Weekend Actuals (Page 75): X-MEN 103.3M OS OW | Angry Birds 38.15M | Captain America 32.9M (Ahoy Matey!!) | Neighbors 21.7M | The Nice Guys 11.2M | Jungle Book 10.9M

[department store basement]

Wow, Lady in the Van's BO run is so good. I didn't expect it to crawl to 10m.

 

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=weekend&id=ladyinthevan.htm

[SteveJaros]

4 hours ago, Telemachos said:

 

It's made a ton of money, but honestly everyone expected more, not just Marvel diehards. Look at the tracking, look at all the predictions. 

 

Well, I expected less DOM and WW and said so, but I guess I haven't been around long enough to really count, LOL.

[superweirdo87]

You live up to your name, film lover. But, there is a sort of twist, markets are involved.

 

"Films based on existing properties bring in most of the money. In 2011, non-original films collected $6.6 billion at the box office, significantly more than the $3.5 billion grossed by original films. In 2012, non-original films captured over $7 billion of the total of $11 billion in grosses. There are no signs that the gap is closing anytime soon. Tellingly, of the 343 films that made more than $100 million at the box office in that decade, 150 — close to 45 percent — were based on an existing property. The large majority of these were released in the last five years... Film aficionados may dislike studio executives not mixing it up more, but the market speaks loudly."

 

http://www.vulture.com/2013/10/why-hollywood-is-caught-in-the-blockbuster-trap.html

 

Do you see an original movie that could kill it at the box office? Passengers is said to be incredible, and it seems that it might do the Gravity/Martian/Interstellar thing and make over 600 or 700M WW? A lot of original material has had a tough time. Tomorrowland, for instance.

[filmlover]

3 minutes ago, superweirdo87 said:

You live up to your name, film lover. But, there is a sort of twist, markets are involved.

 

"Films based on existing properties bring in most of the money. In 2011, non-original films collected $6.6 billion at the box office, significantly more than the $3.5 billion grossed by original films. In 2012, non-original films captured over $7 billion of the total of $11 billion in grosses. There are no signs that the gap is closing anytime soon. Tellingly, of the 343 films that made more than $100 million at the box office in that decade, 150 — close to 45 percent — were based on an existing property. The large majority of these were released in the last five years... Film aficionados may dislike studio executives not mixing it up more, but the market speaks loudly."

 

http://www.vulture.com/2013/10/why-hollywood-is-caught-in-the-blockbuster-trap.html

 

Do you see an original movie that could kill it at the box office? Passengers is said to be incredible, and it seems that it might do the Gravity/Martian/Interstellar thing and make over 600 or 700M WW? A lot of original material has had a tough time. Tomorrowland, for instance.

The problem is that even the "original" blockbusters coming up don't look all that great either. Warcraft? The Legend of Tarzan? Eh.

 

Although I think Central Intelligence is going to slay. The market needs a comedy right now and it looks hilarious.

[CJohn]

2 minutes ago, filmlover said:

The problem is that even the "original" blockbusters coming up don't look all that great either. Warcraft? The Legend of Tarzan? Eh.

 

Although I think Central Intelligence is going to slay. The market needs a comedy right now and it looks hilarious.

The Summer looks like death. Dory and CI are the ones I see doing big business. Bourne 5 and SS should do solid numbers to close the Summer but they will disappoint considering the forum expectations for each.

[WrathOfHan]

2 minutes ago, filmlover said:

The problem is that even the "original" blockbusters coming up don't look all that great either. Warcraft? The Legend of Tarzan? Eh.

 

Although I think Central Intelligence is going to slay. The market needs a comedy right now and it looks hilarious.

The market doesn't "need" a comedy like they do now with horror but CI will be a very appealing movie.

[Dementeleus]

1 hour ago, lobo007 said:

when i say fake IMAX, i'm not even talking about the LieMAX that most IMAX theaters have even with real footage.  i hope that IMAX laser is cheaper to shoot than 70mm so that more films will use it and more extensively in the film as well.

 

IMAX Laser refers to projection. 

