krla
-
Posts
174 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Annual Subscriptions
Media Demo
Posts posted by krla
-
-
3 hours ago, setna said:
It´s 4th for wide releases, MBFGW was an abnormal run with ups and downs of theatres.If you classify 657 theaters as 'wide', then MBFGW's 12th wide weekend still beats TGM. That would be MBFGW's 27th week in release, overall.
-
Theater counts from The Numbers;
BOP has Pets making $8.3 and TGM at $6.8. That'd give them roughly the same PTA (with Pets a bit higher). Last weekend Pets and TGM had roughly the same PTA (again, with Pets slightly higher). Just quickly looking through some re-expansions and this would be the only one I've seen where a movie dropped in gross from the prior week. Even Morbius saw its take increase, though it's PTA dropped just under 20%. That would be roughly the same PTA drop that BOP is estimating for TGM.
Though a 421 theater expansion is pretty small for TGM, it's also getting some PLFs (probably what the majority of those 421 new theaters will be), bonus content, and a poster. I can't imagine that it sells less tickets than last weekend. And the tickets it does sell are going to be more expensive. If we take last weekend's PTA, assume that the existing theaters will be able to meet that based on the bonus content and posters alone, and that the 421 are all PLFs that will sell the same number of tickets, but at roughly 20% more, then we're looking at an increase of $1.25m over last week, or $8.25m. And if a single existing theater throws it on a PLF screen, then it's going to go higher. Maybe I'm way off base, but I think the floor on this weekend is around $8.4m.
BOP also has Pets with a tiny drop of 25%. I just can't see that happening?
I think TGM will easily be #2 this weekend. And if the stars align, maybe it can give Bullet Train a challenge.
I could be very wrong. Does anybody have good comparables for a ~15% 're-expansion'?
(btw, even with TGM's 'big' drop today, it still beat Pets' PTA by 10%.)
Just some math pulled out of my ass, I don't think it would be surprising to see ticket sales increase by 20% this weekend, and that the average ticket price is going to be roughly 20% higher. Which would put TGM at $10m. Even selling the same amount of tickets as last weekend, just with the average ticket 20% higher, we see $8.4m. For TGM to come in at $6.8m, it would basically require that either it sells roughly the same amount of tickets last week, and nobody sees it in PLF, or that it sells the same amount of tickets as if there was no re-expansion, no bonus content, no poster, but the higher PLF price is what boosts the take.
-
3
-
-
46 minutes ago, baumer said:
With a whole new generation becoming members of this site and a lot of the older members now either gone or just posting sporadically, I wonder how many people here actually get this reference?
Tell us the tale grandpa B.
-
1
-
-
- (7) Where the Crawdads Sing Sony Pictures $785,000 -54% -35% 3,164 $248 $65,433,484 25 - (9) Elvis Warner Bros. $555,000 -55% -38% 2,411 $230 $137,012,329 46 -
53 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:
The sisters came out as trans in 2010s. That is a fact and wasn’t even a discussion.
by the way, thanks for the warning points in advanced.
Came out publicly. If they came out as gay, would we say their prior films were made by straight people? Is the song Rocket Man by a gay singer, bisexual, or a straight one?
CAP MODERATION ETA:
Good points. Correct points. No one responded back. Please move on.
-
42 minutes ago, BestPicturePlutoNash said:
So then you're saying nobody liked movies made by women
We live in a patriarchal society which has molded us to value things produced by men. Men and women have different preferences at the group level. As this forum is presumably more testosterone packed, I'd imagine the films that appeal to the group would be the product of other men.
Also, since most films are directed by men, and older films even moreso, it means that there will be an inevitable skew towards male directors.
Anyways, I had a couple films directed by women on my list, so I'm Doing My Part. (though I did put a 2022 film on my list, so maybe it went straight into the trash, lol)
-
1
-
-
54 minutes ago, BestPicturePlutoNash said:
And no female Director for a live action film? That's not good
The Matrix was just on there.
-
9
-
-
18 hours ago, CaptNathanBrittles said:
Until INDIANA JONES 5 comes out... and Ford can add the 70s to that list.
If Dustin Hoffman can score a 100m grosser this decade, he'll have it from the 60s.
-
24 minutes ago, filmlover said:
With a re-release on IMAX, TGM could be #2 next weekend. EC said last week on Twitter that it will include bonus scenes "and more". I wonder what the 'and more' is?
Hell.. with TGM at around $7m this weekend and having miniscule drops as it is, IMAX will provide a nice boost, bonus content will provide a nice boost... it's possible that it could be #1 again.
TGM could/should hit $700m before Labor Day.
-
2
-
-
12 hours ago, LonePirate said:
Judging by the dual 12 year gaps in that table, it will be 2034 before we see another film join that trio.
