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

[baumer]

4 minutes ago, nilephelan said:

 

You are way off and this is about as silly as the people trying to press so hard after the fact that The Force Awakens wasn't good or somehow has backlash.  

 

So you have the pulse of everyone who saw the movie?  You know things that others don't when it comes to who liked it and who didn't?  Interesting.  I'm not way off on this.  Telling me I'm silly about this is kind of patronizing.  Your opinion might be that I am but my opinion is just as valid as yours.

 

3 minutes ago, Gopher said:

Nah guys, if baumer believes it it's not a minority opinion. He kinda represents his own country with his opinion. Our country as well! He's a real 'voice of the people' type. I heard they won't even make Infinity War after his slams against Ultron and Civil War. 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Really?  That's kind of unfair.  

[ecstasy]

42 minutes ago, nilephelan said:

 

No.  

 

The legs were what they are because of 2 main factors..... the biggest factor is that with each Marvel Universe movie, the general audience is going to get more limited.  You had to see a minimum of 5 movies to even have a clue what was happening in Civil War.  That doesn't lead to nearly the casual walk up business no matter how good the movie is.  It could be a fantastic movie (and it was), but some 50 year old guy and his wife who have only watched a couple Marvel movies or none at all are never going to buy a ticket.  You aren't going to get that person with a few hours open on a Tuesday night and watches 10 movies a year to buy a ticket.  

 

Second factor was that it was the least family friendly and most dour Marvel movie yet.  The ending doesn't really lead to repeat theater viewings.  There was plenty of civil war parts and the airport scene was praised.  

 

I can dig everything you say except plenty of Civil War parts. Sure there was the airport scene but I was looking for a real war. But I wanted more big fights.

[Dementeleus]

Our personal opinions (and those of our friends) is anecdotal, basically. It's easy to assume that many people feel the same way -- and perhaps they might -- but there's no easy way to tell and it's a slippery slope to assume how much everyone else agrees with you. 

 

I hated JW but its legs don't reflect that. 

[superweirdo87]

User scores, Cinema Score, social media tracking, etc. can offer clues. It is also worth noting that your social circle may tend to have similar opinions to you.

Edited August 14, 2016 by superweirdo87

[baumer]

2 minutes ago, Tele the Jet Baller said:

Our personal opinions (and those of our friends) is anecdotal, basically. It's easy to assume that many people feel the same way -- and perhaps they might -- but there's no easy way to tell and it's a slippery slope to assume how much everyone else agrees with you. 

 

I hated JW but its legs don't reflect that. 

 

If you're directing that at me, I already said that I admit there many who liked it.  I get that.  But I also know plenty who didn't.  So the multiplier of 2.25 is kind of telling.  It's the lowest multiplier of all of the Avengers films starting with Iron Man.  So that has to account for something, doesn't it?

[John Marston]

Civil War had bead legs due to front loading and because the movie was pretty good but not the greatest thing since sliced bread like the early extremely hyperbolic reactions made it look to be. (Remember some people saying it would get Avengers 2 or even GOTG type legs 

[Jonwo]

12 minutes ago, WilliamK99 said:

With BvS and SS both showing the lack of staying power, I wouldn't be surprised if more studios challenge future DCEU films at the box office, meaning WB is going to have a harder time for future films. Marvel films make as much as they do because rival studios normally give them a week or two breathing room before challenging them....

 

You can have a successful film launching a week after a big tentpole if it's the right film. The Great Gatsby did over $50m OW the week after Iron Man 3 for example

[Dementeleus]

2 minutes ago, Baumer loves Dory said:

 

If you're directing that at me, I already said that I admit there many who liked it.  I get that.  But I also know plenty who didn't.  So the multiplier of 2.25 is kind of telling.  It's the lowest multiplier of all of the Avengers films starting with Iron Man.  So that has to account for something, doesn't it?

 

Well, I agree with you and nile on that, actually. I think there are some more casual people (like you and some others I know) who just didn't think the movie was that great. And I know of others (including myself) where the prospect of keeping tabs on over a dozen superheroes and their various stories just isn't worth it. When you combine that with the inherent front-loading of an extremely popular franchise with a lot of dedicated fans, you end up with legs that are fairly small.

[baumer]

2 minutes ago, Tele the Jet Baller said:

 

Well, I agree with you and nile on that, actually. I think there are some more casual people (like you and some others I know) who just didn't think the movie was that great. And I know of others (including myself) where the prospect of keeping tabs on over a dozen superheroes and their various stories just isn't worth it. When you combine that with the inherent front-loading of an extremely popular franchise with a lot of dedicated fans, you end up with legs that are fairly small.

 

I know we have spoken about this on what's app before and I agree with you when you say that movies with massive built in fans are getting more and more front loaded now.  There's enough evidence to support this.  When Twilights were getting 2.10X, those were considered the pariah's of multipliers, now it seems that 2.25 to maybe 2.35 is kind of expected to films like SS and CW and AOU simply because they have massive rush factors and because they are not pleasing the majority of the fans, so there is some backlash.

[EmpireCity]

23 minutes ago, Baumer loves Dory said:

 

So you have the pulse of everyone who saw the movie?  You know things that others don't when it comes to who liked it and who didn't?  Interesting.  I'm not way off on this.  Telling me I'm silly about this is kind of patronizing.  Your opinion might be that I am but my opinion is just as valid as yours.

 

 

Really?  That's kind of unfair.  

 

You are way off on this though, and I'm not trying to patronize you but there are more than enough metrics out there to show that everyone from the critics to the general audience enjoyed Civil War very very much.  You can have an opinion on it, but doesn't mean it is all that valid or correct in this case.  

