MEH-MORIAL DAY WEEKEND BOX OFFICE | Abandon all hope, the box office is dead. 3 day weekend #s X-Men 65M, Alice 28.1M, Angry Birds 18.7M, Civil War 15.1M, Neighbors 9.1M. Bad openings, horrible holdovers.

[eddyxx]

1 hour ago, filmlover said:

You know what was somewhat of a missed sequel opportunity? One to the Karate Kid remake. The movie had an over 3 multiplier despite Toy Story 3 being in its second weekend, public perception of Jaden Smith was promising, and it even ended with the door open ajar for a "next level" adventure. Should've made that instead of wasting everyone's time on After Earth.

How can we wax on and off if our hands aren't real?? 

[trifle]

 

More complaints about critics... Really?

 

Yep.  I've only just started.  Others got in before me.  I have a ways to go, as I still consider them accurate.

 

I don't think there is a 'conspiracy' etc, but I do think a bunch of the lesser ones get a 'cool guys think' idea going and can't let up, and apply it across the board, making them kinda useless, and often damaging.  "Two part movies are bad"  "CBM's are passe except for [biggest blockbuster]".  They really DO read more similarly than CBMs watch, imho.  Your mileage is free to vary.
 

Edited May 28, 2016 by trifle

[grey ghost]

I feel like this thread needs a Venn diagram of superhero and comic book movies showing how they overlap and sometimes exclude each other.

[Lancelot Gold]

I might even see TMNT in theaters even though I hated the first one. It's cause of seeing that Krang is in it, in one of the trailers. I've wanted to see him in a movie since I was a kid. 

 

Nobody thinks of this as a comic book movie. The cartoon overshadows the comic. Most people think of that and don't even know it was a comic. 

[cannastop]

1 hour ago, movieboner said:

Finding Dory must break out or this summer will be torturous.

Not for those who enjoy Schadenfreude.

[Johnny Tran]

If this happens a month ago it would have taken Snyder off the hook a bit. I mean people scoffing at $870M, what does that look like in comparison to $525M?

[trifle]

4 minutes ago, Johnny Tran said:

If this happens a month ago it would have taken Snyder off the hook a bit. I mean people scoffing at $870M, what does that look like in comparison to $525M?

 

XA was only ever expected to do about 700M, so they aren't really directly comparable.  No one was saying it would be the biggest of the year, going in.

 

I'll let Snyder off the hook as soon as Superman starts being Superman again, instead of an emo murderer.

 

But yeah, I'd say my comments on critics probably apply there as well. I just didn't personally care, there.

Edited May 28, 2016 by trifle

[grey ghost]

1 minute ago, lancelot123 said:

 

Nobody thinks of this as a comic book movie. The cartoon overshadows the comic. Most people think of that and don't even know it was a comic. 

 

The general public probably doesn't know the Fantastic Four movies are separate from MCU.

 

But we know better.

 

 

[superweirdo87]

Someone on Super Hero Hype said X-Men actuals tend to come in lower than estimates. Is this true?

[grim22]

1 minute ago, superweirdo87 said:

Someone on Super Hero Hype said X-Men actuals tend to come in lower than estimates. Is this true?

 

No. There hasn't been any kind of correlation between estimates and actuals for X-Men movies or any other series of movies. The actuals can be higher or lower, but they will be in the same ballpark.

[cannastop]

1 minute ago, grim22 said:

 

No. There haven't been any kind of correlation between estimates and actuals for X-Men movies or any other series of movies.

The correlation is called "wishful thinking".

[Captain Craig]

35 minutes ago, AJG said:

 

Movie was boring. People stayed home.

Upon first watch it's not boring. I do suspect that subsequent viewings are going to expose how uneven Acts I & II are though vs all the action in Act III

 

 

Also, I'm late to the discussion but there is no argument, NONE, that TMNT is a comic book film. Cartoons only help further a characters exposure for popularity. Spider-man was created in '62, his first cartoon was in '67. TMNT were created in '84, their first cartoon was '89. Animation was a tool to further a characters exposure and no one is arguing if Spidey is a comic book film...right?

[johnboy3434]

2 hours ago, Daniel Dylan Davis said:

 

Alice didn't hold up, and cinemascores aren't not really representative of anything. They're very limited in fact. They rarely prove anything.

