MARY POPPINS RETURNS | Disney | 12.19.18 | Rob Marshall directing | Emily Blunt, Lin Manuel Miranda

[filmlover]

Just now, meriodejaneiro said:

The only think I don't understand about this movie is the release date... Dec 25th? Christmas Day? Why not a week before. I think they are missing many box office millions. 

They should have placed it a week sooner. Mary Poppins is somehow like StarWars for north american audiences, very very popular. 

Christmas Day is arguably the most popular moviegoing day of the year, plus many musicals have opened on that date in the past (Les Miserables and Into the Woods in recent years) and flourished.

[Lordmandeep]

Um I think they easily open this film on the 21st and enjoy the holiday boost for the film ^^ 

[That One Girl]

30/180

[Taruseth]

29 minutes ago, meriodejaneiro said:

The only think I don't understand about this movie is the release date... Dec 25th? Christmas Day? Why not a week before. I think they are missing many box office millions. 

They should have placed it a week sooner. Mary Poppins is somehow like StarWars for north american audiences, very very popular. 

Maybe they want to avoid the Opening Weekend of Aquaman and Bumblebee, those two as Superhero/ Transformer spin off are front loaded, so higher Opening Weekend.

If all three would open on the 21st, that weekend would be really crowded, three big releases. With first two most likely opening to 75+Mio (if Mary Poppins would open on the 21th and Disney get's the Trailer right) and the other to 30+Mio or something like that.

 

 

I honestly am looking forward to this.

 

 

 

[Cmasterclay]

16 hours ago, MrPink said:

 

I legit told @CJohn a few months ago we needed a remake with Dicaprio and Tom Hardy since they’re buds

YES. Imagine Leo trying to have to act like Tom Hardy. Even better, imagine Tom Hardy having to act like Leo. Can you imagine Tom Hardy during the romantic scenes in Titanic? Would have been electric/terrifying.

[MrPink]

1 minute ago, Cmasterclay said:

YES. Imagine Leo trying to have to act like Tom Hardy. Even better, imagine Tom Hardy having to act like Leo. Can you imagine Tom Hardy during the romantic scenes in Titanic? Would have been electric/terrifying.

 

Tom Hardy would definitely be Castor Troy.

 

Dicaprio as hardass Sean Archer. But then DiCaprio gets to act zany after the face change and will have to start grunting uncontrollably.

[McNerdy]

16 hours ago, Darth Suburious said:

I hope this the highest grossing film in 2018

Me too

 

I don't think it would be too crazy if it makes BaTB numbers.

[Random2]

350ishM for this, I feel it!

 

[DAR]

I’m going to say 275.

 

Oh hot take coming. Bedknobs and Broomsticks >Mary Poppins 

[ThomasNicole]

This will pulling a Jumanji, but bigger

 

I think $ 300M is the floor

[Porthos]

1 minute ago, ThomasNicole said:

This will pulling a Jumanji, but bigger

 

I think $ 300M is the floor

If it gets mixed reception for whatever reason, I don't think 300 is the floor at all.

[Fancyarcher]

1 hour ago, Porthos said:

If it gets mixed reception for whatever reason, I don't think 300 is the floor at all.

If it goes get mix reception then it might struggle to make 200m.

 

Of course given how long it's taken Disney to actually be allowed to make a sequel, I sure as heck hope the reception is more then mix. 

[Porthos]

10 minutes ago, Fancyarcher said:

If it goes get mix reception then it might struggle to make 200m.

 

Of course given how long it's taken Disney to actually be allowed to make a sequel, I sure as heck hope the reception is more then mix. 

As do I.  But we're getting a pretty good object lesson right now that a cherished nostalgia driven property can have a depressed run if it gets a mixed reception.

 

===

 

The main problem I have with the sky high predictions is that it has 50 plus years of nostalgia baked in.  To make matters worse it's a childhood/family nostalgia property. If the story goes in slightly unexpected directions and/or some of the actors don't click for whatever reasons, the reactions could be... Well, bad.

 

That's not to say if every thing clicks it won't do gangbusters.  Even if 'only' most things click the sky is still the limit.  But unlike something like, say, BatB, there will be a new story attached here.  How said new story is received can always be a bit of a wild card.