First one was based on a historic event, second was a completely original film, third was a sequel. In 12 years, what will be the fourth? Prequel? Spin-off? Remake? Maybe we can predict what it will be, lol.
Cameron had the idea for Avatar around the time he was doing Titanic, and he planned to film it right after. Top Gun: Maverick was set in motion around 2010. So the next big one could be stretching its legs right now.
-
59 minutes ago, The Panda said:
As we’re now halfway through the list I want to give some shoutouts and teasers for some forum events coming up within the next year (or even sooner) to check out! (I am willing to give more shout outs if there’s other things people want advertised)
BOFFYs 10 Year Anniversary: The ‘Super’ BOFFYs coming very soon
These will be run by @Blankments and supported by me. More details to come but in honor of 10 years of BOFFYs, we will be doing a ceremony in which all prior winners become nominees in one super ceremony!
The 2022 BOFFYs coming January 2023
As always, the main BOFFYs ceremony will be back!
Journey: BOT’s Top Cinematic Odysseys of the Body, Mind, and Spirit coming late Spring 2023
The next list project I will be heading up is the most experimental BOT lists I’ll have run. This is because it’ll be three lists in one, a 25 movies about physical/bodily journeys (example: adventure and survival films, such as Raiders or Cast Away), 25 movies about mental journeys (example: psychological thrillers such as Inception, Get Out, or Shutter Island), and 25 movies about Spiritual Journeys (example: Life of Pi, Tundun, and anything by Ingmar Bergman)
Gotta give a shoutout to Baumer's Impossible (but very lucrative) movie trivia contest which is open now! ALL questions are posted. Deadline is September 1st!
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, filmlover said:
I mentioned it before but I'm pretty sure filming with IMAX cameras must cost a pretty penny. I saw the movie in the format over the weekend and have to say it was definitely worth seeing that way.
Was the entire thing shot in IMAX? I think the lowest you'll spend for just a few weeks is a couple million. Shooting an entire movie in IMAX will typically run into the tens of millions. Depends a lot on how much film is used and developed, too. If Stanley Kubrick were alive to film in IMAX, he'd probably burn through $200 million, lol..
1 hour ago, The Panda said:TGM, despite its amazing run, might only end up 3rd of the year DOM and WW.
BP: WF could have a 250m OW and finish around BP's total, increases WW.
Avatar 2 does 1b DOM and 3b+ WW.
Sad for Tom Cruise.
I could see Avatar being very hit or miss. 3D doesn't have the premium prices of 2009. There's not going to be the limit on 3D screens that keeps its legs long, and thus the continued press about it. It'll be much, much more frontloaded than the first, which means theaters will drop it when pta drops. In '09, they were recouping the investment in 3d, so had a reason to keep Avatar around. The higher ticket price boosted pta. Now Avatar will be competing for premium screens like everyone else. It's competing on a relatively level playing field compared to the first. So when pta declines, it loses theaters, screens, and showings.
Also won't have USD$50+ ticket prices in China. So while it may make more in China, due to more theaters being able to show it, and thus more tickets sold, the increase may not be what some are expecting.
Hopefully the debate about the cultural impact of Avatar will be settled, though.
1 hour ago, LonePirate said:That is a mystery which makes you wonder if the obvious reason is the actual reason.
The obvious reason being that Wonka is expected to make more than Nope? Or that Nope was filmed in a couple months, while Wonka was filmed over half a year?
-
4 hours ago, Johnny Tran said:
How long are we going to say "without China" though? There's tons of movies from the past that never got a China release, you can't really expect big box office from China at this point until things change
It's relevant when people use a movie with a healthy China gross to make a movie w/o China look even worse by comparison.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, The Dark Alfred said:
TGM just locked up 700m OS. Domestic better follow suit and produce super soft drops in August. It's looking good for 700m domestic and 1.42 billon WW. Re-release should happen as well. There are so many water blockbusters coming (BP2, Avatar, Titanic, Aquaman) we will be needing the air combats back 😁
It should hit $650m around August 1st. If it averages around $1m a day in August, it'll be at $680 going into Labor Day weekend. Following the same holds as the past 7 days, it hits $650m on August 1st, $660m on August 7, $670m on August 15th, $680 on August 26th, $685m September 1st.
Week before labor day it could do $5.4m. Labor Day week is usually, at minimum, 2x the prior week. So that'd be $11m, bringing it up to $696m on September 8th. FFH did +170% on LD week, which would give TGM a potential $14.58m, bringing it to ~$699.58m on September 8th.
Of course something like Bullet Train could take Tom out at the ankles.
