Barnack

Not sure I get this board enthusiasm about yet an other 90s remake doing great business ? Is it some sympathies toward Sony and just to a point anything not disney/Universal doing great is awesome for keeping some form of competition alive ?

AOTC was a low bar to use, because of how terrible the movie was, it's run was terrible for a SW movie, it is still the only SW movie not ending number one of the year domestic.

Most of them had a market growth for the opening weekend. 64m was the largest opening weekend in 1999 and Star Wars did it with an wednesday opening. Attack of the Clones 80m was only 3rd best of 2002, 9 movies did 50m that year vs 2 in 1999. Not sure Attack of the clones really made a better OW than is predecessor.

Probably nature of the audience (maybe Jumanji is getting disproportionally the wide family crowd and will play more like a family movie title than star wars). Both TGS/Jumanji play more like family title, PP3-stars wars less so, PP3 the least and the less helped by Christmas day.

It is not a male dominated industry ?: Women comprised 13% of directors on the top 700 films, but just 7% on the top 250 films. They made up 13% of writers on the top 700 films, and 11% on the top 250 films. And 27% of producers on the top 700 films were female, while 23% on the top 250 films were female. And women accounted for 9% of cinematographers on the top 700 films, but 5% of cinematographers on the top 250 pictures. The number of female editors stayed consistent at 18% in both test samples. I am not sure there is many role not dominated by males (say 60% or more of the employee) in that industry, maybe casting director and talent agents/accounting and some place like that.

One possible difference could be the amount of first dollar gross type player (the concept of waiting the movie to be profitable in case of star wars making little sense), specially the original cast involved. Because yes 800m is enormous for a domestic heavy and home video sellers heavy franchise like star wars (even if we assume they are not considering merchandising impact here). Could mean a 425m budget (production + bonus) at break even point. I doubt we will have any clue of the Last Jedi budget or break even point, we had no idea about the previous 2 star wars movie, Disney is historically very discreet about is budgets (we only know them year later if they used tax credit and the number that the press wrote about them tend to be way off the mark), Disney tend to finance their movie alone and are in house project, not something that was sold on the block like the latest Tarantino movie. Hard to see how anyone could know a Star wars movie budget.

Many didn't even got what the main ideas were, in that context it is hard to say it was too blatant. I kid you not when I say that some (at Screen Junkie) were piss

I think it was a bit too subtle with is main idea, maybe some did find they hit you on the nose with it (really ?), while many didn't understand it at all.

The fact that the question include both is part of the problem, an unstable device has little chance to become a well used device, imagine worrying about using your dollar because you feel they would be worth much more next week and vice versa rushing to spend them feeling the value could go down, those huge inflation/deflation must be a giant break to any massive use as the main currency. If a cryptocurrency become state use it will not be the bitcoin I would imagine but their own. Dollar and other currency have a lot of things going on for them, one of those is how good they have been in the last 20 year's, no crazy inflaiton/deflation, one of the most stable time for many currency in all human history, so much that younger people take a good stable currency as granted, very few I would think feel for any change to be made. Momemtum, the amount of dollars all around the world is really huge: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/money-supply-m0 More chance to replace currency in country with very unstable money or without state money, the dollar in our life time would be surprising.

There is maybe some technical reason, some of the lenses were made for that movie and never re-used, shooting in such heat on 65mm at the time had some technical issue that maybe gave a bit of an unique result, 65mm movie are rare nowaday to start with, etc.... But an other factor is how much would it cost now, the shoot was very long (around 285 actual shooting days), a king lended is army to help the battle scene, the list of locations is James Bond level: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0056172/locations They built small cities and so on, movies does not tend to get that kind of giant production now.

If you have really basic parents.....

Pain&Gain was is best of him I ever saw, imo. It take more than Dwayne Johnson and the movie to be good. This it is big franchise remake using a proven high concept and having Kevin Hart (arguably the biggest domestic draw when it is a comedy) with him.

A bit of under estimating Kevin Hart domestic in the conversation about Jumanji. Kevin Hart did more with Ride Along than with Central Intelligence and chunck out 90m or more domestic title without much effort (not much quality, spectacle, franchise, etc... needed) and can open himself all alone on stage over 10m. Not sure Johnson is proven to be a bigger domestic draw than Hart in a comedy at this point.

Less and less thought, they have less cars, less jobs, go out less, date less, etc... The 12-17 year's old were just 13% of the tickets sold (boy and girls), while in the past the 12-15 alone could go to 14%: https://books.google.ca/books?id=qxynbtC3JQgC&pg=PA388&lpg=PA388&dq=mpaa+study+ticket+sales+age+group+12%3D17&source=bl&ots=K6ap0d0U9S&sig=gv5dxbb3ou7ItFe7nRVLrJgBBAk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwid-suM06HYAhXLkeAKHXThCBUQ6AEIVjAI#v=onepage&q=mpaa study ticket sales age group 12%3D17&f=false Last year, the 12-24 were 29% of the tickets sales, in 1985 it was over 50%, in 1999 it was 41%. Smaller horror movie that get big let Get Out, their main audience were older female, Rings was mostly female, Split was mostly female, horror tend to have an over 50% female audience. Under 25 male are I think the most expensive quadrant to convince into going to theater more and more at least that what I remember from an interview. Their per capita attendance is still above older people, but the general population is just getting older and older.

