THE Incredibles 2 | June 15, 2018 | NO SPOILERS!!!!

[meriodejaneiro]

53 minutes ago, Lothar said:

 

It won't even touch 300M $ 

Just have a look at the competition. We have JW next to I2 and Ocean's 8 week before.

O8 is a female targeted movie that will fail enormously (as the previous "shewash-remake" like ghostbust'h'ers did). 

 

TI2 is a wider audience targeted (kids, families, mid-aged people that saw the original 14 years ago as kids/teenagers, and any other pixar fan). 

 

True JW2 will be a tough competitor, but it won't be on JW numbers at all. We should expect a decrease (may be a TFA-TLJ level). Anyway will be tough competitor. But summer-days effect is there too to help soften competition. And as someone said before, IO-JW get on well with each other three years ago. 

[meriodejaneiro]

10 minutes ago, MCKillswitch123 said:

Inside Out came out just a week after Jurassic World (which still made 100M+ on IO's opening weekend), a couple of weeks before Minions (real direct competition, and BIG one at that), some non-direct competition like Ant-Man and Mission: Impossible 5.... still made 300M+.

 

Despicable Me 3 had zero real competition until The Emoji Movie (which recieved Godawful wom), but still took on some heavyweights like Spider-Man: Homecoming and Dunkirk..... didn't stop it in any way from having great legs and coming near 270M (under expectations, but franchise fatigue + Minions' terrible wom played heavy roles).

 

Incredibles is gonna open even bigger than any of these animations did (wouldn't be surprised if it matches or beats Finding Dory's opening), and it has no direct competition worth a damn (Hotel Transylvania 3 is the closest thing to that, and there's no way that it has Minions or Secret Life Of Pets type numbers). Your point?

356M is way more than 300M+. That's 350M+ 

 

I'm still on the 400-450M dom for TI2 

[Lothar]

12 minutes ago, MCKillswitch123 said:

Inside Out came out just a week after Jurassic World (which still made 100M+ on IO's opening weekend), a couple of weeks before Minions (real direct competition, and BIG one at that), some non-direct competition like Ant-Man and Mission: Impossible 5.... still made 300M+.

 

Despicable Me 3 had zero real competition until The Emoji Movie (which recieved Godawful wom), but still took on some heavyweights like Spider-Man: Homecoming and Dunkirk..... didn't stop it in any way from having great legs and coming near 270M (under expectations, but franchise fatigue + Minions' terrible wom played heavy roles).

 

Incredibles is gonna open even bigger than any of these animations did (wouldn't be surprised if it matches or beats Finding Dory's opening), and it has no direct competition worth a damn (Hotel Transylvania 3 is the closest thing to that, and there's no way that it has Minions or Secret Life Of Pets type numbers). Your point?

You mean to say I2 is going to make more money than first one ? Which was 14 years ago.

[MCKillswitch123]

4 minutes ago, Lothar said:

You mean to say I2 is going to make more money than first one ? Which was 14 years ago.

Uhhhh, yes it will? You are aware that:

 

1) this is probably the most anticipated movie Pixar has ever released (or on par w/Toy Story 3);

2) Finding Dory came out 13 years after Finding Nemo and it made more than Nemo, and Toy Story 3 also came out 11 years after Toy Story 2 and still outgrossed both of the previous movies;

3) Incredibles 1 made 385M adjusted for inflation?

 

If anything, in the case of a long anticipated sequel to a beloved animated movie, the 14 year wait has only made Incredibles' chances of outgrossing the 1st one even higher. 14 years worth of inflation (+ IMAX and 3D) and anticipation. Of fucking course it's gonna do more. Not even a question.

Edited March 28, 2018 by MCKillswitch123

[korrasami]

32 minutes ago, MCKillswitch123 said:

Uhhhh, yes it will? You are aware that:

 

1) this is probably the most anticipated movie Pixar has ever released (or on par w/Toy Story 3);

2) Finding Dory came out 13 years after Finding Nemo and it made more than Nemo, and Toy Story 3 also came out 11 years after Toy Story 2 and still outgrossed both of the previous movies;

3) Incredibles 1 made 385M adjusted for inflation?

 

If anything, in the case of a long anticipated sequel to a beloved animated movie, the 14 year wait has only made Incredibles' chances of outgrossing the 1st one even higher. 14 years worth of inflation (+ IMAX and 3D) and anticipation. Of fucking course it's gonna do more. Not even a question.

This. I2 will DEFINITELY outgross the first one. 

[Eric Prime]

 

[meriodejaneiro]

2 hours ago, MCKillswitch123 said:

Uhhhh, yes it will? You are aware that:

 

1) this is probably the most anticipated movie Pixar has ever released (or on par w/Toy Story 3);

2) Finding Dory came out 13 years after Finding Nemo and it made more than Nemo, and Toy Story 3 also came out 11 years after Toy Story 2 and still outgrossed both of the previous movies;

3) Incredibles 1 made 385M adjusted for inflation?

 

If anything, in the case of a long anticipated sequel to a beloved animated movie, the 14 year wait has only made Incredibles' chances of outgrossing the 1st one even higher. 14 years worth of inflation (+ IMAX and 3D) and anticipation. Of fucking course it's gonna do more. Not even a question.

