ThePrinceIsOnFire

That is true but Hunger Games Mockingjay Part 2 had this breakdown: DOMESTIC (42,6%) $281,723,902 INTERNATIONAL (57,4%) $379,732,661 WORLDWIDE $661,456,563 So it is collapsing internationally, relatively speaking, as this HG: BOSS will crumble to about 130 M WW total which is only 30% MJ p2, compared to domestic's likely end tally of 160 M WW (about 55% of MJ p2)

As far as its performance in USA+CANADA goes yes, but it's still a flop internationally (there is no thanksgiving boost in EU/SA/Asia so it is dropping quite a bit from its opening weekend that was pretty bad in most countries and straight-up disaster in Asia). Given the very restrained budget, the WW gross will be decent enough though, saved by its overall good domestic performance.

Meanwhile, in mainland Europe, Napoleon is rocking the B.O. with a 50 M + opening weekend. Hunger games not as mighty with an avarege drop at about - 40 % (-35 to -55 per cent range) on a very small opening weekend. Wish is having a spread out release that could actually boost it a bit in some Eu markets, for instance it has a great opening spot here in Italy on December 21, which is on the verge of the peak cinema season for us.

I can only speak for Italy (and partially for France), but I can say that here Moana definetly isn't on the same level as Frozen or Tangled/Rapunzel. Maybe that's because there was a name change in both the movie title (it's called Oceania here) and the main character (here she is called Vaiana to avoid any link to the famous italian late adult actress Moana), pheraps because it is set in a culture that is too far removed from Europe, or maybe because the main cast is all non-whites and that doesn't always sit too well here. Though generally speaking, I've seen kids going crazy for Encanto which is also set in a farway land and with a diverse cast ,in recent times. If I were to guess, I would predict that the Moana LA might go crazy big in USA but be weak in EU the same way LA TLM was. Frozen and Rapunzel as LA on the other hand would make big money here. But then again, Hunchback of Notre Dame is a big staple here and would certainly do well with the 90's millennials, but I guess it doesn't have the same hold in USA/ South america, otherwise the remake would already be in development with a top priority.

Well, so let's hope that from now on every big franchise/ IP starts lowering the budgets to 100 M so that we can have many 300 M WW blockbuster hits, or even at 50 M so that we can have 150 M WW hits. I'm sure that the producers might find this a good deal, but it's very hard to imagine that the theaters will thrive in a such a scenario...if they manage to stay alive for 5 years at this "success" rate, that is.

But it making a profit (however small that might be) is not a sure thing for now: first the early estimates would need to be confirmed, then it would need to hold well in the upcoming weeks, which is not a given. As for the "healthy WOM" is it there really? The critics were mixed to negative, the Cinemascore bad enough at B-, it is being liked by its core fanbase and the teens girls as the main demo, but it is not like it's being universally acclaimed. And even then, this isn't an original stand-alone entry, it's a piece of a franchise so any discourse on it should consider that. Deadline wisely wrote last week that if this has to be a reboot- new saga starter than it is a failure, much like Fantastic beast was (and they were right as we all saw how that ended). If this movie, on the other hand, was meant to milk the last remaining dollar out of a dying saga then it is serving its purpose. Regardless, this is no flop, that's for sure. But as I already said in the past for other movies (like A haunting in Venice, Elemental or TLM) there is a grey zone between a flop and a success where everything from a "mild disappointement" to "okayish" stands, and this one falls right into that grey zone IMHO.

It's going to gross less than half of what Mockinkjay -Part 2 did 8 years ago. In terms of tickets sold, it's going to collapse at around -70% tickets sold worldwide. It is barely fighting to recoup its budget and that outcome is possible only because it was given a very reasonable, smaller budget to begin with. If I were one of the producers, I would not want my franchise to be tarnished to the point where a next entry would have to be micro-budgeted to be greenlighted. But I'm not a producer so it's not like my opinion is what matters. If you all want to consider this a success, so be it...I will kindly disagree in silence from now on.

If, (and that's a pretty big If, that relies heavily on the way the movie will perform in Japan) it will manage to get close to 300 M, then maybe we can say that it is a small success, as it will have had a decent return of investment margin (something like 1.3 dollars on a 1 dollar spent) but if its total tally ends at around 250 M WW like its projected to, then it will simply recoup the budget. That isn't a sucess story in my book. Let's also remember that this isn't disney, so there is no "but it will boost merchandising sales, and the theme parks" excuse here... but then again in a year where almost every big movie flopped, something recouping its budget might as well be seen as a success. But that's just telling on how depressing the current state of B.O. and cinema is.

Literally Where? It flopped in Asia and had a lackluster/bad opening in most Euorpean countries with little to no competition, and there is no thanksgiving here so it is bound to drop hard (not to mention that it has also opened on wed in most big european markets last week). I just can't understand why everyone is going overboard on a decent North american hold in a festive long weekend from a very soft opener...it's projected to drop 30% out of a small 45 M opening, it's not a miracle or anything. But I guess in desperate times grasping at straws is the only thing one can do to remain positive. I mean, are we really trying to spin a 100 M blockbuster ending at 250-300 MM WW (in the best case scenario, that is) in a success story?

