Weekend Thread | Estimates SS 43.7m, SP 33.6m, PD 21.5, JCIJB 13.6m, BM 11.45m, SLOP 8.8m, STD 6.8m, FFJ 6.58m

[Fromthegrave]

2 minutes ago, cannastop said:

Compare BvS to Cap 3. Done.

 

Cap 3 crushed BvS at the box office. What is there to compare?

 

2 minutes ago, Tele the Jet Baller said:

 

Sure, it's having a very solid run, especially when you consider people's expectations when it first was announced. The hate is because a lot of people really didn't like it.  

 

That's the point then, isn't it? These forums especially, where so much nonsense occurs NOT necessarily because a film is having an objectively terrible run, but because some members of these forums don't like a film, then start twisting the numbers around to suit their personal dislike for the film.

 

Many times in the past, under a different forum life, I have hated various films. I'm only human. However I mainly hated the films themselves, not their runs. Their runs were what they were.

[Ent]

2 minutes ago, Fromthegrave said:

 

You don't get it do you. Bad legs for these DC films is IRRELEVANT if the total gross ends up good or great. Yes the legs are bad, and so what?

 

You are partially right.

 

You are right in the sense that the total gross ending up good deosn't impact that movie financial result that much.

 

But bad wom on a first movie impact the potential legs and opening reception of the direct sequel.  It also makes the franchise peaking too soon BO wise.

 

Basicly it increases not only the likelihood of having a direct sequel opening lower but also increases even more the potential of it being even more frontloaded than sequels usually are.

 

A first movie with a poor wom, no matter how big its final BO is decreases the likelihood and longevity of the franchises. 

 

All three DCEU movies so far may end up being the peak financial wise of their proper franchise because the bad WOM of the first movie prevent them to build major goodwill for the potential direct sequels and accelerate the natural BO erosion of the following sequels.

 

 

 

 

[Ohana]

8 minutes ago, Tele the Jet Baller said:

Obviously SS is doing well in terms of basic numbers. Finishing with 250m+ domestic and 600m+ WW isn't peanuts. But, equally obviously, DC hasn't done a good job expanding past their basic hardcore audience. And they've failed (in that regard) despite using their most familiar and iconic characters. So clearly that's an ongoing issue.

 

Their best chance to change this perception is with WW -- literally a break from the other movies in almost every respect. But right after that we're go into JL, which (unless Johns, etc manage to bust out a much stronger story) is gonna be more of the general same.

That's a great sum of the current situation.
I totally agree with everything you wrote!

[Nova]

12 minutes ago, Fromthegrave said:

 

You don't get it do you. Bad legs for these DC films is IRRELEVANT if the total gross ends up good or great. Yes the legs are bad, and so what?

For the millionth time you're on a box office forum! We look at legs for films. Every single film that comes out. This isn't an exception that we just made for the DCEU and SS. We do it for almost every film. Why all of a sudden is it a big deal for SS and the DCEU? Why are we coming up with excuses now and only now do we say "well let's not look at legs!" When box office analysts have been doing it for decades. 

 

Again this isn't IMDb or some comic book forum. It's a box office one. Legs are a part of the box office so excuse us for looking at that part of it as well. 

[Fromthegrave]

2 minutes ago, The Panda said:

Yeah, I do find it funny that we've gotten to a point where people act like a near 70% drop isn't bad.

 

I understand certain films are frontloaded in nature, but it doesn't make those massive drops good.

 

You and others have beaten this dead horse of a discussion and everyone seems to be in agreement. The legs are bad. Now what?

 

2 minutes ago, Baumer loves Dory said:

I must be the only one that the new DCU regime is pleasing then.  I loved Watchmen, like 9.5/10 loved, thought MoS was a passable mess and then liked BvS and liked SS a lot.  

 

Thanks Zack for making movies for me.  Now go team up with Bay, get Ryan Reynolds to play the lead and find a role for Bill Paxton and I'll blow my load before the film even starts.

 

I've enjoyed the films as well, but I try my best to keep that out of the analysis of the box office runs themselves. Or I simply refrain from posting about some films.

[druv10]

1 hour ago, ecstasy said:

The legs were bad because people expected to see a real war. Something epic. In reality it was the continuation of the Cap Buck love story with extra characters thrown in. I enjoyed it but it wasn't what I thought it was gonna be from the title.

Ending hurt repeat viewing. I loved it but only saw it 3 times in theater compared to TA1 9 times.

[Dementeleus]

1 minute ago, Fromthegrave said:

 

Cap 3 crushed BvS at the box office. What is there to compare?