Love it.

[Dementeleus]

4 hours ago, meriodejaneiro said:

O8 is a female targeted movie that will fail enormously (as the previous "shewash-remake" like ghostbust'h'ers did). 

 

GB16 didn’t “fail enormously” domestically. 

[filmlover]

2 minutes ago, Trolltastic Tele said:

 

GB16 didn’t “fail enormously” domestically. 

Forget it Tele, it's the Internet.

[John Marston]

9 minutes ago, Trolltastic Tele said:

 

GB16 didn’t “fail enormously” domestically. 

 

 

It it was a bomb though. No question about it 

[Dementeleus]

8 minutes ago, filmlover said:

Forget it Tele, it's the Internet.

 

Dunno why I bother, tbh.

[MCKillswitch123]

4 minutes ago, John Marston said:

 

 

It it was a bomb though. No question about it 

It was a bomb OS, and subsequently WW. DOM though, it did well, and there's little reason to believe that Ocean's 8 won't do similarly or better.

Edited March 28, 2018 by MCKillswitch123

[Dementeleus]

It wasn’t a bomb at all. Disappointment, sure. 

[MCKillswitch123]

9 minutes ago, Trolltastic Tele said:

It wasn’t a bomb at all. Disappointment, sure. 

(Talking specifically about its worldwide numbers, not DOM as I agree it did well there) I would be hard pressed to call a movie that didn't even come close to doubling its production budget and lost the studio anywhere from 50 to 75 million anything but a bomb, but hey, agree to disagree I guess

 

Though by no means does that mean that Ocean's 8 will bomb or disappoint too.

Edited March 28, 2018 by MCKillswitch123

[Dementeleus]

3 minutes ago, MCKillswitch123 said:

(Talking specifically about its worldwide numbers, not DOM as I agree it did well there) I would be hard pressed to call a movie that didn't even come close to doubling its production budget and lost the studio anywhere from 50 to 75 million anything but a bomb, but hey, agree to disagree I guess

 

Though by no means does that mean that Ocean's 8 will bomb or disappoint too.

 

229m WW vs a 144m budget. 

 

I object to the usage of “bomb” to a movie that just lost money. The term has been ruined through such casual over-exaggeration over the years, in large part because people on the net feel so compelled to think in only black or white.

[MCKillswitch123]

9 minutes ago, Trolltastic Tele said:

 

229m WW vs a 144m budget. 

 

I object to the usage of “bomb” to a movie that just lost money. The term has been ruined through such casual over-exaggeration over the years, in large part because people on the net feel so compelled to think in only black or white.

Well, I respect your opinion (and I acknowledge that yours is probably a lot more well founded than mine, given how you have a lot more years talking about BO than me), and I guess I'm part of that generation who have turned the word into something that it wasn't.

 

But within BO context, that's the interpretation of the word "bomb" that I have understood for the last couple of years: a big disappointment and a big money loser for a studio. 50-75M is a lot of money. It's not a huuuuge bomb, it's no Lone Ranger or King Arthur, but it still kinda counts as one. I wouldn't count movies that lose their studios O/U 25M as bombs cause that's not really a hugely substancial amount of cash (not so substancial that you can't make it up on home video anyway), but Ghostbusters.... it's a stretch to not call it one, imo. But again, everyone has their opinions, of course.

Edited March 28, 2018 by MCKillswitch123

[Dementeleus]

^^ I guess the difference is we didn’t need to use “huge” as a differentiator back in the day. The mere usage of “bomb” was sufficient. It usually carried the connotation of a massive budget as well. 

[MCKillswitch123]

13 minutes ago, Trolltastic Tele said:

^^ I guess the difference is we didn’t need to use “huge” as a differentiator back in the day. The mere usage of “bomb” was sufficient. It usually carried the connotation of a massive budget as well. 

Fair enough, then. I guess considering studios nowadays seem to grant more and more movies bigger and bigger budgets, and we end up getting failed ones w/higher frequency than before, differentatiors are worth using to separate the smaller bombs from the John Carters and the Tomorrowlands. I imagine back then there weren't as many big budget movies failing as often as today (c'mon, it feels like there's a failure every week  Tomb Raider and Pacific Rim 2 are looking possibly okay overall, mostly because of OS, but A Wrinkle In Time.... yikes). And those that did flop, it was Cutthroat Island or Battlefield Earth giant nuclear style (how was the reaction to those bombs like, btw? Legit curious) 

[Dementeleus]

They were considered bombs.  (tbh people sometimes misuse the word then too — WATERWORLD, for example — but that was more because they didn’t actually look at the grosses).

Edited March 28, 2018 by Trolltastic Tele

[MCKillswitch123]

15 minutes ago, Trolltastic Tele said:

They were considered bombs.  (tbh people sometimes misuse the word then too — WATERWORLD, for example — but that was more because they didn’t actually look at the grosses).

Oh, that still happens today   Remember the Batman V Superman debacle and how people thought that it was flopping because it was dropping hardcore every weekend? I guess those close to 100M WB made in profit off of an 870M WW box office haul (against a 250M net production budget + a rumored 150M in marketing; so 400M P&A total budget) don't count for anything.

Edited March 28, 2018 by MCKillswitch123