 

On the contrary, Cinemascore is a great measure of what it's trying to gauge. The problem is that people use that measure to make unrelated conclusions. Cinemascore measures the reaction of audiences after they have seen a given movie. People chose of their own free will to go to these films, and then evaluated them. Therefore, it is a measure of the satisfaction the movie gives to those who wanted to go see it in the first place. To clarify, an "A-" Cinemascore translates as such: "If Alice in Wonderland looks like a movie you would be interested in seeing, then you will like it." A "B" Cinemascore would translate like "If Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice looks like a movie you would be interested in seeing, then you will be mildly disappointed".

 

If you have no desire to go see a given movie, then the Cinemascore is absolutely meaningless. Also, Cinemascores are not comparable to one another unless the audiences for both movies are exactly the same. It also says nothing about the size of said audience. God's Not Dead 2 getting an "A" doesn't mean it's better than most other movies. It means that if it looks like your kind of movie, then you will love it. "You", in this case, is not as wide an audience as a lot of other films.

 

Edited May 28, 2016 by johnboy3434

[Avatree]

7 minutes ago, Captain Craig said:

Upon first watch it's not boring. I do suspect that subsequent viewings are going to expose how uneven Acts I & II are though vs all the action in Act III

 

 

Also, I'm late to the discussion but there is no argument, NONE, that TMNT is a comic book film. Cartoons only help further a characters exposure for popularity. Spider-man was created in '62, his first cartoon was in '67. TMNT were created in '84, their first cartoon was '89. Animation was a tool to further a characters exposure and no one is arguing if Spidey is a comic book film...right?

 

How is it not a comic book film? If it originates from a comic book, then surely it is a comic book film.

[department store basement]

3 minutes ago, johnboy3434 said:

 

On the contrary, Cinemascore is a great measure of what it's trying to gauge. The problem is that people use that measure to make unrelated conclusions. Cinemascore measures the reaction of audiences after they have seen a given movie. People chose of their own free will to go to these films, and then evaluated it. Therefore, it is a measure of the satisfaction the movie gives to those who wanted to go see it in the first place. To clarify, an "A-" Cinemascore translates as such: "If Alice in Wonderland looks like a movie you would be interested in seeing, then you will like it." A "B" Cinemascore would translate like "If Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice looks like a movie you would be interested in seeing, then you will be mildly disappointed".

 

If you have no desire to go see a given movie, then the Cinemascore is absolutely meaningless. Also, Cinemascores are not comparable to one another unless the audiences for both movies are exactly the same. It also says nothing about the size of said audience. God's Not Dead 2 getting an "A" doesn't mean it's better than most other movies. It means that if it looks like your kind of movie, then you will love it. "You", in this case, is not as wide an audience as a lot of other films.

 

 

It also polls a very small sample of the general population. That's not enough to predict trends at all. A different sample of the same size could lead to completely different results.

[johnboy3434]

12 minutes ago, department store basement said:

 

It also polls a very small sample of the general population. That's not enough to predict trends at all. A different sample of the same size could lead to completely different results.

 

Actually, a sample size of between 500 and 1000 people can be large enough to generalize about the entire United States population. The only bugaboo is whether or not the sample is representative of said population. Not knowing the exact procedure of how Cinemascore conducts the polling, for all I know there could be an inherent bias in their method, but theoretically there's nothing suspect about how they do it.

 

And of course, they don't need to generalize to the entire population. They just need to generalize to the population of people who would want to see a certain film. Combine that with the fact that they (obviously) only poll people who have seen the film, and finding a representative sample becomes a lot easier that it normally would.

Edited May 28, 2016 by johnboy3434

[grim22]

2 minutes ago, johnboy3434 said:

 

Actually, a sample size of between 500 and 1000 people can be large enough to generalize about the entire United States population. The only bugaboo is whether or not the sample is representative of said population. Not knowing the exact procedure of how Cinemascore conducts the polling, so for all I know there could be an inherent bias method, but theoretically there's nothing suspect about how they do it.

 

Those pollsters randomly choose five theaters in five cities (one theater in each city) to get to an ultimate goal of 400 to 600 ballots.

 

 

They use 5 theaters as representative of the entire population. The selection of the theaters ends up being the big issue in their methodology.

[grim22]

Deadline's favorite (completely made up BS) stats

 

 

[filmlover]

I was polled by CinemaScore once. It was quite fun lol.

[johnboy3434]

3 minutes ago, grim22 said:

Deadline's favorite (completely made up BS) stats

 

 

 

You know, I would love to check that chart for accuracy, but the amount of work involved makes it very unappealing. If it's true, then it's a rather convincing argument for Cinemascore's correlation with box office revenue/legs.

Edited May 28, 2016 by johnboy3434