 

 

That's the point then, isn't it? These forums especially, where so much nonsense occurs NOT necessarily because a film is having an objectively terrible run, but because some members of these forums don't like a film, then start twisting the numbers around to suit their personal dislike for the film.

 

Many times in the past, under a different forum life, I have hated various films. I'm only human. However I mainly hated the films themselves, not their runs. Their runs were what they were.

 

You're right, of course. The numbers are the numbers. There may be slightly positive or slightly negative ways you can spin them, but they are what they are.

 

I wish everyone was as sensible. 

[Kalo]

3 minutes ago, Fromthegrave said:

 

You don't get it do you. Bad legs for these DC films is IRRELEVANT if the total gross ends up good or great. Yes the legs are bad, and so what?

 

Because extreme front loading usually points to audience dissatisfaction, and eventually if the same company keeps releasing something that a large portion of the audience is not happen with the revenue will go down, and it doesn't matter how well you advertise it, eventually the casual audience with stop coming. now the Superhero genre is frontloaded in general and I realize that and some of them do have stories that just don't appeal to everyone. Civil War for example. it got rave reviews from critics marvel fans loved it (it's still my favorite film of the year). but it's story kind of required you to have previous knowledge of the other MCU films to fully appreciate. and that's just too much homework for some people, the fact that is was kind of smaller scale and focused more on Captain America made have turned some people off as well. however it opened Higher than BvS and still had better legs. BvS was arguably more advertised and possibly even more anticipated before hand, but it got ripped apart by critics audience reaction was all over the place with many not liking it and in the end it couldn't even muster a 2.0 multiplier. The worst hold in history for a film to open to over $100m. I know JL is going to be advertised like crazy. but I'm legitimately expecting a 200m/$250m gross for the film. and considering BvS $250m budget I can't forsee it being any cheaper to make. and that would be a disastrous total. I'd wager in about 3 years either DC will start making good films or the DCUE for not exist or consist of standalone superhero films.

[Blaze Heatnix]

19 minutes ago, Brainiac5 said:

???? The jokes are coming ?

 

 

No jokes. According to my breakdown, SS might drop 70% for the next 7 weekends, only making more 19 million in 24 weekdays, and it'll still have a final domestic box office of 255 million.

 

So, based on these low and brutal predictions, we can imagine that by doing better, SS will probably get close to 300 million domestic or a little more. I'm being pessimistic right now, so I can pretend I'm surprised once this movie doesn't drop 70% for 7 consecutive weekends.

[Fromthegrave]

7 minutes ago, Ent said:

 

You are partially right.

 

You are right in the sense that the total gross ending up good deosn't impact that movie financial result that much.

 

But bad wom on a first movie impact the potential legs and opening reception of the direct sequel.  It also makes the franchise peaking too soon BO wise.

 

Basicly it increases not only the likelihood of having a direct sequel opening lower but also increases even more the potential of it being even more frontloaded than sequels usually are.

 

A first movie with a poor wom, no matter how big its final BO is decreases the likelihood and longevity of the franchises. 

 

All three DCEU movies so far may end up being the peak financial wise of their proper franchise because the bad WOM of the first movie prevent them to build major goodwill for the potential direct sequels and accelerate the natural BO erosion of the following sequels.

 

 

 

 

 

I was keeping this discussion strictly to the current films out so far.

 

However yes you are correct, and I fully agree that the bad legs could affect the box office performance of future films. That is certainly a possibility.

 

6 minutes ago, Nova said:

For the millionth time you're on a box office forum! We look at legs for films. Every single film that comes out. This isn't an exception that we just made for the DCEU and SS. We do it for almost every film. Why all of a sudden is it a big deal for SS and the DCEU? Why are we coming up with excuses now and only now do we say "well let's not look at legs!" When box office analysts have been doing it for decades. 

 

Again this isn't IMDb or some comic book forum. It's a box office one. Legs are a part of the box office so excuse us for looking at that part of it as well. 

 

Where explicitly does it state these forums are for legs analysis ONLY? Mods or staff members, can you point to any such doctrine for these forums?

 

Yes, you are right, this is a box office forum, and in a BOX OFFICE forum, there is MORE to discuss than just legs. What you people are currently doing are ONLY discussing legs, and ignoring the very large OW and the very good total that Suicide Squad will end up with.

 

5 minutes ago, Tele the Jet Baller said:

 

You're right, of course. The numbers are the numbers. There may be slightly positive or slightly negative ways you can spin them, but they are what they are.

 

I wish everyone was as sensible. 

 

Thanks.

