Weekend Estimates (pg14): Martian 11.4 | Goosebumps 10.21 | Spies 8.06 | Burnt 5.04 | Crisis 3.43 | Scouts 1.77

[moviesRus]

14 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

Are we now calling any adult drama that opens in the fall "Oscar bait"?

Well, they took this film to TIFF and emphasized "from the producers of ARGO". It's not a leap to say it is failed Oscar bait. 

Burnt definitely wasn't. 

[MovieMan89]

Burnt looks like it was lucky to avoid DTV status, let alone be "failed oscar bait." As for Crisis, Bullock would be the only reason to suspect they ever had any hopes for awards with it. But not like anything she does is Oscar bait though. 

[CJohn]

3 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

Burnt looks like it was lucky to avoid DTV status, let alone be "failed oscar bait." As for Crisis, Bullock would be the only reason to suspect they ever had any hopes for awards with it. But not like anything she does is Oscar bait though. 

Burnt was originally Oscar Bait as well. 

[MovieMan89]

Just now, CJohn said:

Burnt was originally Oscar Bait as well. 

"Originally" as in way back in the pre-production days? Cause not buying that otherwise...

[grim22]

The TV Spend for the new releases is very low as well. Both Burnt and Crisis only spent 10M on TV ads in the US. That is basically the studio dumping the movie with minimal advertising. Normal TV spend budgets are around 20-30M for most movies this year. Universal spent 25M on Steve Jobs TV ads to date, and SPECTRE has seen 12M so far with the final week barrage yet to come.

[grey ghost]

43 minutes ago, Water Bottle said:

WOULD YOU LIKE TO SUPPORT THE FORUMS?

Our Copper Accounts are or cheapest account tier at $5 a month which is about $60 a year. That's quite a bit of money for some users. Well guess what? You can now save money!

If you can, pay $55 now and you'll get a Copper Account for a whole year! That's right you save a whole $5! This is a bargain price! What do you get with a Copper Account? You shouldn't get any ads, you'll get 75 likes a day, and you'll gain the ability to send users in chat private messages! What's more is that you can upload larger avatars!

So upgrade for annual tier and get a whole month free!

 

Don't forget to repost this next weekend. This is possibly the slowest weekend of the year. 

Edited October 30, 2015 by grey ghost

[Empire]

2 hours ago, Tau Ceti said:

Variety: http://variety.com/2015/film/news/box-office-sandra-bullocks-our-brand-is-crisis-bradley-cooper-burnt-1201630653/

OBIC: $3.5 mil

Burnt: $6 - $6.5

Zombies: $2.5

This weekend's box office is hilarious. I knew it would be bad, but didn't figure it would be this awful. 

[grey ghost]

5 hours ago, WrathOfHan said:

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/counts/chart/?yr=2015&wk=44&p=.htm

Crimson Peak is losing 892 theaters, damn.

Flopson Peak.

[TalismanRing]

1 hour ago, grim22 said:

The TV Spend for the new releases is very low as well. Both Burnt and Crisis only spent 10M on TV ads in the US. That is basically the studio dumping the movie with minimal advertising. Normal TV spend budgets are around 20-30M for most movies this year. Universal spent 25M on Steve Jobs TV ads to date, and SPECTRE has seen 12M so far with the final week barrage yet to come.

$10m in TV advertising for WB is barely opening the wallet.   Though its still more than they gave the Efron thing.

[Webslinger]

Crimson Peak's run makes me feel a bit sad. The movie isn't Del Toro's best, but it looks damned beautiful on the big screen, especially if that big screen happens to be an IMAX one. But alas, I knew it was screwed when I saw it in IMAX on its opening night and the audience hated it.

[grim22]

7 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

$10m in TV advertising for WB is barely opening the wallet.   Though its still more than they gave the Efron thing.

They definitely knew WAYF was a bomb, it was not even produced by WB, they did the bare minimum to advertise and distribute it.

1 minute ago, Webslinger said:

Crimson Peak's run makes me feel a bit sad. The movie isn't Del Toro's best, but it looks damned beautiful on the big screen, especially if that big screen happens to be an IMAX one. But alas, I knew it was screwed when I saw it in IMAX on its opening night and the audience hated it.

Universal didn't care in the end, the last minute "It is not horror, it is a gothic romance" positioning didn't help either.

