Rogue One: A Star Wars Story | 1B WW

[NCsoft]

6 minutes ago, Fullbuster said:

 

Be careful, we got the same scenario with Finding Dory, in the end it passed $1B WW

 

True, too early to call for Rogue one yet at this stage. Dory's run certainly had its up and downs, I'm just glad it ended up in a good place (over 1B, even over Zootopia, 2nd WW) so I can be at peace . 

I think at this point though Civil War has WW crown secured, Rogue one may end up close to Zootopia/Dory's range, will be interesting to watch.

[Fullbuster]

11 minutes ago, NCsoft said:

 

True, too early to call for Rogue one yet at this stage. Dory's run certainly had its up and downs, I'm just glad it ended up in a good place (over 1B, even over Zootopia, 2nd WW) so I can be at peace . 

I think at this point though Civil War has WW crown secured, Rogue one may end up close to Zootopia/Dory's range, will be interesting to watch.

 

But...But....Superhero Fatigue! I thought comicbook movies were declining, haters said so since 2013

 

[terrestrial]

 

6 hours ago, hw64 said:

Please. 60%+ drops ARE a bad sign. 

If you speak about SW R1 = disagree. Strongly.

[Aristis]

I think the chance this makes less than 1B is very slim. A deciding factor will be Dom + China. Those two could make $450M or $700M (the last is probably unlikely but with $550M and $150M...)

 

IMO there is a big range from $400M/$550M/$950M to $550M/$700M/$1,25B. I see about $500M/$650M/$1,15B (So CA3 is still reachable )

 

SW7 had a Dom multipler of 3,8x. 3,5x $140M would bring this to $490M (Of course SW7 had great legs! But TH1 had 3,6 and TH2 had 3,5 so 3,5 should be reachable for a movie tht has better critical acclaim.

 

I made a list with (IMO) lowest and highest possible result but there are countries I don't really know which result this could have (France, Japan, Australia). Probably it's to soon to make such predictions accurate. But that's the fun

 

(I know GB should have $180M but for now I use this number)

 

	SW7	RO (low)	RO (high)
Dom	936,7	400	575
Ger	111,4	45	60
Fr	88,5	35	45
GB	163,6	60	70
Rus	26	10	15
Ch	124,2	85	140
Jap	97,9	55	65
Aus	67,3	35	45
In	1131,6	545	715
Others	452,7	220	275
	2068,30	945,00	1290,00

Edited December 16, 2016 by Aristis

[FantasticBeasts]

s

Edited December 16, 2016 by FantasticBeasts

[Aristis]

7 minutes ago, FantasticBeasts said:

I think that some of your lows are actually high. Supposing that GB stands for Great Britain = United Kingdom I think that I saw people in the UK thread saying that 50-55m seems like a reasonable prediction. Also in Russia, I think that 15 must be the highest it can get to...

lc50M I think, not? That would be $60M. With Russia maybe your right

[FantasticBeasts]

Just now, Aristis said:

lc50M I think, not? That would be $60M. With Russia maybe your right

Just realized that I messed the pound to euro adjustment. Deleted the post. But I think for Russia it's still right.

[wildphantom]

8 hours ago, hw64 said:

 

Please. 60%+ drops ARE a bad sign. There's a point to be made that we should wait and see the full opening weekends and the results for the next few days after that, but there's no way, looking at these results on their own, that there's "nothing bad" about them.

 

They're a bad sign when they're on the level of the biggest films of this year?

 

I repeat. This is not Star Wars Episode VIII. It is also not the most anticipated film in history and the continuation of a story people had waited over 30 years for. 

It will do around a billion worldwide. A huge success, and most importantly - it's really good. Get some perspective. 

Did you really come on here thinking this should be one of the biggest movies of all time?!?! Really? 

[Jonwo]

14 minutes ago, wildphantom said:

 

They're a bad sign when they're on the level of the biggest films of this year?

 

I repeat. This is not Star Wars Episode VIII. It is also not the most anticipated film in history and the continuation of a story people had waited over 30 years for. 

It will do around a billion worldwide. A huge success, and most importantly - it's really good. Get some perspective. 