Edited August 14, 2016 by Fromthegrave

[Brainiac5]

3 minutes ago, Blaze Heatnix said:

 

 

No jokes. According to my breakdown, SS might drop 70% for the next 7 weekends, only making more 19 million in 24 weekdays, and it'll still have a final domestic box office of 255 million.

 

So, based on these low and brutal predictions, we can imagine that by doing better, SS will probably get close to 300 million domestic or a little more. I'm being pessimistic right now, so I can pretend I'm surprised once this movie doesn't drop 70% for 7 consecutive weekends.

??SSDD.

[Fromthegrave]

7 minutes ago, Kalo said:

 

Because extreme front loading usually points to audience dissatisfaction, and eventually if the same company keeps releasing something that a large portion of the audience is not happen with the revenue will go down, and it doesn't matter how well you advertise it, eventually the casual audience with stop coming. now the Superhero genre is frontloaded in general and I realize that and some of them do have stories that just don't appeal to everyone. Civil War for example. it got rave reviews from critics marvel fans loved it (it's still my favorite film of the year). but it's story kind of required you to have previous knowledge of the other MCU films to fully appreciate. and that's just too much homework for some people, the fact that is was kind of smaller scale and focused more on Captain America made have turned some people off as well. however it opened Higher than BvS and still had better legs. BvS was arguably more advertised and possibly even more anticipated before hand, but it got ripped apart by critics audience reaction was all over the place with many not liking it and in the end it couldn't even muster a 2.0 multiplier. The worst hold in history for a film to open to over $100m. I know JL is going to be advertised like crazy. but I'm legitimately expecting a 200m/$250m gross for the film. and considering BvS $250m budget I can't forsee it being any cheaper to make. and that would be a disastrous total. I'd wager in about 3 years either DC will start making good films or the DCUE for not exist or consist of standalone superhero films.

 

In terms of how this could negatively affect the runs of future DC films, like Ent said, I agree with you on that.

Edited August 14, 2016 by Fromthegrave

[kayumanggi]

Do we have Saturday numbers?

[Water Bottle]

Pete's Dragon was amazing. 

Now I'm waiting for Sausage Party. A bit skeptical on how much I'll like it.

 

Why?

 

Based on what I've read Sausage Party, it's anti-religion and as a Christian...

[Lordmandeep]

THE thing is that it's okay people like SS and batman vs superman...

 

But lol man of steel is not a big mess compared to those films

 

 

Come on lol

[superweirdo87]

1 minute ago, AJG said:

Can we just all admit that Suicide Squad is trash and move on?

 

 

 

I did not love Suicide Squad, but I question that. A lot of critics have noted that criticism is not as much about the verdict as it is the argument that the critic makes for their assessment. There is quite a bit to disagree on with SS, and to talk about. This movie made more than any film in August to date. The 2nd weekend drop is similar to other movies in the sub-genre that are not loved. That gives us quite a bit to discuss and debate.

[cannastop]

1 minute ago, kayumanggi said:

Do we have Saturday numbers?

Not unless RTH or Nilephelan pipe up.

[Mr Terrific]

If SS hits about $302m domestic, that would put the DCEU at a $307m average. That's where the MCU is through 13 films. 

[Kalo]

13 minutes ago, Fromthegrave said:

 

Yes it's true, WB since their leadership change years ago hasn't done a good job. They're at best only doing an average job with many of their DC films now, but it's still enough for them to be profitable, and for some fans to enjoy the films. It is what it is. Will WB learn, or change? Who knows. WB reached their peak with comic films with Burton's Batman films and Nolan's Batman trilogy.

 

I was curious if it was just the DC film WB was.. lacking at so I looked up the last 10 blockbuster budgeted films (100m or more) and 9 out of 10 of them had mixed to bad reception, and 5 of them were financial failures as well. in fact the only one that was raved about was Mad Max and that was directed by George Miller. granted they are doing a little better with their smaller films. but whatever they are doing with their bigger properties obviously isn't working out very well for them. which is a shame because they've have released great films in the past, and it would be nice if Disney had some legitimate competition. I hope they get it together soon for DC's sake.  

[superweirdo87]

These sorts of numbers do bring dollars to WB. And the budgets could arguably be trimmed a bit without hurting the movies' commercial potential. Say 225 for Justice League. Suicide Squad could have been done for 160M it looks like. That is the movies are profitable. If the movies do not improve, then would that change? Scott Mendelson surmised that the DCEU could be like the Twilight of comic book movies.

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2016/08/09/the-dc-films-universe-is-the-twilight-of-comic-book-superhero-movies-and-thats-okay/#252dec5379f0