-
1
-
-
Just wanted to let everyone know that my donkey, my lover, & I made $30k this weekend
Spoiler- N My Donkey, My Lover & I Greenwich $30,000 51 $588 $30,000 1 
-
11 hours ago, M37 said:
In all this talk of legs, I think there is an underestimation of how the barren release calendar - the doggiest dog days of August we've had in a long time - is going to help lift the value of everything currently out in the market. After the Bullet Train/Easter Sunday weekend, there's really nothing of any consequence coming out: a niche release in Dragon Ball, then Beast which should do at best mid-teens, and handful of re-releases (NWH, ET, Jaws).
Whether it's club subscribers trying to get their money's worth, or just regular moviegoers searching for something to watch and reconsidering their first impression, it will raise the floor of even the "weaker" titles. Here are some previous weekends to illustrate, with holds from films not generally considered to have good WOM/legs noted
May 20-22 (2 weeks after Strange MoM) Notables: Sonic -12%, FB3 -24%
April 29-May 1 (2 weeks after FB3) Notables: Morbius -34%, Ambulance -35%
Jan 28-30 (2 weeks after Scream) - Notables: The 355 -16%, King's Man -7%
Sept 17-19 (2 weeks after Shang-Chi) - Notables: Candyman -26%, Paw Patrol -25%
Those (often lol) holds is what should be expected from mid-August until probably the 9/23 weekend with Darling and Avatar.
I imagine that's great for TGM, too. Should have some flat weeks coming up in August? And then up for LD weekend. If Bullet Train doesn't eat too much into TGM audience, could be possible TGM stays above $1m daily throughout August? Or at least averages $1m+ daily. I think around August 1st it'll hit $650m. So it could be over $680m going into labour day. Probably far too optimistic.
9 hours ago, Valonqar said:It is. Studios don't approve bigger budgets if they expect lesser boxoffice. Marvel didn't approve 250M for L&T expecting the boxoffice barely above Ragnarok (180M budget), for example. They bank on audience/fandom growth. So 68M for Nope points at they expected the boxoffice above US and GO. It's no rocket science. I mean, the movie isn't a bomb and it'll turn some small profit so no need to be defensive. But it isn't making more than cheaper movies so return on investment will be smaller.
Marvel is also banking on other revenues, like toys and other merch. They'd probably still be rolling in the dough if they handed out tickets for free.
2 hours ago, ThePrinceIsOnFire said:It's not like a movie is either a flop or a success, there is a grey zone where something simply performs rather well/rather poorly when compared to the studios expectations.
I don't think execs at Warner Bros were aiming at just 250 M when they greenlit Elvis and gave it a 85 M budget, they probably hoped to reach Bohemian Rapsody's height (910 M) or at least earn HALF of it, which would have put Elvis at 450 M.
Did it recoup its budget? Pheraps, but we would need to know ho much of it goes to the Elvis foundation, how much to the international distributors and how much in P&A.
Luhrmann is a reliable director (he too has his flops, like Australia) so that's why they give him money to work with, because he rarely gives them a loss.
Now what I don't agree with in the slightest is that it would be considered a success in the pre-pandemic era, given that Rocketman had a way better budget/WW gross ratio (40 to 190, almost 5x compared with 85 to -at best - 250, which is almost 3x) and still wasn't considered a success but rather a decent showing.
Same goes for Nope, everyone in this board will sing its praise like it saved the box office, but a projected 200 M WW gross on a 68 M budget is not a great deal for a Studio that will likely have spent money and time on a project to have a net gain of about ZERO.
As for Thor, that too is certainly under Disney/Marvel expectations and its bloated budget shouldn't take the movie to a mere 700 M WW Tally... it's crystal clear that the goal was to reach 1B, which should be achieved when you put in a 250 M budget. Is it a Flop? Hell no, but it is a disappointement nonetheless.
1 hour ago, Eric the Tethered said:As an aside, I'm very much annoyed with how box office grosses are and lament about how only "nostalgic toy commercials" are performing well. But like I don't think any WB or Uni execs will be crying themselves to sleep over Elvis nor Nope's numbers. They aren't life-changing, but both are likely to be profitable and well above their budgets just on theatrical. When we include VOD and TV airings and all that fun stuff, they'll be golden and will likely ensure Baz and Jordan will get other big projects. At most, I could maybe see a lower-budget effort from them, but they've thrived in lower costs before and have made stuff that's arguably more cinematic than the 250M budget behemoths. I know some will cry foul at "lowered expectations", but I think it's good to have perspective with all this.
With Elvis, they'll probably sell a ton of DVDs/Blu-Rays, since older folks still use those often. And it sounds like there is a ton of extra footage, so it's possible they pump out special editions, director's cuts, maybe even chop it into a miniseries or something. Lots of revenue potential there.