It depends on whether we're judging its USA performance only or the international one too, because there is no denying that it is a pretty huge bomb internationally. Lately I'm seeing a trend on here where most movies get a pass if they perform well enough (or even just decent by today standards) in North America, regardless of their total WW gross; yet big budgeted hollywood IPs live or die by their global appeal. Or have we come to a point where there is no faith in the OS countries anymore and Hollywood is now producing content exclusively for its domestic audience? To me this latest Hunger games as a big hollywood franchise entry is not doing well at all, it is simply earning enough money in the USA for Lionsgate to be pleased given their very peculiar release/production strategy, but on a whole it's pretty tragic just as other domestic-heavy but globally flopping 2022-2023 releases were.

It was a gorgeous film to look at and had some amazing tunes, but the way the plot and characters (especially Maui) were written was extremely bad, a poor reash of Pocahontas's already tired tropes (i suggest watching Lindsey Ellis's deep-dive essay on that).

This outcome was to be expected. I was criticized on here when I said that everything in the trailers had zero appeal to anyone who is not a preschooler, but I still think that is true to this day and the main reason for the rotten score. Pheraps small children will enjoy this, but its derivative and oversimplicistic plot, juvenile humour that dangerously borders on trashy (that scene with the chickens popping out eggs... something that you would see in a razzie nominee) it's an hard sell for adults. The music itself is underwhelming and low budget-y except some songs. Still I wouldn't rule out that this somehow becomes a success with its main audience (small children) either in theatres or (more likely) once it hits streaming. Moana was a shallow, badly written story with pantomime characters and some really trashy humour yet it is beloved by children and went on to become a streaming mega hit. I think that it is simply time to accept that the WDAS are not trying to impress adults anymore ( they had this as a secondary goal back in the '90s, but have now completely abandoned it and left room for Pixar to fill that gap) and IMHO the critics should also keep that in mind when reviewing this kind of movies. Which is to say, ok.... for a grown up this movie might be terrible, but is it good for a child? Then there is no way that it can be rotten, because it serves its purpose. The same thing goes for Mario too, that film should have not been rotten either.

No, I understood what you meant but the time is running out for this one and they can't afford wasting it any more. 7 days might seem like it's nothing but it's enough to polish/edit what will likely be a 30 to 45 seconds teaser. They were probably not ready for the disney 100 and used this extra week to finish it up in a rush, as they can't wait anymore. That is, if the release date remains in March....

It's quite a different story here though. The OS to DOM ratio is smaller for AHIV than DOTN, despite the latter opening at a time were most countries were still dealing with covid and had theaters shut down. This got a a full theatrical run so streaming will also likely come with a smaller margin than DOTN. It might still get a sequel but they somehow need to bring the costs at about 30M, which isn't impossible ("The Menu" was made for 30M and got 80M WW and had a pretty good cast) but a very tough ask. We shall see.

Looks like I was right and this will fall in my predicted 100-120 M WW range. Might actually end up at something like 116 M WW. Not a complete flop but a huge disappointment nonetheless. Unless it does huge business on streaming it's not going to get any more sequels; even with a 40 M budget there is a solid risk of not getting its budget back, and I really can't see them making another one with a 30M budget.

How is it "so soon"? We are at 5 months before the release date, a teaser should have been released already. Actually, every other disney live action had a promotional image/still at roguhly 18 months/1 year before release and a teaser at 1 year/6 months before the relase date. This is way behind schedule, it is looking more and more likely that it will be pushed back to fall 2024 or later (unless they dump it in March with little to no promotion, which could very well be the case given that it looks like a huge bomb in the making).

Not here, but on the web many were hoping for something in the vein of Sleeping beauty/Snow White or even a Beauty and the Beast. A movie that had more darkness in it and some mild horror elements and a serious tone. It doesn't help that so far all we had were basically night images (hence darker) and so many interviews of everyone claming that this is the next big fairytale that pays homage to Snow White (with the seven kids/seven dwarves rehash) and Sleeping beauty (with the aspect ratio) heavily. That being said, it might actually be something close to Tangled (though the lack of a central love-story certainly can make the overall plot feel even more juvenile).

It certainly is financially but artistically? That's highly debatable. Parents in the US where shocked with Hunchback's mature theme, sexuality and horror, so that had a rather poor performance Stateside, but in Europe it did pretty great business. And I'm pretty sure that nowadays there would be an audience for more mature animated movies in Europe, but Disney has progressively based itself more and more on the domestic market, so I guess they will stick to the status quo. The very frequent comparisons with Sleeping Beauty and Snow White have created some hefty expectations on Wish, given that those movies are pretty horror/gore-ish and unsettling for today's standard. There is some humour in both, but they definetly have a darker, more serious tone than what the Wish trailer seems to be suggesting.