That is not a bad point, december giant legs were in part thought because of smaller OW that they would have in the summer, and that does not apply with those Star Wars release.

I am not sure how much a 40% drop from TLJ would put it but if we are talking about still over 720-750m WW, I doubt Solo being profitable would be in play, it is probably a less than 360m net budget and when you look at that cast, no one is getting first dollar gross big points type, even probably accepting to work for nearly "free" a la Gadot on WW and many others because of the level of opportunity it is for a career.

That pretty much what 50 shades of Grey is for the Twilight franchise no ? Adapt very successful fanfiction into movies is not unheard of. Same for letting people dictate a movie content, MTV did it in the past, that did lead to terrible result and box office flop. The Room did feel a bit like a movie that could result of a process like that (we want boobs, a scene with a gun, etc....)

Higher the chance the fanbase and GA is on board the safer a product is. Not playing it safe is accepting a good chance that most people to hate it (not an issue for movie that only seek to please 1-2% of the population and trying to do 50m, a big problem for Star Wars). Star wars playing it quite safe, every statement the movie made make pretty much full consensus in society, pretty much pure and easy to follow narrative, not one shocking image or moment. It was not Matrix sequel, Cloud Atlas, Tree of Life unsafe exercise either. All the pace issue and not knowing what is going on in the middle and setup that does not pay much are not playing it safe or unsafe, it is probably execution issues.

Maybe no panic, maybe they calmly fire directors

I think chance are good that Kingsman sequel will have started to shoot before Disney acquisition impact on Fox would have started to show. Say it take 1 year's for the acquisition to actually go through how long will it take for disney to make change at Fox ? It went really fast with smaller entity like Marvel / Lucas Film, but a bigger thing ? With big name having big pay or play contract attach to projects ? I could see an other year before the transition already happen, and with what we see in theater usually what was shoot the year before and greenlight the year before that.... Kingsman 3, even Maybe Deadpool 3 could be on there way.

I agree this is not much of a Han or no Han for the most part (is absence was well known opening weekend...) But how sequel movie play did change a lot from ESB time vs now, during the 70s early 80s, movie were mostly seen in theater, so the possible audience for the sequels were just among people that had seen the first one in theater, that by definition will always go down, from back to the future, Godfather 2, no matter how good the movie was. I think rules of thumb, if everything went right you lost around 30% of the business on sequels back in these days. And attack of the clones is I think universally seen has the worst entry of the series. Making in both case the comparable a bit of a low bar for Last Jedi. Now Force Awake was on Netflix for a very long time and sequels can hold better because of this, that said Force Awaken was such a big hit that maybe it does not matter (completely saturated the possible audience for ticket buyers), that I was expecting it to play like those old sequels than the newer franchise that didn't drop (Potter-Lords of the Rings that was gaining new audience via the books/home video after the first movie entry).

Disappointed or not is all about expectation, and you know that top 5 of all time is a bit misleading, the main story line star wars adjust over 800m except for the SW2&3 prequels, all stars wars except for the worst (SW 2) were the biggest domestic movie of the year. It does put it in a different category, a bit like Canadian if their hockey team win the silver medal at hockey or the US dream team at basketball... If he was really in the top 5 of all time (E.T./New Hope/Titanic/Force Awaken type of run) no one would be talking about any disappointment. If a Star Wars movie do not reach a 3.15 multiplier with a December release (693m dbo), hard to imagine not being disappointed by this film legs: In the history of big december openning that would be the worst multiplier in the top 25: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/weekends/month/?mo=12&p=.htm Worst multiplier for a star wars movie ever by a good amount. It should do more than that, but I am talking if it goes that low... (obviously if it does around 3 or below we are entering worst possible scenario type of talk) Now the OW was so exceptionally good that the total will still be really good, even relative to the Force Awaken total, dropping 25% from an exceptional entry is still a good performance, something Jurassic World 2 would love to do, that Spectre would have love to do after Skyfall, etc... but because almost all that drop will be in the legs that could be worrisome.

Verbinski-Depp (he had 3 movie over a billion in just 5 year's for Disney)-Pirates was probably seen has the big asset live action wise (for a good reason) around that time.

2010 was quite a different time for Disney, before Avengers release and they just acquired them, it was before buying Lucas Art

They all share the same look and feel yes photography, tone, etc..., maybe more than Rogue One vs the other 2 in some ways, Rogue One was quite different in many ways, but still had the strong Star Wars elements in it. But in production design and setting, Dr Strange, Winter Soldier, Guardian-Thor 3, Ant-man, Civil War, Spider Man is more varied, same for the genre they can go to thriller comedy, high school comedy, space fantasy comedy, heist comedy. Look at the trailer of Black Panther, in production design, setting, it is quite different than Thor 3 or Guardian 2, tone/photography/pacing/score/writing will probably be quite similar, will see.