Did you really come on here thinking this should be one of the biggest movies of all time?!?! Really? 

 

Itll still be the second highest OW of December and it still has Christmas holidays coming up. 

[PatrickvD]

I'm really confused by all these people expecting this to be in TFA/Avatar/Titanic territory.

 

It's a spin-off. What am I missing here?

[FantasticBeasts]

24 minutes ago, PatrickvD said:

I'm really confused by all these people expecting this to be in TFA/Avatar/Titanic territory.

 

It's a spin-off. What am I missing here?

No noone expected this to be in the same level as TFA. However, spin-offs when coming from franchises with strong fanbase usually do reasonably well. It is not common to see a franchise with more than 50% drop from the film its coming from. For example, Hobbit did extremely well and with adjustment included although it did less than Lotr it still didn't fell that much. (In actual grosses it even did better). Also, Fantastic Beasts is on par for a 750-800m finish which is almost close to same low HP movies' grosses and something like 30% less from DH2 OS If you adjust it to todays ER. I think that RO's performance will be intresting to the point that we will see that TFA's gross was somehow "inflated". It is my belief,  there was a ton of people who even saw it without having ever watched a SW movie. And an even bigger number from people who saw a SW movie in theaters for the first time. In other words, SW's power in OS markets at leat shouldn't be measured by TFA's numbers because that was a cultural phenomenom with huge marketing campaign that got people who weren't highly intrested see it. I believe that if you want to rank franchises in OS markets, you should probably place SW slightly after Lotr and HP...

All in all, RO's performance is far from a disapointment but it goes to saw that SW is not JUST TFA...

Edited December 17, 2016 by FantasticBeasts

[RobinHood26]

Keep in mind LOTR and HP had Dead franchise though, this is active and a spin off. even more impressive. 

[keysersoze123]

27 minutes ago, PatrickvD said:

I'm really confused by all these people expecting this to be in TFA/Avatar/Titanic territory.

 

It's a spin-off. What am I missing here?

 

 

if you had made this prediction before release then its great, looking at the thread only James was predicting low before release(and that too bcos he wanted FB to beat R1). Hindsight is always 20/20 and easy to say. Plus this is not a spin off. it directly ties to ANH. So in a way its like SW 3.5.

[FantasticBeasts]

4 minutes ago, Jay Hollywood said:

Keep in mind LOTR and HP had Dead franchise though, this is active and a spin off. even more impressive. 

You mean that both Lotr and HP had ended by the time spinoffs came? Well I think this can only be seen as a advantage because both those franchises were far from their peak when the spinoffs were released. Talking for HP, it had been 5 years since the last movie and still doing such great numbers shows the loyalty of the fanbase. SW in addition, is currently at its peak popularity (at least for the 21st century) so anything releasd now has a huge advantage. I am really confident tthat if FB was released at 2012-13, it would have done close to a billion if not more...

[FantasticBeasts]

Btw, can someone make an opening weekend prediction?

[peludo]

38 minutes ago, FantasticBeasts said:

No noone expected this to be in the same level as TFA. However, spin-offs when coming from franchises with strong fanbase usually do reasonably well. It is not common to see a franchise with more than 50% drop from the film its coming from. For example, Hobbit did extremely well and with adjustment included although it did less than Lotr it still didn't fell that much. (In actual grosses it even did better). Also, Fantastic Beasts is on par for a 750-800m finish which is almost close to same low HP movies' grosses and something like 30% less from DH2 OS If you adjust it to todays ER. I think that RO's performance will be intresting to the point that we will see that TFA's gross was somehow "inflated". It is my belief,  there was a ton of people who even saw it without having ever watched a SW movie. And an even bigger number from people who saw a SW movie in theaters for the first time. In other words, SW's power in OS markets at leat shouldn't be measured by TFA's numbers because that was a cultural phenomenom with huge marketing campaign that got people who weren't highly intrested see it. I believe that if you want to rank franchises in OS markets, you should probably place SW slightly after Lotr and HP...

All in all, RO's performance is far from a disapointment but it goes to saw that SW is not JUST TFA...

