Jump to content

WrathOfHan

Weekend Estimates (Page 13): Jungle Book 42.4M | Keanu and Huntsman 9.4M | Mother's Day 8.3M | Barbershop 6.1M | Ratchet 4.8M | CIVIL WAR OS OW 200.2M!!!! (Page 14)

Recommended Posts







32 minutes ago, nilephelan said:

JB was underestimated by at least $1m on Sunday.  

 

Wow...if it gets 43.5m this weekend then a 42.5% drop against CW will give it 25m.

A 'TJB 4th weekend Over/Under 25m' club could be fun.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, a2knet said:

 

Wow...if it gets 43.5m this weekend then a 42.5% drop against CW will give it 25m.

A 'TJB 4th weekend Over/Under 25m' club could be fun.

 

Disney probably wishes they'd released JB a week earlier. As it is, its gross this coming weekend will almost surely be truncated by CACW, or else maybe lingering JB demand will knock a few million off of CA. It's clear that Disney's films will be competing with each other to an extent.

 

I mean, I know, it's a nice problem to have, when you have two blockbusters out there fringing on each other to an extent, but still ..

Edited by SteveJaros
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites



13 hours ago, CJohn said:

This year has been the funniest shit ever. We have had the same movie dominate the discussion for 3 weeks and then we switch to another movie dominating the discussion for another 3 weeks. The Jungle Book is about to pass that torch to Civil War which should dominate until Apocalypse. There, we end this weird phenomenon that has been happening since mid February. 

 

IMO the only thing weird about it is that as you say, it started in February. And that's because thanks to Disney with "Alice" a few years back, "summer" now starts in March, not May or June. But as soon as blockbusters start getting released, well yeah, unless the movie is a John Carter-level flop, the three-week dominance pattern is going to set in, because the studios do tend to try to space them out like that. 

Edited by SteveJaros
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



22 minutes ago, SteveJaros said:

 

IMO the only thing weird about it is that as you say, it started in February. And that's because thanks to Disney with "Alice" a few years back, "summer" now starts in March, not May or June. But as soon as blockbusters start getting released, well yeah, unless the movie is a John Carter-level flop, the three-week dominance pattern is going to set in, because the studios do tend to try to space them out like that. 

I don't know what took them so long to space them out. For years I thought they should do that. There are more tickets sold in summer and it was a great time to launch potential blockbusters that were unknown, before there were franchises, back when jaws and sw got started. Then came along SM IJ BttF ET BM FG.

In the early 2000s many franchise films were crowding each other in summer. I thought the fan base would go see in just about any other month when  they would have more screens longer. It's apparently working

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



3 hours ago, No Prisoners said:

Does look like it's blowing up in places. If China and domestic explode we will never hear the end of SW vs Marvel

 

That's a civil war that Disney can totally afford. Whatever outcome happens, the only thing we can assure is that Mickey Mouse will be swimming in a pool of whores, weed and a whole lotta cash by the end of the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, No Prisoners said:

In the early 2000s many franchise films were crowding each other in summer. I thought the fan base would go see in just about any other month when  they would have more screens longer. It's apparently working

 

The "blockbuster spacing" pisses me off because it's just killing the audience for mid-budget franchises. Would something like Final Destination or The Whole Nine Yards or Pitch Black be successful enough to get a sequel today? I doubt it.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites



7 minutes ago, department store basement said:

 

The "blockbuster spacing" pisses me off because it's just killing the audience for mid-budget franchises. Would something like Final Destination or The Whole Nine Yards or Pitch Black be successful enough to get a sequel today? I doubt it.

 

Yeah, really sucks that Barbershop, God's Not Dead, and Olympus Has Fallen couldn't get sequels

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



4 minutes ago, tribefan695 said:

 

Yeah, really sucks that Barbershop, God's Not Dead, and Olympus Has Fallen couldn't get sequels

 

That's a terrible argument.

 

Barbershop is an established series, the GND films have tiny budgets, and the Fallen films are promoted like tentpoles.

 

It's the 20m-50m budgeted series that are dying (like the ones I mentioned). I can't see a How to Be Single sequel happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



I don't know why we really need franchises with that specific criteria. Most of them aren't very good anyway, and if they are they're typically well rewarded. We just haven't had much worth rewarding over the past few months

Link to comment
Share on other sites



23 minutes ago, department store basement said:

 

The "blockbuster spacing" pisses me off because it's just killing the audience for mid-budget franchises. Would something like Final Destination or The Whole Nine Yards or Pitch Black be successful enough to get a sequel today? I doubt it.

What are you talking about? Every movie and their mother gets a sequel nowadays.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



31 minutes ago, department store basement said:

 

The "blockbuster spacing" pisses me off because it's just killing the audience for mid-budget franchises. Would something like Final Destination or The Whole Nine Yards or Pitch Black be successful enough to get a sequel today? I doubt it.

I see what you mean there. Silence of the lambs was something that really took off in winter. Maybe harder to do with tent poles coming out.

That's also the fault of the audience though. How many super hero movies can one take in?

I was a teen in the late 70s. Yeah, I saw SW, CEotTK, SM and IJ. Also went to see On Golden Pond., ordinary people and terms of endearment. 

Those were top 5 movies of the year. Not a chance these days. Sicario would have been top ten 30 years ago.  Awesome movie. Benicio was a bad ass. It was 60th last year.

Edit

Went to see porky's too

And fast times. Oh phoebe! Best slow motion of unleashing the hounds ever.

Edited by No Prisoners
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



2 minutes ago, tribefan695 said:

I don't know why we really need franchises with that specific criteria. Most of them aren't very good anyway, and if they are they're typically well rewarded. We just haven't had much worth rewarding over the past few months

 

It's not about whether it'll spout a franchise, it's whether it'll be SUCCESSFUL ENOUGH to spout a franchise. There were many in this range in the early 2000s that easily could have gotten sequels but didn't (such as Old School).

 

Now those kinds of movies are just flopping left and right. PPZ? Flop. Triple 9? Flop. Grimsby? Flop. Criminal? Flop. Hail Caesar? Not a flop but still a disappointment. And the "based on true story" ones like WTF and Eddie are flopping too.

 

I won't be surprised if in a few years the LOWEST budgeted spring film that isn't tiny has a budget the size of Gods of Egypt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



If a movie strikes people's fancy they'll show up for it. It wasn't too long ago that American Sniper opened to nearly $90 milllion in January off a platform release

Edited by tribefan695
Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.