Barnack

It is a bit different, most tv show binge watch will offer a big cliffhanger every 24 or 50 minutes to make sure you come back, it trick you it is an attention grabbing machine. And even then many bingewatch while looking to a second screen from time to time nowaday. That said, 2 hours is certainly not too much for big movies nowaday, today big movies are much longer than the 90s, 4 hours epic would be maybe too long for today yes (in the past it was a show with an Entr'acte in the middle to give people a break and go to the bathroom), but certainly not 130/140 minutes.

That would be surprising, a bit like Guardian of the galaxy 2 Rises was released just before the exchange rate drop of late august. July 2014 vs july 2017 exchange rate for Planets of the Apes main market Currency to USD (with the % drop) 2014 2017 AUD 0.929627 0.763767 0.178416 BRL 0.442693 0.307229 0.306 CNY 0.161838 0.147011 0.091617 COP 0.000533 0.000325 0.389981 EUR 1.338688 1.147052 0.143152 GBP 1.688619 1.285347 0.238817 JPY 0.009727 0.008781 0.097299 KRW 0.000973 0.00087 0.105609 MXN 0.075614 0.055805 0.26198 PEN 0.357897 0.307248 0.141518 RUB 0.027998 0.016448 0.41255 SEK 0.144942 0.119062 0.178557 Average 0.212125 It dropped in average of 21% since. War need to do about 25% better just to do has much has Rises oversea.

But you said a huge jump in pre-sales (Presales went up over 70%) is showing that it isn't a movie with huge pressales. Isn't how much a movie a walkup movie: (box office - presales) / box office What you seem to be talking about is not being frontloaded.

Ok now I' really not sure I understand what people mean by walkup film, is presales going up 70% very low because it is the type of movie people do not pre-buy, but walk up too ?

Those movie are really Charle vs Magneto centric, but usually 2/3 other get some screen time and lines. I cannot find the other script, but for Days of future past: https://www.scribd.com/document/258174506/X-MEN-DAYS-OF-FUTURE-PAST-by-Jane-Goldman-Simon-Kinberg-Matthew-Vaughn-pdf A search for the words give The 3 main lead character like you said clearly ahead Charle or xavier: 501 Erik / Magneto: 348 Logan / wolverine : 346 results But 3 others got lot of moments/line to for good supporting roles: Hank / Beast : 203 Raven / mystique : 148 Trask: 124

Had to check, didn't recognize that it was Pattinson in the movie (well the only movie of is I saw him was one of the Potter and the Rover)

Titanic The Searcher Apocalypse now Casablanca Empire Strike Back

I wonder what math they use (33% of the BO, half to the new movie the others sharing the rest...), because it is such low number usually anyway maybe they just don't care.

Do we know how does residual/bonus for the previous 2 movie get accounted for ? (or is it excluded from those ?)

That a nice progression, not so long ago after step 2, almost nothing could have changed the narrative of a movie.

Mojo take a long time updating individual country, but the worldwide total probably take it into account: Almost the same intl numbers that the-numbers.com (mojo is a little bit bigger) and they have japan at 23.2million http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=intl&id=potc5.htm http://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Pirates-of-the-Caribbean-Dead-Men-Tell-No-Tales#tab=international

That a bit 2 different thing no ? ( I would imagine related) It will be frontloaded like franchise movie tend to be, but is audience is from a large part from a population that I would imagine does not pre-buy movie ticket online much and walk ups to the theater and buy it there.

The gross budget is 197.47 m Euro http://www.profession-spectacle.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/La-production-cinématographique-en-2016.pdf And it is getting at least 30m Euro in rebate (that the maximum from the French state), depending if they have to sell it, can use it or if it is direct cash it would go around 167.47 Euro for the net budget. Depending on when it was spent and the exchange rate use, that is around 184 million US yes, maybe they received others credit from other jurisdiction.

In gross budget, in US dollar the difference is considerably smaller than that (if we are to look at the box office in US dollar later and not in Euro) Lucy: 45.445m Euro gross budget for around 60.5 million US in those day in 2013/14 exchange rate. Valerian: 197.47m Euro gross budget around 217.2 million US in 2015/16 exchange rate 4.3 time in Euro, 3.6 time in US dollar. Net it could be bigger than that and close to 4.5/5 like you said I really don't know because it is certain Valerian is not getting 73.5m in rebate (33% like that Lucy rumor), it is capped at 30m euro from France I think.

