redfirebird2008 Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Wait so a Saturday north of $40m is pretty good for Mockingjay. The Friday # minus Thursday late-nights was $38m. It's fine. Catching Fire made $45.7m on its non-preview Friday and then $52.6m on Saturday. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayumanggi Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 The subpar book and the splitting into 2 movies also played a part, blaming a 35m+ drop on just marketing is silly IMO, Hunger Games just peaked. And SW7 is gonna slice off MJ2's late legs. I agree. It's the combination of the two reasons you've mentioned. Even Potter was affected by that split syndrome. It's still money though. Lionsgate doesn't really care. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 This is fun 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avatree Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Just looked at the clock and it's 5am. I think it's appropriate that I watched Insomnia earlier. (good night ) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#ED Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 This is fun 19 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Ed, you got to stop bothering your kid. Look at his face, he's not impressed 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayumanggi Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 I wonder, will THG: MOCKINGJAY I get an Imax release? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 I wonder, will THG: MOCKINGJAY I get an Imax release? No, it's not going to. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MovieMan89 Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 The CF ending was pretty badass, especially with the pin transformation that capped it all off. MJ1 isn't going to seem as epic as that because they were going for complete opposite tonality. CF ended with Katniss looking determined and laser-focused in spite of her losses. She was going to become the Mockingjay and get her ass-kicking revenge. They still hadn't broken her. MJ1 however ends (and even opens) with Katniss finally looking defeated over her obstacles/losses. Obviously that first ending is going to be the big crowd pleaser, whereas the later is kind of a big downer. But I give kudos for them going there and leaving audiences with her as a bit of a broken mess leading to the big finale. Now if only the second half of the book were better... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeCee Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Ed, you got to stop bothering your kid. Look at his face, he's not impressed Plus that's way to much popcorn. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayumanggi Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 No, it's not going to. What movie is keeping the screens? INTERSTELLAR? And that's until THE HOBBIT III? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Marston Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 why are people making the reasons for the underperformance more complicated than they are? It made less because it is a Part 1 that barely had any action and had no resolution and it was pretty obvious it was that way. Simple as that. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeCee Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Interstellar has IMAX until MJ2. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayumanggi Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Interstellar has IMAX until MJ2. It has all been the plan of the 5th dimension people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayumanggi Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 why are people making the reasons for the underperformance more complicated than they are? It made less because it is a Part 1 that barely had any action and had no resolution and it was pretty obvious it was that way. Simple as that. What other reasons are you referring too? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Marston Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 What other reasons are you referring too? "Bad marketing" or Catching Fire not being well received. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CloneWars Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 I agree. It's the combination of the two reasons you've mentioned. Even Potter was affected by that split syndrome. It's still money though. Lionsgate doesn't really care. lol I'm sure Lionsgate cares that MJ1 is looking to make $100M less than CF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayumanggi Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 I'm sure Lionsgate cares that MJ1 is looking to make $100M less than CF. Worldwide money sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayumanggi Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 "Bad marketing" or Catching Fire not being well received. I thought the marketing was not as great as that of CF's but that's not the main reason. And lol no. CF not being well received isn't a factor at all because it's not true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeCee Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 It's simple math. If MJ was 1 movie they may have at most spent $200m less in making it and marketing it over 2 films. There would have then been over $1billion less in gross revenue. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_logo_svg.thumb.png.aa769110ca83b106ca249115c9f5dd5f.png){kind=logo}
