Weekend Actuals (Page 93): TFA 42.35M | The Revenant 39.83M | Daddy's Home 15.02M | The Forest 12.74M | Sisters 7.19M

[incognitoo]

2 hours ago, Klingo said:

I guess its better than getting beaten by Divergent in the summer.

 

Di... Divergent?

 

[CJohn]

Just now, Baumer said:

 

I still think it has more to do with the story, the trailers and who is in it...but that's just me.

For sure, that epic drop is happening because WOM isn't good, but I also think Weinstein should have chosen a date and stick with it. The OW could have been better if people actually knew when the movie was coming out. 

[baumer]

All right, well fuck you for making sense then lol.

[Ethan Hunt]

The Hateful 8 last second date change was hilarious

[CJohn]

Meanwhile the FOX marketing department deserves a fucking award. That is what happens when a studio sinks 135M in a movie like The Revevnant: a magnificent marketing campaign. Except if you are Lionsgate. If you are Lionsgate your movie is doomed no matter what. 

[vc2002]

15 minutes ago, The Panda said:

Yeah, I'm a little surprised at the big drop off for TFA, but in retrospect it makes sense.  The movie's become the biggest movie of all time Domestically in less than 3 weeks, only so many people can/will see a movie in theaters (especially in the modern era) and TFA is testing the modern cap.

 

It also is coming off over a 90m 3rd weekend (that was a Holiday as well).  A smaller drop is harder to maintain.  Especially since even the smaller movies are dropping hard this weekend.

 

It also has 45-50m in new direct competition from The Revenant and The Forest.  It's not the holidays, so new competition is going to hurt.

 

You can't compare it to anything in terms of legs, because there's no proper comparison.  Avatar wasn't even at 400m at this point, there was plenty of room to go before you reached the threshold (that we don't really know what) of everyone who was going to see it, saw it.

 

It doesn't say anything about WoM (as it's its third weekend, and had impressive drops the last two weeks), it just says it burned off a massive amount of demand over the holidays and has to come back down to Earth at some point.

 

It also says it has spoilled a lot of us.

[AniNate]

If everyone knew the movie was out at some point, what does it matter what the official "release date" was? Heck, Star Wars advertised that its release date was December 18th even though they were sure holding a ton of screenings on the 17th

[CJohn]

3 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

The Hateful 8 last second date change was hilarious

It was literally at the last second. I go to sleep on Tuesday and Hateful Eight is still scheduled for Thursday, December 31, and when I wake up on Wednesday I see preview numbers for Hateful Eight and that the movie is already in wide release, wtf  

[Boxofficerules]

26 minutes ago, Mockingjay Raphael said:

That's a good start for horror this year, let's hope it will be a promising year, unlike 2015 

Why? It's lower than what The Woman In Black opened to last January. It's much lower than what the like of The Devil Inside and Texas Chainsaw 3D opened to in the past.

[CJohn]

5 minutes ago, Boxofficerules said:

Why? It's lower than what The Woman In Black opened to last January. It's much lower than what the like of The Devil Inside and Texas Chainsaw 3D opened to in the past.

The Woman in Black was a sequel to a highly successful first movie. Texas Chainsaw is Texas Chainsaw. Devil Inside had Jesus kind of marketing from Paramount.

 

The Forest is a movie with almost no marketing, it is not a sequel and the lead actress is a hot chick from Game of Thrones. 

[The Panda]

17 minutes ago, Baumer said:

 

I still think it has more to do with the story, the trailers and who is in it...but that's just me.

 

It's a mixture.  If I weren't an avid movie follower online (but still enjoyed the same movies I did and went as often), I wouldn't have known the movie was coming out at all.  Let alone, that is all of the sudden expanding a week and a half earlier than planned.

 

Add to the fact, the overall product isn't appealing to the general audience.  Django and Inglorious Basterds both played like over the top revenge comedies to audiences.  In Django especially, you had like able leads and villains you loved to hate and there were huge audience reactions when you watched them die.  They were adventure movies for adults.

 

The Hateful Eight is not that digestible to the GA, mostly because it's pretty much a play Tarentino put on the big screen.  It's slow moving, add overly long on top of that (sure Django was long too, but it had a much faster pace so audiences didn't care as much), and it's much more morally ambiguous.  None of the characters are all that likeable, there's not much of comedic element to it (so it's just incredibly bloody and vulgar, making those comedic makes it easier for an audience to enjoy), and there's no big exciting moments that you saw in say Django.

