303,679 (-57% of the first, follow -50% and -51% easily beatable) If it would continue to do 113% of Tomorrowland going on it would end up at 94.35m

Do someone know if PR 2 is considered a local production and treated differently in term of marketing and retention rate for the distributor ?

I am reading this right if it feel like it is possible it will not grew much if at all from the first 112m take in 2013 ? (need about 120m just to do the same), except if it get good legs ?

Z-lister ! Caviezel is Passion of Christ Jesus in person.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul,_Apostle_of_Christ Bible movie for Easter weekend.

Probably not, by single he mean first release of the movie excluding is re-release.

Fantastic Mr. Fox had some helps, Roald Dahl adaptation, Globes/Oscar nomination during the awards seasons, Clooney/Streep doing promos, 93% review level type of reception. Stop animation just got extremely hard to sell, I also think that Anderson + is crew should be enough to push it at 30M if things goes well, it is not easy. http://www.boxofficemojo.com/genres/chart/?id=animationstop.htm&sort=date&order=DESC&p=.htm Even Kubo had a really hard time.

I imagine Gringo and Hurricane Heist will both have a week 3 theater count annihilation (and that could help Annihilation and some others theater count next weekend).... They were #10, 11 in theater count this weekend but only #48 and #50 in per theater average... and were those case of movie already loosing theater at week #2.

Come-on people Baywatch didn't even got close to flop (that was some twitter non-sense), it did 2.5x times it's budget without a China release it was really big in Hasselhoff land, DiCaprio Blood Diamond, Body of Lies, Revolutionnary Road and J Edgar would be better example even thought they didn't flop either. Bullock is not stable as a draw like Denzel (Our band is crisis, all about steve, Gun shy, etc...) no one was stable like him in the 2000s, but has probably a much better International ceiling when the movie turn out well, Denzel went 3 time above 200m in is career + Pelican Brief and a couple of others adjusted, Bullock did it 5 times unadjusted.

You cannot buy a microsoft windows software with a CD and start distributing the OS to everyone https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brookings-now/2014/06/09/why-copyright-law-allows-you-to-borrow-a-book-but-not-share-a-digital-song/ http://www.clas.ufl.edu/llc/copyright/RightsBuyer.html https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.pdf You cannot project a dvd you own in a movie theater and charge money, it is a bit limited (specially for digital content when the .