Barnack

I think it would be fair to assume that someone is saying something different by celebrated than acclaimed. There is an argument to be made that it was vastly celebrated by the general audience: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_MTV_Movie_%26_TV_Awards But yeah it was not an acclaimed movie.

Seem like a good drop to me (if 9.4m hold), it would be an second day in a row over man of steel: 2013/06/14 1 $44,013,367 +265% 4,207 $10,462 $56,075,491 1 2013/06/15 1 $36,315,318 -17% 4,207 $8,632 $92,390,809 2 2013/06/16 1 $36,290,677 n/c 4,207 $8,626 $128,681,486 3 2013/06/17 1 $12,585,005 -65% 4,207 $2,991 $141,266,491 4 2013/06/18 1 $11,511,127 -9% 4,207 $2,736 $152,777,618 5 2013/06/19 1 $9,002,279 -22% 4,207 $2,140 $161,779,897 That would point to a second weekend above Man of steel (above 41.2 m), if the NBA game was a factor we could see an over 46/47m second weekend.

I doubt studio have much control, probably independently done. Has for refined/celebral Sci-fi, even great one tend to have hard time: Arrival did less that WW first weekend alone and is considered a big success. We got a lot of more serious sci-fi recently, and even the hyped good/great one had a hard time a the BO: midnight special : 3.7 million Ex Machina: 25.4 million Her: 25.5 million I'm not sure they are underrating demand. The big spectacle that have the big emotional beat (Martian, Inception, Gravity, Interstellar, Jurassic Park) tend to be those that really do well.

The article did say that he is still a big draw (and that is 2 biggest first weekend of is career came after the incident, the Internet told people that is career was affected by it). The article is really good it was made by someone that studied Cruise career and wrote a book on it. Destroyed more in the sense that the theory is that Cruise developed a need to be loved more since and that he think audience will accept him only has likable action Cruise, the title is a bit click bait.

That could be an interesting case, in canada there is some precendant, like people suing woman only gym: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stopps_v_Just_Ladies_Fitness_(Metrotown)_Ltd One big point in a city with multiple gym is that: Firstly, the tribunal found that the complainant was not adversely affected by the denial of membership Here that will be certainly the case, I suspect a theater playing the same movies on 5 screen at the same time will not be far. Second, the tribunal found that the complainant failed to prove that his dignity has been adversely affected by his denial of membership. That will probably be the case there too. Third, the tribunal found that its purpose is to provide compensation for those who have actually suffered from being discriminated against, and that the tribunal should not be used to make a political point. The tribunal found that Stopps's claim was politically motivated, and filing such claims harms those who file legitimate claims of discrimination, including men who have been discriminated against and whose dignity has been demeaned. That sound to be the case here too. Don't know for the US and that state thought. P.S. Speaking of legal complain, do people remember the lawsuit against the movie Drive, against it apparently misleading trailer and anti-semetist element, the original lawyer is still going at it, and never stopped over the year's, and he is now trying to sue everyone that played the movie (Apple, Netflix, etc...) Al brook, amazon and a bunch of people: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3258402-Drive-Motion.html

Not sure the concept is a bigger seller for a movie than what The Martian high concept was, it take a bit more sentence, bit more nerdy, sound more like a tv show, seem unsure if it will be pulled off and safe to go see in theater. I agree 70-75m is certainly possible, but like you say the biggest unadjusted opening weekend of all time for a non established franchise live action movie, first one to 100m, with that cast and that concept, the movie would need to deliver big time in those trailers and reviews, 100m that is Independance Day/Jurassic Park/Men In Black adjusted, it is more than Guardian of the Galaxy or Skyfall.

Hard to imagine for me too, except if the book become a phenomenon before the release, that would be the biggest ow of all time for a live action of a non well establish franchise. American Sniper at 89 (with a platform release) , Passion of the christ (while Jesus is big) 83m, I am Legend (prime Will smith) 77m and Avatar at 77 million are the only one coming close. The Martian 55 million opening and overall performance (228m dbo/ 630m WW) would be incredible for Ready player one I think.

If you listen to that interview with is editor: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjdOG-w0Zz4 That seem to still be the case, one of the most said sentence during pre-production/production/post that they say is according to him: "How many million more at the box office will we really do if we do this instead of simply this", he seem still completely obsess with crowd pleasing, financial/responsible film-making and world success. Has he got over 70 year's old, than obviously is taste and the audience he tend to do is movie for changed, not that fact that he do movie for them, he is far from Harmony Korine or Malick (and even them don't really do movie for themselve, if they were the last humans on earth they would never spend 6 month in editing room for a movie no one will ever see that just does not exist people that make movie for themselve, it is a communicative medium always made for others).

If we take the numbers of think piece about no one want a sequel to Avatar divided by the amount wrote for Alice in Wonderland sequel (wrote year's before it's release, while 0 marketing for it or shooting started yet), maybe it will give us an idea on Avatar 2 box office potential.