-
2 hours ago, Valonqar said:
Studio less so, though. That would be the lowest grossing Peele movie on the highest budget (68M before P&A).
I imagine this budget is inflated due to covid and vfx. Worst case is he gets a smaller budget in the future. Hard to say how that ends up; some directors just fail hard when they have to do a lean shoot, and some directors strive, If he can still succeed on a leaner budget, that will greatly enhance his value.
He's also getting to the point where actors will seek out the opportunity to work with him. This can bring down budgets as you can use profit sharing. Then the studios are more likely to gamble on your projects, since one of the more expensive components (cast) are taking on risk as well.
-
5 hours ago, M37 said:
Sure, Star Wars has sand/desert scenes, but the entire premise takes place in space
Dune had major PLF factor, great WOM … and grossed less than a movie based off a 65-year old Disney ride in Jungle Cruise
Guess I should clarify that this is more of a modern audience thing
Imagine if that Luke fella had grown up in a jungle. I'd bet pennies from heaven that that there Star Wars film would have blown off a lot of wigs with that premise.
Can't wait for The Rock's next flop, Dune Cruise.
-
2 hours ago, Doffy said:
Wtf Thor only lost 5 screens?
5 theaters. It's probably down many more screens and showings than that. It'll make roughly over $5,000 per theater this weekend. If you're running a theater, the only movie that will earn more is Nope. Most theaters have multiple screens, no reason to not show both.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, TwoMisfits said:
No, it won't. This was just people willing to pay $5, but not $15, per person to see the movie.
It was still a large bump for a Tuesday. Last I checked, audiences seemed pleased with the movie. With decent WOM, it could hold well this weekend.
1 hour ago, TwoMisfits said:Families aren't really showing up, so it's not a big issue.
I mean, there was:
Lightyear - catastrophic fail
Minions - big success, but thanks to 13-25, not really hugely family driven
Paws of Fury - fail
Super-Pets - TBD - I think it's success is gonna ride on how much they can get 13+ to show up...although it will still be above Paws
I imagine, regardless of how well Super Pets does, that it will obliterate Paws. But I get the feeling Super Pets will also come in below expectations. And is California gonna be masking up again? That could keep families away from theaters.
1 hour ago, Bishop54 said:It only gained 8% while most other movies went up 20+%.
Compare it to last Tuesday, it had the smallest week to week drop of -19%.
-
Paws of Fury had a really nice bump (57%). I wonder if it'll be able to hold well this weekend?
-
38 minutes ago, vale9001 said:
Also for crawdads Apple tv tweeted the movie is coming soon but without a date. They already have a date or Sony can decide it after seeing how the movie hold on theaters?.
I'd imagine the contract would have a tentative date, but with windows based on performance. Otherwise they would have announced the Apple TV date prior to (or upon) release.
If Sony didn't negotiate it that way, and just gave a firm theatrical window (like 45 days), then Apple may see this as a way to renegotiate and get a box office cut for extending the window.
The contract is probably something like this; xx-day theatrical window; if the film exceeds $xx gross, then Sony can exercise an option to extend the window xx days. If it grosses $xx after that, Sony can further extend the window, but Apple starts getting some of the box office. Could also have a provision where Apple can extend the theatrical window (if they think Sony is doing the math and thinks it isn't worth extending the window and splitting with Apple, whereas Apple might want the film to have a bit more prestige from its box office run), and a provision where they can shorten it (if the movie absolutely bombs, then Apple could trigger this provision and toss it on Apple TV in 2 weeks, for instance).
I can't imagine Apple and Sony having some simple contract with a short, firm theatrical window, unless Apple were paying a premium.
-
9 minutes ago, Doffy said:
Why there are so many movies above 2m ?
Labor Day, New Years Eve, Avatar, Labor Day, Golden Globes, Obama is 2nd weekend wide.
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, Cappoedameron said:
September is gonna be so damn interesting. Not just with the box office, but two streaming juggernauts going head to head.
House of the Dragon which is being met with immense positive reception despite the completely destruction of GOT in its final season that makes the series almost pointless. Rings of Power which has been panned by a lot of the fans on Youtube with 178,000 dislikes on the Youtube vid and I have no idea why. Would love to know from any LOTR fans why people are bashing the crap out of the 2 minute teaser and I hope it's a lot more then they decided to add diversity to the cast.
House of Dragon looks pretty, but I don't know if I can invest myself in that franchise again. Plus, I don't trust American shows not to insert crappy American politics into everything.
Weekdays 08-16 /08-19
in Numbers and Data
Posted
I wonder if the current epidemic will have an effect on Bros. I imagine a lot of right-wing sources will be wringing their hands over the film. Maybe the outrage will drive more people to see it, lol. Though maybe left-wing types don't want to watch a film with some gay stereotypes in the current environment.