A quick look: Hidden Figure: 30 mama mia: 32 Lord of the rings: 35 Wonder Woman: 40 ? Dark Knight: 40 The Blind Side: 45 Spider-Man (2002): 45 Hunger game Catching fire: 45 Look like it will need to get over 45 days to get into special top 5 category. Titanic: 101 (lol)

They do and they have studio accepting the deal because it cost them almost nothing in marketing to release a movie under that deal for a market that large (for many movie the studio marketing expense in China will look like what they spent in say Belgium) Making the net theatrical return (China bo * 0.25 - China release expense) of about 22/23%, that is right in the middle of the world average in term of net return, not particularly good but not bad all, specially considering that it is the only market with a risk 0 of loosing money by spending more on the release than what you get back from tickets. As long as releasing stay cheap in China (with a controlled market and a very digital marketing system), I don't see why they would up that number up, as long as we don't see big popular movie in China refusing to release there or China movie being popular in the US and being able to use those as a negotiation peace, expect that 25% number to stay around that level, it is not a bad deal at all. What matter more and what is more different is the after theatrical windows market.

Not sure who are those people buying ticket for some of those movies so much in advance, the size (probably why they all only talk in percentage and not in actual number) must be really low with a lot of noise.

I was not sure to understand what was going on here, before realizing that it was 2014 and that 2014 was before Force Awaken. Even then, middle earth was not that far from potter: The 6 movie average: 975 million Lowest entry: 869.3 million Last entry: 956 million Highest: 1119.1 (in 2003) Potter in 2014 was at Average: 965 million Lowest entry: 796.7 million Highest and last entry: 1341.5 million Was it really in a different realm of sustained success than Lord of the Rings ?

If grapes of wrath and stagecoach would have been the same year I imagine he could fight Godfather 2 + The conversation, or Jurassic park+Schindler list. Yeah if you give lot of point for the box office part of the success, Spielberg is clearly ahead here. But Coppola 1974, to the Oscar: *Best picture for Godfather 2 Best picture for The conversation *Best director for Godfather 2 *Best writing adaptation for Godfather 2 Best writing original for The Conversation He got 5 nomination with 3 win For a comparison, Spielberg got 2 nomination and won both. The first godfather was the highest grossing movie of all time at is release I think (unadjusted), Godfather 2 I don't know how much it did worldwide but domestic it dropped quite a bit so I would agree that Jurassic Park commercial level of success probably give him the edge, but it is not that far apart.

In term of movie released the same year, arguably, but 1974 Coppola, Godfather 2 + The Conversation, is hard to beat. John Ford was making so much movies that I imagine one of is year's could be in contention also. In the same 1974, Mel Brook released both Young Frankenstein and Blazing Saddles too, big year for dual release of the same director.

Big shoot director were really just studio employee in Hollywood (maybe not like the guy recording sound but really not anything close to today), could you imagine firing a Peter Jackson today.... and a Cameron accepting to be an hired director on a movie already started after studio fired someone of Jackson stature....

They are about 95% of the same, pretty much all metacritic are RT top critic and vice versa, with sometime 1 or 2 different name. That why they make such a big deal (that people buy) in how the present the same critics with the same result (one putting the average rating in a bigger font than the other), they are almost for all movie exactly the same, average score = MC score.

Give it a second try 10 year's for now, sometime it play like a thrilling very enjoyable horror-ish movie and one of the most fun movie watching experience (didn't like the first 2 time I watched it). Has for the top critics, it is easy to find out : https://www.rottentomatoes.com/help_desk/critics/ TOP CRITICS Top Critic is a title awarded to the most significant contributors of cinematic and critical discourse. To be considered for Top Critics designation, a critic must be published at a print publication in the top 10% of circulation, employed as a film critic at a national broadcast outlet for no less than five years, or employed as a film critic for an editorial-based website with over 1.5 million monthly unique visitors for a minimum of three years. A Top Critic may also be recognized as such based on their influence, reach, reputation, and/or quality of writing, as determined by Rotten Tomatoes staff. Amy Nicholson on MTV (or pretty much anywhere) is an obvious top critic to me, she is a big name, university in film, anthropology,video, writing, playwriting on a really big outlet doing this for over 15 year's that wrote a book on Tom Cruise for Cahier du cinema, what more credential could be required ?

Perfectly normal for someone like Amy Nicholson to be considered a top critic when working on a major publication like MTV, MTV had invested a lot on their movie reviewing.

Considering the era I'm not sure it beat it, Flemming was the third director on wizard of Oz the previous having been fired and he left that production before the end to replace a director that was fired on Gone With the Wind (that he left by moment because of exhaustion). And it is a producer that directed the long reshoot on wizard of Oz. He was the main but not only director on Gone with the wind, the 3 director shooting days: Cukor:18 Wood: 24 Fleming: 93 I'm not sure he was involved and in control at a Speilberg level in pre (obviously not in pre production being a replacement director)/post production nor even involved during the full length of the actual production of those 2 movie. Troubled production, 1,2,3 director being fired, test screening going terribly and the movie changing a lot, 3 month of re-shoot's, those were the nice days.