 

I'm sure the new IMAX digital cameras will be used more than the 70mm ones, but they're still big and bulky and finicky compared to more typical cameras. Traditionally, the main problem with 70mm IMAX isn't the cost, it's that they're super heavy and incredibly loud, which makes working with them a huge hassle for non-action scenes. 

[filmlover]

Just now, WrathOfHan said:

The market doesn't "need" a comedy like they do now with horror but CI will be a very appealing movie.

Horror typically founders in the summer. The first Conjuring was an exception.

[CJohn]

1 minute ago, filmlover said:

Horror typically founders in the summer. The first Conjuring was an exception.

WB is betting big on Lights Out to become another Conjuring. 

[filmlover]

Just now, CJohn said:

WB is betting big on Lights Out to become another Conjuring. 

It opens in the same spot as Orphan did 7 years ago. I'm gonna guess it'll make similar grosses to that? Don't even know what it is.

[CJohn]

Just now, filmlover said:

It opens in the same spot as Orphan did 7 years ago. I'm gonna guess it'll make similar grosses to that? Don't even know what it is.

Oh yeah, I agree, it is gonna flop. But I think WB is expecting it to pull good numbers. 

[Dementeleus]

1 hour ago, cannastop said:

I'm just skeptical that you recognized the bad guy from the first scene. What tipped you off? It's an older movie, so you can blurt out spoilers, I think.

 

I liked ZOOTOPIA, but I also thought the villain was fairly obvious. I don't think I'm particularly smart or insightful when it comes to this stuff, but IMO it's just noticing certain tropes and being aware of the genre. (Also, I don't think it's a negative that some people can guess a twist. The filmmakers are casting a broad net -- they need to set things up so that everyone will get it, which invariably means some will get it sooner than others).

[Avatree]

The villain in Zootopia came out of nowhere for me, but then, 1) I wasn't paying that much attention to the movie, and 2) I am stupid

[WrathOfHan]

I'm expecting 50-60M for Lights Out, I think it could surprise.

[Dementeleus]

16 minutes ago, SteveJaros said:

 

Well, I expected less DOM and WW and said so, but I guess I haven't been around long enough to really count, LOL.

 

There's always a few outliers.  Baumer thought it would go sub-400m as well. 

[filmlover]

2 minutes ago, CJohn said:

Oh yeah, I agree, it is gonna flop. But I think WB is expecting it to pull good numbers. 

Orphan numbers would probably be good numbers for a late July horror release.

 

Also lol Orphan. That movie was so ridiculous.

[redfirebird2008]

1 hour ago, lobo007 said:

when i say fake IMAX, i'm not even talking about the LieMAX that most IMAX theaters have even with real footage.  i hope that IMAX laser is cheaper to shoot than 70mm so that more films will use it and more extensively in the film as well.

 

IMAX laser is a projection technology, not a video capture technology. There are already digital IMAX cameras. Eventually those will be able to match 70mm film resolution.

 

The main thing is IMAX digital projection is not good enough for the old school 70mm IMAX screens, but the hope is IMAX laser projection can more accurately show 70mm IMAX footage on those huge screens. 

[grim22]

9 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

 

I liked ZOOTOPIA, but I also thought the villain was fairly obvious. I don't think I'm particularly smart or insightful when it comes to this stuff, but IMO it's just noticing certain tropes and being aware of the genre. (Also, I don't think it's a negative that some people can guess a twist. The filmmakers are casting a broad net -- they need to set things up so that everyone will get it, which invariably means some will get it sooner than others).

 

Yeah, the villain reveal was obvious and so was the blueberry switcheroo. But then again it is probably because we watch too many movies. The MPAA defines a frequent moviegoer as someone who watches more than 3 movies a year, 3 movies means one over Memorial Day, 4th of July and Christmas basically.

[Avatree]

If you want to talk about plot issues in Zootopia can we please consider the absurd convenience of how the bunny discovered the poisonous flower

[department store basement]

Too bad there isn't a spoiler thread for Zootopia so people can voice their concerns there.