[Webslinger]

Well, it is horror, but it's almost entirely psychological until the blood-soaked final half-hour.

[CJohn]

1 hour ago, MovieMan89 said:

"Originally" as in way back in the pre-production days? Cause not buying that otherwise...

Yes, when they hired Cooper and all that. 

[grey ghost]

3 hours ago, filmlover said:

I think Fox missed an opportunity not releasing Victor Frankenstein on this weekend. That thing that crawled up onto DanRad's head and died there is probably more frightening than every horror movie released this year.

That Harry Potter stint took Radcliffe to a dark place. Some of his filmography looks like Tim Burton mated with Rob Zombie.

[MovieMan89]

15 minutes ago, Webslinger said:

Crimson Peak's run makes me feel a bit sad. The movie isn't Del Toro's best, but it looks damned beautiful on the big screen, especially if that big screen happens to be an IMAX one. But alas, I knew it was screwed when I saw it in IMAX on its opening night and the audience hated it.

The movie was stunning in IMAX. It is a real shame out of all the directors to get big budgets taken away from them it's gonna be GDT. The man really knows how to make big, amazing looking spectacle with the money. I also thought it was very respectable from a non-visual standpoint too. Good acting, decent script, predictable but decent plot saved by good execution. I have no idea why they thought marketing it as straight up horror was a good idea though. I can just imagine the confounded reactions from the teens, out for their cheap thrill Halloween horror flick, when they were presented with a full blown period piece romance film in that first act.  

If anything, they should've taken more of The Others approach to marketing. Present it as a much more adult and dramatic psychological thriller. Instead they seemed bent on marketing it to compete with the like of Paranormal 5, and of course that audience would hate it. Terrible decision on their part. 

Edited October 31, 2015 by MovieMan89

[Webslinger]

Del Toro deserves a huge hit, but it just seems like he hasn't caught a break since the success of Blade II. The Hellboy movies both underperformed relative to expectations. Pan's Labyrinth did great business for a Spanish-language, R-rated fairy tale for adults, but it barely broke into the mainstream multiplexes. Pacific Rim - which was unironic dumb fun - couldn't even live up to inflated expectations despite giddily entertaining sequences of giant machines fighting giant monsters. And now we have Crimson Peak, whose underperformance basically vindicates Universal's decision to can At the Mountains of Madness a few years back.

[MovieMan89]

5 minutes ago, Webslinger said:

Del Toro deserves a huge hit, but it just seems like he hasn't caught a break since the success of Blade II. The Hellboy movies both underperformed relative to expectations. Pan's Labyrinth did great business for a Spanish-language, R-rated fairy tale for adults, but it barely broke into the mainstream multiplexes. Pacific Rim - which was unironic dumb fun - couldn't even live up to inflated expectations despite giddily entertaining sequences of giant machines fighting giant monsters. And now we have Crimson Peak, whose underperformance basically vindicates Universal's decision to can At the Mountains of Madness a few years back.

Which is why I'm saying there will be no more big budgets for GDT until he starts small and builds himself back up again. Which sucks because out of all the directors who can best use a big budget to their film's advantage, I'd say he would be near the top. PJ should've gotten over himself and let him do The Hobbit. Things almost surely would've turned out better from a success standpoint for both directors. 

Edited October 31, 2015 by MovieMan89

[TalismanRing]

1 hour ago, MovieMan89 said:

"Originally" as in way back in the pre-production days? Cause not buying that otherwise...

A look at the entire cast list and that it was scheduled for late Oct by Weinstein (who is not adverse to serious dumping and shelving) indicates that feeling lasted longer than that.

[moviesRus]

Del Toro just hasn't caught on with audiences or critics with his recent output. I think Crimson Peak could've been pushed to a higher number just be having better critics reviews and getting that "must see" buzz. Instead it's at a middling 60-something on rotten tomatoes, which is okay but not anything special that might make people take notice. 

[Webslinger]

6 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

Which is why I'm saying there will be no more big budgets for GDT until he starts small and builds himself back up again. Which sucks because out of all the directors who can best use a big budget to their film's advantage, I'd say he would be near the top. PJ should've gotten over himself and let him do The Hobbit. Things almost surely would've turned out better from a success standpoint for both directors. 

My understanding of the Hobbit situation is that Del Toro and Peter Jackson had a decent working relationship, but Del Toro was frustrated with delays and Warner Bros preferred Jackson at the helm.