Disney's A Wrinkle in Time | 9th March, 2018 | Frozen's Jennifer Lee writing, Ava DuVernay directing. 45% on RT

[Krissykins]

I’m sure it’ll increase. 

 

I’m not totally surprised though, in the trailer  it’s a bit unclear what the film is about. When I went to see Greatest Showman with my mum and aunt they both shrugged during this trailer.

[Zakiyyah6]

Tracking often is off but this close and I just believe 30's is what is going to happen.

[narniadis]

I also echo the sentiment that I am at least thankful the crazy $$ from the MCU and SW, etc allow Disney the occasional one-off thats different.

 

I am just hoping the source material was treated well here unlike the TV film they did 15 years ago....

[MovieMan89]

Guys, this is a PG family aimed film. When is tracking not under for those kinds of movies? Unless they're ones generating significant teen/adult appeal like BatB, and even that was underestimated. I know for sure movies like Alice 1, Maleficent, Oz, Jungle Book, etc opened way higher than their tracking. 

[Barnack]

11 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

Guys, this is a PG family aimed film. When is tracking not under for those kinds of movies?

Recently Ferdinand I think went quite lower than the tracked zone.

The BFG went under is 22-32m with a 18m openning.

Good Dinosaur, some trades said it was tracking over Inside Out at some point and it opened 50m lower.

Kubo was tracking for 14m did 12.6m after a 95% or something like that reviews to help it...

Tomorrowland was tracking north of 50m for the 4 days weekend at some point and did 42.7m

 

It would be surprising for tracking to always be under or more often so than for other genre, the bank of comparable they use will to generate a box office estimate from the tracking numbers will only be composed of family movie and they have their own equation just for them, it is an harder genre to track because a large portion of ticket buyer do not even know without help the name of the movie maybe ? But I would imagine that it is wrong either ways quite often.

 

Edited February 23, 2018 by Barnack

[Jonwo]

6 hours ago, Telehilation said:

While I'd like to see it get a larger OW, those numbers aren't bad at all, given the budget. Assuming decent reviews and WOM, it should have solid legs as a family film.

It'll more than what Pete's Dragon did as well, that did $21m OW a year and a half ago. I think with $34-37m OW and a similar multi to PD gets it to $120-135m total which is solid. I do think it may underperform OS. 

[Morieris]

 

[Eric Prime]

46 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

Guys, this is a PG family aimed film. When is tracking not under for those kinds of movies? Unless they're ones generating significant teen/adult appeal like BatB, and even that was underestimated. I know for sure movies like Alice 1, Maleficent, Oz, Jungle Book, etc opened way higher than their tracking. 

Maleficent: $60-70M (Deadline), north of $60M (Variety), $60M (THR) $69.4M OW

Oz: $70-80M (Deadline), $90M murmurs (Variety), $75-80M (THR) $79.1M OW

Jungle Book: $67-75M (Deadline), $70M range (Variety), $67-79M (THR) $103.3M OW

Cinderella: $50-60M (Deadline), roughly $60M (Variety), $65M (THR) $67.9M OW

 

So you're somewhat right, as stuff like Cinderella and Maleficent did do better than what expected, but Jungle Book's the only one in the list you can argue jumped "way higher than its tracking."

[aabattery]

13 minutes ago, CoolEric258 said:

$69.4M OW

 

[That One Girl]

2 minutes ago, aabattery said:

 

 

Nice

[Eric Prime]

27 minutes ago, aabattery said:

 

[Porthos]

2 hours ago, Morieris said:

 

Don't read the spoiler box if you haven't read the book/aren't familiar with the source material.  Like, seriously.

 

Spoiler

"When have I ever been wrong?"

 

Well, you see Charles Wallace, there's this genre convention called "Tempting Fate" and I'm afraid that you just stepped in it.*

 

===

 

More seriously though, that is a hopeful sign that they aren't going to mess with the Meg-Charles Wallace dynamic, which I am convinced is where this film either lives or dies.

