KATCH-2D2 Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Daxtreme said: Seriously guys, Star Wars could release at any time of the year and would break records, that's just how it is. ^This.. So much this. Edited January 4, 2016 by KATCH-2D2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vc2002 Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 5 minutes ago, Daxtreme said: Seriously guys, Star Wars could release at any time of the year and would break records, that's just how it is. People back then were saying that "Star Wars couldn't ever beat OW record because it releases in December", and now that it did, everyone's like "IT HAS TO RELEASE IN DECEMBER TO MAKE MONEY" Wrong - Star Wars just proved that it can release at any time of the year that it wants, it's still gonna break records anyway. Don't become the next wave of naysayers, please. I'd be willing to bet that it could destroy records in September too. Seriously. I dont see anyone saying that and even hinting that. No, what we're trying to argue is which is a better release time frame for SW8: Dec like SW7, or summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayhawk the Hutt Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 7 minutes ago, Daxtreme said: Seriously guys, Star Wars could release at any time of the year and would break records, that's just how it is. People back then were saying that "Star Wars couldn't ever beat OW record because it releases in December", and now that it did, everyone's like "IT HAS TO RELEASE IN DECEMBER TO MAKE MONEY" Wrong - Star Wars just proved that it can release at any time of the year that it wants, it's still gonna break records anyway. Don't become the next wave of naysayers, please. I'd be willing to bet that it could destroy records in September too. Seriously. True, but it is all about maximizing gross. December may be the best time to get the most out of it, since it's proved it can get the best of both worlds (amazing OW and strong legs). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misterchief81 Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 I don't really care what time of year they release it. Like others have said, it's going to make money no matter what. Either through the holidays, or through the summer. I'd only prefer they release it December 2017, because May feels too close to the release date of Rogue One. There should be at least a year between Star Wars universe films. I worry about oversaturation when you have Episode 7 in 12/15, Rogue One 12/16, Episode 8 5/17, and then have the Han Solo prequel, and Episode 9 after that. Give the main trilogy 2 years between movies, with the side stories in the off years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Community Manager Water Bottle Posted January 4, 2016 Community Manager Share Posted January 4, 2016 1 minute ago, vc2002 said: I dont see anyone saying that and even hinting that. No, what we're trying to argue is which is a better release time frame for SW8: Dec like SW7, or summer. There is no better release time frame. SW8 gains nothing by moving to December but it loses nothing if it does move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayhawk the Hutt Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 Wonder how long they'll wait to continue the saga after this trilogy. I would say wait another 10 years, but that's unlikely. I hope they wait at least 5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daxtreme Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 1 minute ago, vc2002 said: I dont see anyone saying that and even hinting that. No, what we're trying to argue is which is a better release time frame for SW8: Dec like SW7, or summer. Sorry I extrapolated opinion from other sites as well. But I did get that vibe from here as well, lemme check... Apparently it originates from page 58. Anyway, maybe you didn't say it directly, but some of you sure as hell are hinting it, otherwise there wouldn't be so many people defending the May release in here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurriKaty Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 They could release Star Wars in March and it would poop gold coins everywhere. This argument is hilarious. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KATCH-2D2 Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 1 hour ago, Darth Water Bottle said: True. Titanic will win the battle when adjusted for inflation. Of course, TFA's amazing run is at a time when ticket prices have increased and ticket attendance has gone down since 1997. The tickets are more expensive so it's making more money without inflation...but believe it or not, it's actually more impressive to me that a movie sells lots of tickets at the current price than when a movie sold lots of tickets when they were cheaper. True. Plus.. when Titanic was released people still went to see movies on the big screen back then. These days people at my workplace call me a movie buff just because I'd rather go to the cinema to see the movies I wanted to see instead of waiting three months to download them like NORMAL people. I love Titanic but it isn't that fair to bring SW7's current BO run down with this inflation bla bla bla. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadAtGender Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 I find the study of when the best release dates are to be fascinating. I don't think there can be a firm conclusion as to what is the BEST release date. There's a lot of context specific stuff for a film's performance that the release date has nothing to do with. Brand popularity and such. Plus, there's a lot of changing conventional wisdom. There were several years in the mid-00s where the actual Thanksgiving release was seen as subpar compared to the pre-Thanksgiving weekend. (The legacy of Harry Potter.) Even the success of films like Enchanted didn't seem to change that. (Note Disney's massive misstep in TPATF's release strategy.) Frozen and Tangled might have issued a course correction there, but I wonder if TGD's lackluster performance will be a cause for concern. (I like the Thanksgiving release, because if a film has legs, it gets a better benefit from Christmas.) Also, the first weekend of May has long been seen as a strong one, even though there are few calendar benefits. Recent years have shown the late March/early April date is probably equally strong, and could be better. Late legs don't get summer day benefits, but there is spring break and Easter that can be a boost. Plus, lower competition. (Early November seems to get the same sort of play as early May, which seems wrong to me. I don't think it's as strong as the films released there would indicate.) July used to be a powerhouse month. Long summer days gave a boost and even if you waited until after the 4th, you could get some massive weekends. Pirates and Batman both benefited greatly. However, the past few years have been less kind. Early August is almost looking better, lately, which seems backwards, since the late legs are cut off. But there is less competition, so who knows. However, December is generally always good. True, it doesn't often generate record breaking weekends. But the week from Christmas to New Years (and a bit beyond on either side) is so strong it's often like having three or four good weekends right in a row. And more than that: competition almost doesn't matter. So many films can coexist in the timeframe. The rising tide of the box office lifts all the movie ships. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandias Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) In the Modern era, December does seem like the best place to release a film if you're aiming for the all time record. Way less competition + 2 weeks of inflated Holiday grosses. In Summer, you have major new releases coming out every 1-2 weeks and thats inevitably gonna hurt your theater count and grosses no matter how well your film is doing. Edited January 4, 2016 by Ozymandias 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurriKaty Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 1 minute ago, KATCH-2D2 said: True. Plus.. when Titanic was released people still went to see movies on the big screen back then. These days people at my workplace call me a movie buff just because I'd rather go to the cinema to see the movies I wanted to see instead of waiting three months to download them like NORMAL people. I love Titanic but it isn't that fair to bring SW7's current BO run down with this inflation bla bla bla. The people you work with wait three months? I get crap for not wanting to watch shaky cam torrents two days after the movie comes out by my roommates. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewy Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 How often, after a movie breaks OW record, does the studio change the release pattern for the sequel? It's super rare - SM2, because Tobey Maguire hurt his back and they needed more time to make the movie. Disney moved Pirates 3 to memorial day, and I think they'd call that a mistake in hindsight. No one's saying "it has to release in december or it won't make money". People are saying "disney is going to release it in december, because the last one made an outrageous amount of money in december" 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theendsnotnearitshere Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 With TFA being such a monster breakout in NA, even if there were people with extremely high expectations re its BO run, I wonder why ST09's, directed by the very same Greg Grunberg fuck buddy (I mean, come on!!), DOM total needs such a ridiculous multiplier to match this. Both films serve as reboots and sequels at the same time, and are very close in quality (though I'd say ST is more cohesive and has no pacing issues). Is ST just not as big in them States? Could you ever forgive the metric system? Do countless ST TV shows and movies play a part in this as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewy Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 1 minute ago, theendsnotnearitshere said: With TFA being such a monster breakout in NA, even if there were people with extremely high expectations re its BO run, I wonder why ST09's, directed by the very same Greg Grunberg fuck buddy (I mean, come on!!), DOM total needs such a ridiculous multiplier to match this. Both films serve as reboots and sequels at the same time, and are very close in quality (though I'd say ST is more cohesive and has no pacing issues). Is ST just not as big in them States? Could you ever forgive the metric system? Do countless ST TV shows and movies play a part in this as well? lmao 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K1stpierre Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 So this didn't get past 90M this weekend? I'm a bit disappointed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daxtreme Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 Just now, K1Rey said: So this didn't get past 90M this weekend? I'm a bit disappointed. It's not over, we've yet to see actuals and many of us here believe, me included, that Disney is lowballing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadAtGender Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 1 minute ago, Chewy said: How often, after a movie breaks OW record, does the studio change the release pattern for the sequel? It's super rare - SM2, because Tobey Maguire hurt his back and they needed more time to make the movie. Disney moved Pirates 3 to memorial day, and I think they'd call that a mistake in hindsight. No one's saying "it has to release in december or it won't make money". People are saying "disney is going to release it in december, because the last one made an outrageous amount of money in december" It doesn't even need a record. Remember when The Hobbit 3 was originally going to get a summer release? The films didn't exactly light the box office on fire, but they knew enough to stick to the pattern. However, there are examples of films which play with the structure. They realized with Harry Potter that they couldn't do a one-film-a-year thing and went to 18-ish months from 3 onward, until they only did an 8 month break from 7 to 8. Twilight took the same strategy. (I'm starting to wonder if The Hunger Games should have done the same. Perhaps the MJ problem was doing too much too fast.) It's a little weird because it's almost starting to feel like two years between films is too long, but one year isn't enough. And not just production-wise. Audiences need time to breathe, perhaps? So how do you play with it? Remember when sequels took three years? Yeah, those were the days. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 3 minutes ago, theendsnotnearitshere said: With TFA being such a monster breakout in NA, even if there were people with extremely high expectations re its BO run, I wonder why ST09's, directed by the very same Greg Grunberg fuck buddy (I mean, come on!!), DOM total needs such a ridiculous multiplier to match this. Both films serve as reboots and sequels at the same time, and are very close in quality (though I'd say ST is more cohesive and has no pacing issues). Is ST just not as big in them States? Could you ever forgive the metric system? Do countless ST TV shows and movies play a part in this as well? 1. ST isn't nearly as big as SW (like not remotely in the same ballpark, especially when it comes to movies) 2. SW:TFA is a better movie than ST 3. SW:TFA has been more embraced by its core fandom than ST 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadAtGender Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 6 minutes ago, theendsnotnearitshere said: With TFA being such a monster breakout in NA, even if there were people with extremely high expectations re its BO run, I wonder why ST09's, directed by the very same Greg Grunberg fuck buddy (I mean, come on!!), DOM total needs such a ridiculous multiplier to match this. Both films serve as reboots and sequels at the same time, and are very close in quality (though I'd say ST is more cohesive and has no pacing issues). Is ST just not as big in them States? Could you ever forgive the metric system? Do countless ST TV shows and movies play a part in this as well? Star Trek is a venerable and popular franchise, but, honestly, it's not even in the same galaxy as Star Wars. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
