The Nun | The Conjuring Cinematic Universe | Sep 7 2018 | WB | Corin Hardy. IMAX confirmed

[Barnack]

1 hour ago, firedeep said:

600M WW is possible

Sound like crazy legs for an franchise horror entry with a C cinemascore.

 

Sound impossible to me.

 

IT got B+ and made 700m with a nearly 200m start in less markets.

 

Feel like that make 460m the ceiling and chance are good legs would be worst for an high 300m result.

 

Edited September 10, 2018 by Barnack

[La Binoche]

I so wanted this to be good. I hated it

[EliasChristensen]

I saw it on saturday and liked it quite a bit. It does not even touch the class of Wan's "Conjuring" movies, they truly are something special, but for me it was on the same level as "Annabelle: Creation". Way better than the first doll movie. If they keep that quality for all of the spin-offs I will keep watching them.

 

I don't get the bad cinemascore. It may be no A- or B+ level but when I think about other truly disappointing movies that get a B or at least a B- I am shaking my head in disbelief about that C. For me it was a solid B. Entertaining with good actors (especially Taissa Farmiga, I hope we will see more from her on the big screen), great cinematography and a killer soundtrack. Seriously, that was on point.

 

I am looking forward to "Valak: The Nun II" in 2020 and I truly hope that they will do something with the casting of the Farmiga sisters. Seriously, that has to mean something. My friend went even further and praised (after 20 minutes in) the special effects of the movie. As she commented that in one of the scenes where the actors are outside in the nature with absolutely nothing happening but dialouge  I asked her what she meant and she said that it would be fascinating how young the actress from the "Conjuring" movies looks in this one. She is not THAT much of a horror geek but she truly believed this is a digitally regenerated Vera Farmiga. 

[KeepItU25071906]

9 hours ago, Barnack said:

The little silly point yes, but the main one that they made 1400 millions in the last 12 month with movies, Saw is really a small part of their business.

And Why are you talking about the last 12 month, when Saw franchise is already over? When Saw was every year Halloween-flick since 2004 and till 2009, it was almost everything for Lionsgate.

Edited September 10, 2018 by KeepItU25071906

[Barnack]

6 hours ago, KeepItU25071906 said:

And Why are you talking about the last 12 month, when Saw franchise is already over? When Saw was every year Halloween-flick since 2004 and till 2009, it was almost everything for Lionsgate.

THey had Tyler Perry stuff, distributing a lot of stuff not under their name and started to had a library, in 2006 Liongates the filmed enterteinmant annual revenues were about 800-900m for Liongates, I doubt it was almost all from Saw.

[KeepItU25071906]

13 minutes ago, Barnack said:

THey had Tyler Perry stuff, distributing a lot of stuff not under their name and started to had a library, in 2006 Liongates the filmed enterteinmant annual revenues were about 800-900m for Liongates, I doubt it was almost all from Saw.

in 2006 "Saw 3" was the almost 25% of all their 2006 box office in North America.

[scoobysaurus]

It was more of a monster movie than a horror movie other than the occasional jump scares. Not great but I thought it was fun & entertaining.

 

Rotten Tomatoes who? 

[Barnack]

59 minutes ago, KeepItU25071906 said:

in 2006 "Saw 3" was the almost 25% of all their 2006 box office in North America.

That already a bit far from most of it. 

 

But also in 2006 box office was usua a really small part of a studio income, for studio in general but specially for a Liongates type.

 

Oscar Best picture winner Crash, Crank, Lord of War, Madea Goes to Jail, Madea Family Runion, they had revenues sources.

 

If you look at the july-september quater of 2006, their motion picture revenues looked like this:

 

Theatrical: 20.5m (versus 57.1m in distribution and marketing expense, they were loosing more than twice what they were making in theater)

Home Video: 115.1m

TV: 33.4

Intl: 17.1m

Other: 0.5m

Total: 186.6m

 

 

Theatrical was only 11% of one of liongates business, Motion Picture. Looking at box office mojo to judge a studio is in general quite misleading but in the 2004-2009 dvd era it is especially misleading. Even more if one look at the domestic box office around that time it was in general under 10% of the revenues.

 

They were also in the TV business (31.6m).

 

25% of their box office was around 2.35% of their business in that era.

 

 

 

 

[diddykongracing128]

Hype is one hell of a drug. Seen it and it is the weakest CCU film since Annabelle. Not many like it either. This is going to drop like a rock this weekend.

Edited September 10, 2018 by diddykongracing128

[KeepItU25071906]

1 hour ago, Barnack said:

That already a bit far from most of it. 

 

So, you think TCU for WB= Saw for Lionsgate?

 

 

1 hour ago, Barnack said:

25% of their box office was around 2.35% of their business in that era.

 

Also, Saw 3 has 2,5 DVD units sold. This is about 50 mln$ of revenue. And we still not count TV-rights.

Edited September 10, 2018 by KeepItU25071906

[Barnack]

11 minutes ago, KeepItU25071906 said:

Also, Saw 3 has 2,5 DVD units sold. This is about 50 mln$ of revenue. And we still not count TV-rights.

50m in sales does not mean 50m in revenues to the studio.

 

13 minutes ago, KeepItU25071906 said:

So, you think TCU for WB= Saw for Lionsgate?

No, never said I agree with that sentiment, but Liongates already had more than 6,000 title with a 1 billion a year gross revenues around 2006 , even if the franchise Saw was 200m of those, they were still a 80% non-Saw revenues studio.

[KeepItU25071906]

8 minutes ago, Barnack said:

50m in sales does not mean 50m in revenues to the studio.

 

It doesn't mean profit, but means revenue.

[Krissykins]

Saw is to Lionsgate what Freddy is to Newline.

 

”The house that Freddy built”

[Barnack]

18 minutes ago, KeepItU25071906 said:

It doesn't mean profit, but means revenue.

It does need mean either.

 

If a dvd have gross sales of 50m in the stores, the studio will received a cut of that and the store will keep a share, exactly like a movie making a 100m at the box office does not mean 100m of revenues for the studios.

 

Say the store keep in average 20% of the sales price, 50m in sales would be 40m to the studios.

[DAJK]

This is definitely getting to 400M 

 

Gonna drop hard this weekend, but I think 110M domestic and 300-315OS should be within reach

[MrGlass2]

Above A Wrinkle in Time worldwide, in 4 days.

[Lucas]

It was frustrating. I liked a lot about it and it truly felt like it could've been great, everything is just slightly off and I can't exactly pinpoint what it is. A lot of wasted potential, which is surprising because I didn't think there'd be any potential for a Nun movie.

Edited September 10, 2018 by Lucas

[RichWS]

My co-worker, who was pumped for this, is fairly disappointed. That's my WOM report.

Edited September 10, 2018 by RichWS

[dxmatrixdt]

.

[Frozen]

2 hours ago, Lucas said:

It was frustrating. I liked a lot about it and it truly felt like it could've been great, everything is just slightly off and I can't exactly pinpoint what it is. A lot of wasted potential, which is surprising because I didn't think there'd be any potential for a Nun movie.

 

I can pinpoint what it is, but that would be a spoiler. I wrote it in my review in the Review Forum.

 

There is one major problem with the film and it is just so WTF.