Edited January 2, 2018 by Porthos

[Fancyarcher]

18 minutes ago, Porthos said:

As do I.  But we're getting a pretty good object lesson right now that a cherished nostalgia driven property can have a depressed run if it gets a mixed reception.

 

===

 

The main problem I have with the sky high predictions is that it has 50 plus years of nostalgia baked in.  To make matters worse it's a childhood/family nostalgia property. If the story goes in slightly unexpected directions and/or some of the actors don't click for whatever reasons, the reactions could be... Well, bad.

 

That's not to say if every thing clicks it won't do gangbusters.  Even if 'only' most things click the sky is still the limit.  But unlike something like, say, BatB, there will be a new story attached here.  How said new story is received can always be a bit of a wild card.

Oh of course. Most of us really have no idea how well Mary Poppins Returns will do, some of us are simply throwing out big predictions based off Disney's previous "nostalgic revival films", the difference being those were remakes, and Returns is supposed to be a sequel.

 

At this point I have no true idea just how "successful" Poppins will really be. We still have less then a year to go, and all we have right now is photos to go off of. While I think the film should turn out all right, and also do quite well, I'm also aware it could possibly turn out to be less then stellar, and maybe not so well-received. 

Edited January 2, 2018 by Fancyarcher

[MovieMan89]

I don't think 300 is the "floor" only because next November and December are so stacked. The one and only thing this really has going against it for being absolutely huge is that its audience could be pretty exhausted by the time we get to this. Nutcracker, The Grinch, Fantastic Beasts, Ralph 2, Spider-Verse then this...how much can the family demo handle in less than two months? The good news is most of those are November, but even still. But I think 300+ will happen as long as reception is really good and I'm still not totally ruling out 400.  

Edited January 2, 2018 by MovieMan89

[ThomasNicole]

2 hours ago, Porthos said:

If it gets mixed reception for whatever reason, I don't think 300 is the floor at all.

I don't think it will get a mixed reception

[lilmac]

Agree that it should release a week before Christmas. In the future Disney will have to go through hoops to avoid competing with its other tent poles. I still think Solo should be a December release. 

@meriodejaneiro

[Broadwayfreak66]

20 hours ago, MovieMan89 said:

I don't think 300 is the "floor" only because next November and December are so stacked. The one and only thing this really has going against it for being absolutely huge is that its audience could be pretty exhausted by the time we get to this. Nutcracker, The Grinch, Fantastic Beasts, Ralph 2, Spider-Verse then this...how much can the family demo handle in less than two months? The good news is most of those are November, but even still. But I think 300+ will happen as long as reception is really good and I'm still not totally ruling out 400.  

Fantastic Beasts is marketed to a significantly older audience than all the ones you name. It's not aimed at the "family audience", and it doesn't even look like it is. 

 

The first film performed to 65% over 25 year olds. 

 

The Harry Potter series isn't a family film series like live action fairy tales and animated kids movies. That should be known at this point. 

 

Im consistently confounded by the fact that a primarily PG-13 franchise, which had 3 brushes with the R rating, who's primary marketing audience is young adult women, not little kids, like the rest of the films you name, is still being called a "family" film. It's totally incongruent to any other film in that category. It's sort of condescending to repeatedly group it in to that category when it doesn't fit it. 

 

Maybe if people stopped doing this to the Harry Potter franchise, we wouldn't have so many critics whining every time they reviewed a new installment in the franchise about how "it's too dark" or "it takes itself too seriously"!

 

I remember some patronizing prick of a reviewer saying something like "it's darker than a kids film has any right to be" in regards to Deathly Hallows Part 1, and I couldn't believe how frustratingly condescending he was...uh, maybe that's because this franchise is not marketed to kids or families, or at least doesn't pander to that audience? So frustrating, how this franchise is characterized by people. 

Edited January 2, 2018 by Broadwayfreak66

[That One Girl]

7 minutes ago, Broadwayfreak66 said:

which had 3 brushes with the R rating

 

Never once has Harry Potter even come close to an R rating

[DAR]

4 minutes ago, That One Guy said:

 

Never once has Harry Potter even come close to an R rating

Yes some have been PG-ThiRteen