The trailer looks fit for its target audience. I can't really see any mature person who is not a massive disney fan actually enjoing this juvenile humour and overall tone. Trailers can be misleading but it's not like Frozen is actually mature story or anything that is palatable for the average adult audience...it's only just a tad more dramatic and epic in tone than what the trailer might suggest. But to be fair, other than Hunchback of Notre Dame, Pocahontas and some minor movies like Atlantis or Treasure planet, post 1995 WDAS have never really tried to make their movies fit for a grown-up audience. I still think this has all the elements ( musical + colorful character + "princess" protagonist in a "quasi" european setting) to achieve a big success, but those who think that it will be something different than (or more than) a children movie will be disappointed.

To be fair, Death on the Nile's international release was more fragmented, it opened in Spain and China one week later and in Japan 2 weeks later, so it's hard to compare when AHIV has been released in every major market the same week. IMHO it's more likely to end in the 100-120 M WW range, which would be decent for a mid-budget movie, but still not good enough to cover the expenses. As for a sequel, can they cut the budget down to 20 - 30 M and still have a star-studded cast and a visually appealing movie? Only Wes Anderson manages to do that currently, but he has stars working for him for free...

Where is this poised to finish at? $100/120 M WW? I can't see this getting another sequel. Here in Italy it's doing really well, but it was to be expected given that MOTOE was HUGE here and that this one is set in Venice, so it plays a bit like a domestic movie too. Anyway 100M WW is not a bad result for a mid-budgeted movie, but it is still too expensive to make a profit. I guess they would need to cut the budget down to about 20-30M to make this profitable, but Branagh isn't Wes Anderson and he is not going to get an all-star cast working for peanuts just for the sake of art. I still think that they should do a "and then there were none" remake as the pinnacle of Christie's work, with Branagh directing but not starring in it; that one could be very cheap as it only needs one location really (a mansion on a cliff) and doesn't really need an all-star cast (though at least for Vera, Walgrave and Lombard big names should be choosen).

I agree, but upon further refelection I think this is a solid strategy from disney. The pre-schoolers and children aged 6-9 have very short attention span and can get easily tired of something the same way they can obsess over something else. Having posters/TV spots out 2 months before release is not going to have a draw effect on the children, so it might be better to have a very heavy promotion window in the days before the release, so that children can push their parents to bring them to the theatres right away when they see, and fall in love with, the characters from the new animated film. This film is not aimed at adults (not even "disney adults" to be fair) and everything about it, from the design of the star to the animal companion to the excess of musical moments, the oversaturated visuals (not on the Encanto level but not that far off either) is specifically done for very small children only. This isn't and isn't trying to be a four quadrant movie (disney has long abandoned the idea after the flops of its late 90's early 2000's films like Atlantis and Treasure Planet), it is poised to have no love story, very limited action and overall no scary moments, and I doubt that any mature theme will be featured at all. So all in all, I think it's fair to judge this (and its marketing) as a product that has a target audience that is not the usual public that movies seek (the coveted 15-49 demo) so the usual rules should not apply here. That being said it does sadden me a little to see that WDAS has turend itself into a studio that only makes stuff aimed at small children, but with PIXAR as a competitor it's only fair that they would leave the more mature stories aside, as Pixar has proved itself over time as more succesful in creating animated stories aimed at a more mature public.

There is little to no awareness over this project, the marketing has been dire so far and it looks like this is the same old "company of colorful misfists embark on a journey to save the world/planet/kingdom" stint that disney has been pulling for every single movie since Rapunzel. The visuals look lazy and uninspired, this new tecnique lacks the flair of the traditional animation and the detail of the full 3d, making everyhting look cheaper. That being said, I hope children aged 3-8 will enjoy this one like they did with Encanto, because sure as hell disney keeps lowering its target audience age with every single release, the days of Hunchback of notre dame/Pocahontas (as in, more mature animated stories that targeted the whole family, adults included) are long gone, so it really is a matter of the product actually making it big with small children. I can see this being a big hit depite the lack of promotion the way Encanto was, all it needs is to go viral somehow and be liked by that 3-8 age group that is heavily targeted.

In USA the singalong re-release flopped with a 500K weekend, Now stands at 297.75 M, still more than 2 M from 300...it won't reach the milestone.

I understand that this isn't the place to talk about Zegler's personality and other similar issues, and I wholeheartedly agree with that (which is why I have not given my opinion on the topic), but isn't this a box office forum after all? I see no problems in people predicting this one to flop and giving in depths of the reasons why it might flop. This discouse about bringing "negativity" on the the board etc. feels really far fetched to me. We are supposed to talk about numbers here, yet apparently it's not ok to point out that Disney is very late in the promotion/marketing campaign of this one in day to day comparisons vs every other live action remake. 7 months from release date and we have not gotten a promotional still out yet, let alone a teaser trailer, which is not the way the marketing usually goes for these live actions. Does this mean that they are intentionally undermining it? Maybe, why not? Pheraps they just want to spare money on something that they believe will be an economical loss. Does this mean that Disney is broke and doesn't have the money to promote the film? No way, nobody is implying this. I just don't get why some people here are triggered when it's facts that we are talking about. As it stands, this is the only live action remake that has not had a teaser or a promotional image released at the 7 months before release mark. There surely is a reason for that, and only the disney HQ knows it. Everything else is just opinions, each one as valid as the next one.