Gopher Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 IM3 wouldn't have had great legs even if everyone loved it. It was mostly out of multiplexes by June because there was just so much competition out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 LOL who cares about a freakin' multiplier? IM3 crossed the 400m. Last I checked that's a lot of freakin' money and quite an accomplishment no matter how you spin it. Haters gonna hate. But it doesn't even matter. It's in the books. DEAL WITH IT! Thats just a great picture to accompany the DEAL WITH IT Good one E! Don't bother with the haters, just let them hang on to something that they think are worthwhile. We're just enjoying the numbers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted June 19, 2013 Author Share Posted June 19, 2013 IM3 wouldn't have had great legs even if everyone loved it. It was mostly out of multiplexes by June because there was just so much competition out there. I don't buy the competition thing. Summer films are released in summer because they have the best chance at big bucks. If a film is good enough, it will find a way. Competition is irrelevant imo. There is no more competition now than there was in 2007. And besides, do you think IM3 would have made more than 400 mill if it was released in the second week of September? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keysersoze123 Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 LOL who cares about a freakin' multiplier? IM3 crossed the 400m. Last I checked that's a lot of freakin' money and quite an accomplishment no matter how you spin it. Haters gonna hate. But it doesn't even matter. It's in the books. DEAL WITH IT! Same argument for twilight movies as well. So many folks keep harping on the multiplier instead of overall gross. IM3 is crazy success no matter how bad the multiplier is(which is ok rather than awful). 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Marston Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Iron Man 3 was a huge disappointment IMO. Don't care that it made money. I thought box office doesn't equate to quality? Not to Avengers effect helped in a big way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted June 19, 2013 Author Share Posted June 19, 2013 Iron Man 3 was a huge disappointment IMO. Don't care that it made money. I thought box office doesn't equate to quality? Not to Avengers effect helped in a big way. Yep, I agree. The film itself wasn't that great. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfirebird2008 Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 LOL who cares about a freakin' multiplier? IM3 crossed the 400m. Last I checked that's a lot of freakin' money and quite an accomplishment no matter how you spin it. Haters gonna hate. But it doesn't even matter. It's in the books. DEAL WITH IT! I agree with you on the hater aspect, but multipliers are a decent tool to analyze a film's reception from audiences. Obviously the bigger they are, the harder they fall no matter how well-received they are. But there is still a noticeable difference between big openers with amazing WOM and big openers with less than amazing WOM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keysersoze123 Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 if IM3 effect is negative I see avengers effect diminishing for marvel flicks that will follow like Thor and CapAm sequels. We will know this november for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfirebird2008 Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 IM3 was mostly out of multiplexes by June... This is not true. Have you looked at its screen count each week? For the weekend ending June 2nd (IM3's 5th weekend), it was still playing on 4300 screens. That is 300 more screens than TDKR, which faced much weaker competition on paper and still ended up with a lower screen count that late in each film's run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecstasy Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 I agree with you on the hater aspect, but multipliers are a decent tool to analyze a film's reception from audiences. Obviously the bigger they are, the harder they fall no matter how well-received they are. But there is still a noticeable difference between big openers with amazing WOM and big openers with less than amazing WOM. Sure you can use it as an analyzer but you have take into consideration other factors as well. Amazing word of mouth and not so amazing word of mouth are only talking points in a discussion on box office. IM3 was never gonna do Avengers numbers ever. In my opinion, the big opening was mostly due to all of the previews it had. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lordmandeep Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Im3 flopped it woukd made only 200 million if it were in 2d based on a 100% share and 100% markup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatebox Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 The main thing about IM3 is that it proved beyond doubt there was a worldwide TA effect, and makes predictions for Thor 2 and CA 2 a whole lot more interesting. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lab276 Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 I don't buy the competition thing. Summer films are released in summer because they have the best chance at big bucks. If a film is good enough, it will find a way. Competition is irrelevant imo. There is no more competition now than there was in 2007. And besides, do you think IM3 would have made more than 400 mill if it was released in the second week of September?It probably wouldn't because of the nature of September. People would already have spent a bunch of money the previous four months, so breaking out then would be a tougher ask. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfirebird2008 Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 The main thing about IM3 is that it proved beyond doubt there was a worldwide TA effect, and makes predictions for Thor 2 and CA 2 a whole lot more interesting. Well said. Will be interesting to see how much of an effect the others have, especially since their first solo films were in 3D while the first two Iron Man films were not in 3D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goffe Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 (edited) Yep, SM3 would have a 2.0 or worse if it came out today. It benefited a lot from Twitter not really being a factor, plus Facebook hadn't expanded anywhere near as much (it was only 3 years old at the time). And in general, movies keep getting more and more frontloaded because the screen counts keep increasing on opening weekends. Stop, it's not like SM3 opened in the 90s Multis these days tend to be worse than six years ago. IM3 has a better excuse I reckon. Had it been received like SM3, it would've been even closer to Twilight but probably not less than 2. do you know why you're wrong? because SM3 wasn't hated (not loved or liked either) I agree. If IM3 had SM3 WOM then it would have tanked 70% in the 2nd weekend. No, because actually dropped 61% and GA don't hate SM3 like the internet hates Yeah, If I remember correctly, SM3 had a hefty drop in its second weekend without any significant competition. Just WHAT?? SM3 had to face two 100m openers within 4 weeks, NOT ENOUGH COMPETITION RIGHT? Exactly, IM3 dropped less from a higher opening with TGG opening. SM dropeed less in the third week when Shrek3 opened, a 121m opening. KABOOOOOMM Edited June 19, 2013 by Goffe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lordmandeep Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Competition has an effect.Tell that to TF3 and asm2 both which got killed by tdkr and dh2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goffe Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Yeah, so? Spider-man 3 wasn't a flop, if I remember correctly. Neither was IM3, I'm only stating that both had similar multipliers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZattMurdock Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Sure you can use it as an analyzer but you have take into consideration other factors as well. Amazing word of mouth and not so amazing word of mouth are only talking points in a discussion on box office. IM3 was never gonna do Avengers numbers ever. In my opinion, the big opening was mostly due to all of the previews it had. Yes, The Avengers Effect does exist, but I truly don't know what some people were expecting. It'll end up with a 1.2B WW box office. TA has $1.5B WW. Iron Man 3 has made an insane amount of money, and thinking harder about it made more than any individual solo superhero film. Tony Stark is king right now. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitik Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 IM3 hits 400 and the haters come out. Most people liked it. Deal with it! 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecstasy Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Yes, The Avengers Effect does exist, but I truly don't know what some people were expecting. It'll end up with a 1.2B WW box office. TA has $1.5B WW. Iron Man 3 has made an insane amount of money, and thinking harder about it made more than any individual solo superhero film. Tony Stark is king right now. Yes The Avengers Effect does. But I was speaking more on the domestic box office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