Hobbit films did good, sure, but nothing close to LOTR. You are comparing actual grosses of films separated a decade, without taking into account expansion of new markets, inflation or even wide better ER conditions. The reality says that in, terms of admissions, Hobbit lost about a 40-45% of admissions relative lo LOTR.

 

Concerning FB, HP was released during a decade and it was losing attendance through years. Finally, DH2 exploded (although it is not the most attended film of the franchise), and now, as you well say, FB is losing a 30% relative to it, what is quite impressive, but still, is about a 50% lower than HP1, the biggest entry of the franchise.

 

I think RO is a different case. I see it closer to MCU films. It is like if we have seen Avengers last year and now we have Guardians of the Galaxy. There is nothing wrong making half of TFA. It would be worrying if this would be SW8 figures. We will see what happens next year.

Edited December 17, 2016 by peludo

[FantasticBeasts]

2 minutes ago, peludo said:

Hobbit films did good, sure, but nothing close to LOTR. You are comparing actual grosses of films separated a decade, without taking into account expansion of new markets, inflation or even wide better ER conditions. The reality says that in, terms of admissions, Hobbit lost about a 40-45% of admissions relative lo LOTR.

 

Concerning FB, HP was released during a decade and it was losing attendance through years. Finally, DH2 exploded (although it is not the most attended film of the franchise), and now, as you well say, FB is losing a 30% relative to it, what is quite impressive, but still, is about a 50% lower than HP1, the biggest entry of the franchise.

 

I think RO is a different case. I see it closer to MCU films. It is like if we have seen Avengers last year and now we have Guardians of the Galaxy. There is nothing wrong making half of TFA. It would be worrying if this would be SW8 figures. We will see what happens next year.

I agree with your points and I made it clear that Lotr did better than Hobbit with adjustment. However, I think it's worth considering that SW is at its peak right now. So anything SW-related generates immense buzz. On the contrary, FB for example was released 5 years after the end of HP. The pottermania was far more calmed that it was at late 00's to early 10's...I think it's fair to say that FB would have made much better numbers (close to a billion) If it was released at 2012 let's say.

[wildphantom]

1 hour ago, FantasticBeasts said:

No noone expected this to be in the same level as TFA. However, spin-offs when coming from franchises with strong fanbase usually do reasonably well. It is not common to see a franchise with more than 50% drop from the film its coming from. For example, Hobbit did extremely well and with adjustment included although it did less than Lotr it still didn't fell that much. (In actual grosses it even did better). Also, Fantastic Beasts is on par for a 750-800m finish which is almost close to same low HP movies' grosses and something like 30% less from DH2 OS If you adjust it to todays ER. I think that RO's performance will be intresting to the point that we will see that TFA's gross was somehow "inflated". It is my belief,  there was a ton of people who even saw it without having ever watched a SW movie. And an even bigger number from people who saw a SW movie in theaters for the first time. In other words, SW's power in OS markets at leat shouldn't be measured by TFA's numbers because that was a cultural phenomenom with huge marketing campaign that got people who weren't highly intrested see it. I believe that if you want to rank franchises in OS markets, you should probably place SW slightly after Lotr and HP...

All in all, RO's performance is far from a disapointment but it goes to saw that SW is not JUST TFA...

 

A decade of inflation will do that for you, regarding Hobbit. It fell massively from Rings. 

 

 

[FantasticBeasts]

Just now, wildphantom said:

 

A decade of inflation will do that for you, regarding Hobbit. It fell massively from Rings. 

 

 

It fell but I don't think that it was 50% or more...

[wildphantom]

2 minutes ago, FantasticBeasts said:

It fell but I don't think that it was 50% or more...

 

Force Awakens was one of the biggest phenomenons we've ever seen though - especially in the US and the UK. 

It was the sequel to the most beloved trilogy of films in history - nobody ever thought they'd see the day. 

 

Its sequel can be the only one you can really compare this to. 

Look at Fantastic Beasts and how it's done compared to Harry Potter. 

It's different. Audience buy in is harder. Especially with families for Rogue One as it's so much darker than Awakens was. 

 

Rogue One is doing great. As did Fantastic Beasts.