Barnack

Depends how much of Force Awaken 57M thursday happened before Midnight I suppose....

I remember talks of the possibility of a Night at the Museum performance (250m, adjust at 330m) on this message board by someone a good while ago, because that was the most comparable run for a family/adventure movie having the same holidays calendar advangates.

It is a 4 quadrant popular movie remake (or what they call redoing the same plot with new people but hiding the word remake/reboot from audience these days using a couple irrelevant to the plot items, like they did with Jurassic World), that was really well positioned market wise with is release date and competition. We were "warned" on this very forum by users whose words are to take seriously too not be surprised to see a Night of the Museum type of runs just by the fact it was a giant family movie with that release date, before the good reviews were even in. It is a surprising for sure, but more surprising than Sniper before it's record PTA news first 4 theater weekend ? Or deadpool 2 week before it's release ? People still saw a possible 200m for Jumanji and predictions were around 150m in general, I doubt that was the case for American Sniper.

Phantom menace was still in phenomenon status, it was the second biggest unadjusted WW movie ever, only between Titanic (in 10 year's after it was clear that being behind Ttanic meant nothing). And it was the second biggest of all time behind Titanic also domestic unadjusted (and well Star wars itself with is many re-release). TPM had the biggest first day of all time, fastest to 100m, fastest to 200m, and many other box office records. But that movie was definetly the last special one box office wise of the prequels, Attack of the Clones did normal blockbuster and Sith normal best of the year type of performance, still made some records that didn't last long, was number one domestic but not worldwide, etc....

I think for people that started to follow box office late 2000, early 2010, they got use to a small windows when it was common for sequels to growth (3D boosting pricing a lot, China coming from not even be in consideration to adding 9 figures to the movie box office and overall world market growth). You could see it in the conversation of the DCEU being just the x first entry, has if it was certain that their sequels would growth, instead of the almost always drop of the past. Ticket pricing stabilized, China growth was almost nill for hollywood title in 2015-2016, world market growth in part because of exchange rate slowed, and since that late 2014 exchange rate drop and 3d sequel or already 3d movie we got more back to the sequels of big successful movie making less paradigm. Has for illogical to call it an under-performance being illogical, not sure I agree, it has been interpreted has the opening Disney used to remove Marvel people in control of their studios and took direct control out of it, would it have happened if Ultron have not underperformed in their mind ?

It is different or more common during the holidays, but Downsizing loosing theater at week #2 is quite special right ? Usually studio wide release pretty much hold all theater for the first 2 weeks.

It is hard to imagine doing as much as Salt (that was made to be a movie with an interesting storytelling device, it had an over 125m net budget, 105m in marketing, peak Jolie making 40-50m by movie, PG-13), that made 118m. I can see something between Atomic Blonde 51m and Salt 118m (the average would be 85m), 23-24m OW, 85m dbo / 240m WW seem a likely target,

around 35-65 yes.

This is not a completely a bad point. But at least take the top 10 hollywood release (or other relevant number) average by year and see if the domestic progression is has good has the OS one in the last 30 year's. Except for Cameron anomally the first movie in the top OS of all time not from the 2010s is Return of the Kings at number 21, there is 7 non Cameron movie in the top 21 not from the 2010s.... Using very small amount of data (here using just one movie) is almost always certain to be a very misleading analysis.

Titanic is now over 2 billion, those look like Titanic crazy first run numbers of around 1.8b

Jurassic World made 1.6 with a lower domestic than Avatar. Give Jurassic World ratio to Avatar and it is still 1.95 billion and would still have been the biggest ever until Titanic re-release, in the much smaller 2009 market, is 27.3% ratio is really good but not Fast and furious level. A Age of Ultron/Iron Man 3 ratio put it at 2.35b, still biggest ever.

Is it, in 2004 the NA market made $12,249.22, 2017 dollar, not sure were it will end in 2017 but it will be under, maybe nearly by a billion. NA did shrink I think without even considering the disappearance of what was by far the main NA market money source, Dvds. in 1997 the second bigget movie oversea, the giant Jurassic Park 2 made 390 million, just to show how ridiculous Titanic run was, second biggest domestic was 250m. in 2016, more movies did beat that 390 million oversea and by larger amount than those who did beat 250m domestic.

Only ? Avatar was also the biggest domestic unadjusted title by a large amount for more than 5 year's. Yes it is the biggest movie of all time pretty much from is OS number alone, but it was also really big domestic.

I think the same, a representation of earth willingness to adjust and that willingness that stop over too much being asked.

You would if you were a studio, not that it necessarily need to matter. And not sure how true you are with yourself, if Warcraft would have been domestic heavy instead of China heavy ], broke a list of video games adaptation domestic market records I think you would have find is bo superior. Same for the last Resident evil, if it would have been 50/50 dom/intl....

Well even at a total price tag of 800m TLJ will be one of the most profitable movie of the year, if it reach that cost it will be because it will make a lot and lot of money (otherwise it will stay much lower)

Are you assuming the movie will make in revenue around $1 for every $1 made a the box office, not impossible for a star wars movie with a small 800m box office (considering is 65% take and larger than usual everywhere, impact on merc, heavy home video), but often now blockbuster do less than $1 by $1 at the box office, because the dvd market went in large part away and never really replaced it. You could be right, but do not assume someone estimating the break even point to be the same as the total cost... they are 2 different thing even if related.

It could get close to 800m (but not necessarily 1 billion ) that can happen on mega profitable movies, deadline that tend to underestimate total cost more than overestimate them (mostly because of the budget and participation bonus line) had Force Awaken costing around 776 million: http://deadline.com/2016/03/star-wars-the-force-awakens-movie-profit-2015-lucasfilm-disney-1201726142/ Of the 1122 million Spider Man 3 made, Sony kept only 188m of them for an extreme example of how high total cost can go.... Davinci Code went to around 650m.

There some study that show that releasing during the award season, while looking like an award possible candidate and getting no attention actually hurt your box office, if you have a Monument Men push it to February for sure.

Is Hostile tanking to terrible level ? When no distributor picked it and was not getting award attention I expected it to have an impossible road to success with that what, 50m budget, but still those PTA for 5 or less theater are terrible, they look like The Last Flag Flying numbers and that didn't reach 1 million.

In general bigger the audience as long as they are into the movie (and reacting to the movie and not something else). Comedic beat are probably the most enhanced by the presence of an audience, but it is also true for shocking reveal and so on.

And by a giant amount, Dangal was the biggest of 2016 and P.K. of 2015 also I think, seem to be the norm now for Indian movie to achieve that.

Or the biggest OW of the year having over 6.7 multiplier legs like Phantom Menace. The fact that no movie openned in more than 3,400 theater than factor inflation, Thursday being now part of the OW numbers and it look less crazy, but still...

Oh yes, that is misleading I wanted to say of just that year.

I get that, but and ? My question is more why would anyone be please that a movie like this is succeeding....? My theory is sympathy for Sony (at least that why I find it kind of nice). Live action and not Christmas special then