Loved Blair Witches too (the fact the movie never show anything paranormal happening was maybe part of it) I think the US versus rest of the world could be in play there too, religious theme horror probably is more terrifying in religious place/time (say the Exorcist being considered really scary, not to me, would probably be more if I was a believer in those stuff)

I will try to explain those number has I understand them, only the first column of number are an estimation of what probably happened, the 2 second column are just a way to put those result in today context. The number are in thousand yes. Here the number Source of revenue: Theatrical revenue (what goes to the studio from the theater ticket sold): 115.391 million Other revenue (vhs, tv, airplane, etc...): 190 million Total revenue: 305.4 million Source of expense: P&A (cost of prints and marketing of theatrical release): 90 million Others dist costs (making, shipping vhs, marketing of home video release, etc...): 49 million Production budget : 175 million Total cost: 314 million They estimate the movie lost a small amount of 8.5 million (305.4 million in revenue - 314 million in expense), but that all the lost were absorbed by the co-financier that gave more to the movie financing that they received, the studio making a small 12 million or so profit, co-financier loosing around 20 million or so. Usually co-financier on a movie take a bigger risk that the studio of not making their money back, the distributor of the movie tend to pay themselve and distribution expense first before starting to share revenue to others.

I think you could be right (and that is general with tracking), maybe it is unattended in the sense they do not realize that most people do not know what tracking is and many article didn't explain that weeks before release tracking at 65 million does not mean they predict you will open at 65m, it make the news more attractive to not clearly explain that part (but that does not require having any bias against a movie, simply a bias for sensationalism) Has for the way those article got quoted, that I would not be surprised that you would be right, didn't follow that much, my point was about the deadline/thr type reporting about actual tracking numbers.

Well that was the same tracking than Guardian of the galaxy at that point (i.e. pointing the movie to be a large success), my general point is that it seemed to be the narrative the studio wanted to be in the trades, they were the last one to have those low numbers. Those tracking number were not wishing the movie to be a failure, well I don't think so, those trade want click mostly, they had tracking number they published them and got clicks.

That was from the studio itself that told those outlets to tell us those numbers.

Probably, with the kind of wide release it will get, mid range horror movie that get wide tend to spend more on marketing than production. For examples: Evil dead: Budget: 17.25m Marketing cost: 36.7 m Deliver us from evil: Budget: 34.3 Marketing: 50.13m

They still have some malleability, maybe not on obvious title like a SH movie, but greenlight, budgeted and actual spending on marketing can be significantly different (sometime by 15%), but that could be just true for smaller title that make a lot of decision by how well they test. 22 jump street for example was greenlight with 30 m in marketing domestic for theatrical in mind and end up spending 34. This is the end had 35.2 m budgeted beginning of the year and end up spending 40.76m, they are probably adjusting themselve with tracking and rewarding people with more marketing when the movie test better than expected, I doubt studio plan well in advance that Hidden figures would get one of the biggest domestic marketing spending of the year for them.

Taking the talk from the other thread: I'm not so sure about that: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/disney-handed-record-31m-tax-credit-for-filming-avengers-in-uk-9783561.html At the date of 8 October 2014 they already had spent £208.1m on Avengers 2, that was around 336.22 million US at the time with still 6 month to go before the release and I would imagine some post-prod (sfx, sound, etc...), and maybe some reshoot expense still to go, it probably ended up over a 360 million gross budget for Ultron, could be more. And I doubt people on BvS got RDJ points, or that the producer are getting Feige points, Ultron cost could have been significantly larger (not that it matter too much when you do 600m at the box office). But normally Ultron total cost was massively over BvS at the end.

They heavily pointed out that she was on a long vacation from humanity problems if I remember BvS correctly, she did look like she was busy building herself a fortune(not that it require much if you are always young and working for 100 year's in a row), but her character was presented has high level exec/wealthy.

Wrong thread. (we cannot delete message ?)

That is somewhat an issue with the movie, but more on a rewatch, once it is establish that human will do it on their own and we know this because we know about WW2, it make the killing of Ares feel a bit useless (but then again maybe it change who get the A-bomb during WW2) I think BvS and Wonder Woman did establish that after seeing what she saw in WW1, that humans were maybe not worthy of their help or could not be helped by her, because there is no bad guy to kill, one person cannot change history course if that is the case. If the next movie is contemporary, after justice league, it should work. Trying to involve a superheroes in WW2 would be an incredible challenge, how that hero did let happen what happened in the conflict, much easier to do WW1 and step over WW2.

Spider man, Transformer, Despicable Me 3, all before I guess august is weak.

Do the hometeam has some advantage like in hockey (last change, faceoff, etc...) or it is purely crowd effect (that often instaure a referee bias) ?

Maybe they were, that what happen when 2 french speaking people speak in English to each others.

A commercial in the sense of shooting ads, I thought commercial movies.