 

* Fun fact.  I didn't even realize what I typed until looking back on the sentence as I was reviewing everything before posting.  It is a bit TOO on the nose as I look back on it, but I can't change it now.

 

[MovieMan89]

2 hours ago, CoolEric258 said:

Maleficent: $60-70M (Deadline), north of $60M (Variety), $60M (THR) $69.4M OW

Oz: $70-80M (Deadline), $90M murmurs (Variety), $75-80M (THR) $79.1M OW

Jungle Book: $67-75M (Deadline), $70M range (Variety), $67-79M (THR) $103.3M OW

Cinderella: $50-60M (Deadline), roughly $60M (Variety), $65M (THR) $67.9M OW

 

So you're somewhat right, as stuff like Cinderella and Maleficent did do better than what expected, but Jungle Book's the only one in the list you can argue jumped "way higher than its tracking."

Most of those links you gave weren't tracking, they were early preview/Friday reports. Aside form Cinderella, I know for certain no one was expecting any of those mentioned movies to open nearly as high as they did. Oz in particular had lots of bomb talk leading up to release, and I remember everyone here being in complete shock it pulled 80m for OW.  

Edited February 23, 2018 by MovieMan89

[KeepItU25071906]

7 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

Most of those links you gave weren't tracking, they were early preview/Friday reports. Aside form Cinderella, I know for certain no one was expecting any of those mentioned movies to open nearly as high as they did. Oz in particular had lots of bomb talk leading up to release, and I remember everyone here being in complete shock it pulled 80m for OW.  

But Wrinckle doesn't have famous predecessor (movies or cartoon) like OZ, Jungle Book etc.

Edited February 23, 2018 by KeepItU25071906

[MovieMan89]

11 minutes ago, KeepItU25071906 said:

But Wrinckle doesn't have famous predecessor (movies or cartoon) like OZ, Jungle Book etc.

And I'm not saying it will open as high as those, but 50+ seems very likely to me. 

[Fancyarcher]

3 hours ago, Jonwo said:

It'll more than what Pete's Dragon did as well, that did $21m OW a year and a half ago. I think with $34-37m OW and a similar multi to PD gets it to $120-135m total which is solid. I do think it may underperform OS. 

The book's popularity is pretty North American specific. It wouldn't surprise me if the film didn't do "great" numbers OS. 

Edited February 23, 2018 by Fancyarcher

[ban1o]

1 hour ago, Porthos said:

Don't read the spoiler box if you haven't read the book/aren't familiar with the source material.  Like, seriously.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

"When have I ever been wrong?"

 

Well, you see Charles Wallace, there's this genre convention called "Tempting Fate" and I'm afraid that you just stepped in it.*

 

===

 

More seriously though, that is a hopeful sign that they aren't going to mess with the Meg-Charles Wallace dynamic, which I am convinced is where this film either lives or dies.

 

* Fun fact.  I didn't even realize what I typed until looking back on the sentence as I was reviewing everything before posting.  It is a bit TOO on the nose as I look back on it, but I can't change it now.

 

mm storm reid actually looks great as Meg. Good casting. I'm worried by how little we've seen of Charles Wallace though, he's such an important character. Reese pretty good honestly. Gugu's line delivery was kind of weird in this scene imo.

 

This really looks like it's geared towards young kids though but I don't think the book is that popular among kids nowadays. 

Edited February 23, 2018 by ban1o

[kowhite]

12 hours ago, Valonqar said:

They are already bigger than Tomorrowland (33M OW). I've no clue about the budget but Tomorrowland was 190M. This can't be that expensive! Looks like a Sy Fy movie of the week.

 

Its a lot less expensive than Tomorrowland.

[CJohn]

6 hours ago, Fancyarcher said:

The book's popularity is pretty North American specific. It wouldn't surprise me if the film didn't do "great" numbers OS. 

It was already unofficially cancelled here (they delayed it to June 14 which means they won't release it theatrically).

[cookie]

17 hours ago, tribefan695 said:

That tracking is about on the level of John Carter's adjusted opening. Just more reason for me to feel like this is part deux.

This doesn't cost John Carter money though.