 

Im glad Tarantino tried that direction, but it's easily one of his least GA-friendly movies.  It made sense after I saw it why it wasn't going to be a hit, and I said that it was likely to have poor WoM right after I saw it.

 

So add together a movie with a release date nobody knew about, a movie that isn't GA friendly at all (even compared to the directors other movies which aren't GA friendly), and it failing to gain any awards traction other than score and JJL's performance, and it's lucky it even did as much as its done so far.

[baumer]

Well, I don't think you can ignore than Tarantino's two monster films starred monster sized stars.  The other four before that didn't and they made pretty much exactly what H8 is going to make.

[The Futurist]

The two latest QT films just looked bigger & more epic and they were, plus each had a big movie star in it, Pitt & Leo, no offense to Kurt Russel, Samuel L Jackson & the glorious Hateful Eight cast.

 

 

 

 

[CJohn]

2 minutes ago, Baumer said:

Well, I don't think you can ignore than Tarantino's two monster films starred monster sized stars.  The other four before that didn't and they made pretty much exactly what H8 is going to make.

They also had far more appealing premises/marketing campaigns, like Panda said.

 

I still think the OW could have been a bit higher, the release date pattern is just absurd. It makes Paramount moving Star Trek Into Darkness from Friday to Thursday one week before look like a smart move in comparison. 

[The Panda]

2 minutes ago, Baumer said:

Well, I don't think you can ignore than Tarantino's two monster films starred monster sized stars.  The other four before that didn't and they made pretty much exactly what H8 is going to make.

 

That's a factor, but I don't think it was the only one.  Leo and Pitt helped the Box Office OW by getting butts in seats, but the two films crowd pleasing nature (compared to the rest of his films) helped keep them there.

 

Theres a number of factors, but people not knowing when a movies coming out is a big one. (And the WoM we're seeing is simply people going in expecting another Django and getting something completely different)

[a2k]

13 minutes ago, Baumer said:

Well, I don't think you can ignore than Tarantino's two monster films starred monster sized stars.  The other four before that didn't and they made pretty much exactly what H8 is going to make.

 

Kill Bill 1 and 2 did 70m and 66m more than a decade ago. Jackie Brown did 40m 18 years back. I don't think that's similar to making 50m today. Grindhouse is the only one which did worse (25m) and brings down the average (that too ignoring inflation) of his pre-Basterds movies. Dogs released in 61 theaters so not in the equation.

Edited January 9, 2016 by a2knet

[kayumanggi]

So those extrapolations and explanations saying 50 M (some even said 55 M - 60 M) is happening for TFA suddenly stopped making sense. ha ha

 

It has just become the biggest film domestically. Whatever it does from now is just a bonus. Let us not ask too much from it. lol

 

What surprises me is that THE REVENANT's number. I mean what made people see it? Reviews? Leo?

[lobo007]

crumbling... 

 

 

sorry had to say it

 

no in all seriousness, i think people were just playing with the maths without considering the reality. when TFA hit $625 million in something like 12 days compared to something like several hundred for The Avengers, and the drops were at the time Avatar like, it just looked like a true Juggernaut.  but by the third weekend,  TFA's drops were no longer sustainable, despite "only" having around a quarter billion to go.  when has any movie not directed by that Jimmy guy even made $200 million after its third weekend?  when a movie is this big, with such big targets, simple extrapolation (comparing its future run and percentage drops to any of the LOTR movies) just won't do.  the next few Sundays, TFA will have to compete with the NFL playoffs, The Revenant, 13 Hours, KFP3 and other movies, and the Super Bowl. IMO, TFA will continue to drop hard until it hits below $1 million dailies.  the real bet is if TFA's final number will be bigger than tonight's Powerball jackpot.

Edited January 9, 2016 by lobo007

[kayumanggi]

This TFA and THE REVENANT numbers also screw up my Winter Game and Derby.

[kayumanggi]

1 hour ago, SteveJaros said:

If you are a TFA fan, you should consider every DOM dollar earned since passing Avatar as pure gravy. Celebrate them!  

 

This.