 

This isn't me trying to be a dick or know it all about it, but I've got everything from Rottentomatoes critics score (90%) Audience Score (90%) to Metacritic (75%) to Cinemascore (A) to IMDB (8.2) to internal feedback data, satisfaction ratings, $408m domestic and $1.15b in box office, etc.... that all overwhelmingly point to everything I am saying.  The evidence points to roughly 85% of the audience liking it to roughly 15% that didn't.  

 

Show me anything beyond anecdotal evidence from yourself and friends and a multiplier that can be logically explained by a various number of factors.  

 

Again, not trying to be patronizing, but we deal in data here and all the data points very strongly to people liking Captain America Civil War in a big way.  

Edited August 14, 2016 by nilephelan

[Water Bottle]

Sausage Party is crap. The funny jokes were in the marketing, so I didn't laugh once in the theater.

 

Also kind of funny seeing Pete's Dragon and Sausage Party since they literally have opposite messages.

[Fromthegrave]

2 minutes ago, Baumer loves Dory said:

 

I know we have spoken about this on what's app before and I agree with you when you say that movies with massive built in fans are getting more and more front loaded now.  There's enough evidence to support this.  When Twilights were getting 2.10X, those were considered the pariah's of multipliers, now it seems that 2.25 to maybe 2.35 is kind of expected to films like SS and CW and AOU simply because they have massive rush factors and because they are not pleasing the majority of the fans, so there is some backlash.

 

Ironic then how some people say Dark Knight Rises had mixed or average WOM given it had a historic-at-the-time OW for WB, and ended with a 2.78x multiplier, even though its run was compromised. To the general audience, the word of mouth on Dark Knight Rises was great. Some loud small minority of people complaining won't change that.

[somebody85]

I just watched the first 47 minutes of SS again (all the way up until they leave to go to the city) and feel like I have Whiplash. I guess some are into that editing style and that's why this is so divisive. One thing I can say is in theaters I didn't see as many people on their phones as usual because the movie was constantly switching scenes. Maybe this is the result of a generation that wants everything now and has to be constantly stimulated.
 

I wanted some of those introductions way more drawn out then they were. Instead it's here's this, now here's this, now here's this...it's like all these storylines competing at once but none of them are landing because they can't breathe properly.
 

It's the exact same issue I had with BVS (minus the stupid colored filters) until the UE was released that actually felt like a movie. I can see why people find this fun and can just sort of go with it but that style is not for me. Reminds me way too of an extended series of video game cutaways.

[WrathOfHan]

CW had weak legs because:

 

1. The movie didn't have a high rewatchability factor

2. There was no appeal to outsiders; you have to be invested in the MCU to understand what's going on

 

CW didn't have any backlash.

[somebody85]

Anyway interested to see what it does today. 

[Dementeleus]

1 minute ago, nilephelan said:

This isn't me trying to be a dick or know it all about it, but I've got everything from Rottentomatoes critics score (90%) Audience Score (90%) to Metacritic (75%) to Cinemascore (A) to IMDB (8.2) to internal feedback data, satisfaction ratings, $408m domestic and $1.15b in box office, etc.... that all overwhelmingly point to everything I am saying.  

 

It's worth pointing out that those audience metrics are almost entirely fan-driven. So while they may be an accurate representation of the fans, I'm not convinced they're an accurate reflection of the general audience. It was well-received, of course, but not universally so.

[The Panda]

Just my quick comment on the Civil War legs.

 

Of course the movie being the 14th(?) movie of the franchise played an affect on its legs.  Especially when you had to have seen 5 other films to even have a chance at really being able to follow along.  I've seen all of the Marvel movies and I was still left scratching my head at parts trying to jog my memory.

 

You have to be a fan of the Marvel franchise to like Civil War (or you have to at least have seen the movies).  That's not necessarily bad, but it is going to shorten legs because somebody who hasn't seen any Marvel film isn't going to give it a shot because their friends liked it.  

 

It's like somebody who had never seen Game of Thrones trying to start at Season 6 episodes 9 and 10.  While those two episodes are universally acclaimed as some of the best of the series (and some of the best hours of television ever put to screen), you won't appreciate them (or watch them) if you haven't seen the 58 episodes that preceded them.  

 

The MCU has essentially turned into a TV series for Cinema.  While a few movies you can watch as standalones now (like GOTG or Ant-Man, which both had great legs for comic book movies), the majority are too interconnected to do so.  It's both a fundamental flaw in the MCU strategy as well as why it's so successful.

Edited August 14, 2016 by The Panda

[Fromthegrave]

Just now, Tele the Jet Baller said:

 

It's worth pointing out that those audience metrics are almost entirely fan-driven. So while they may be an accurate representation of the fans, I'm not convinced they're an accurate reflection of the general audience. It was well-received, of course, but not universally so.

 

Excellent point. In my opinion, the only good metric of universal appeal is if a film has a tremendous, extraordinary box office run.

[superweirdo87]

Metacritic user score is 8.3 (out of 10) on CA:CW. A lot of evidence indicates that at least Marvel fans, both diehard and casual, really loved Civil War.

[baumer]

The box office doesn't equate to positive feedback.  The multiplier for CW both here and internationally was really small.  I think it grossed something like 500 million internationally in it's first two weekends and then only 250 million in the rest of its run.  Those legs were shaky everywhere.  

 

The cinemascore I put no stock in.  We've covered this before.  Cinemascore is done by one theater and while it is at least something to go on, it really doesn't mean much.  Wolf of Wall Street had a C cinemascore and a 5 multiplier.  This is just one example.  Yes, critics loved it and the audience scores are good as well.  So I can't argue there.  But everything we are basing this on is registered on line.  Sometimes its not just the internet community you go by, but if that is a must, then what I like to do is filter out the reviews on imdb.  If you filter them out and go chronologically, the reviews are absolutely split.  I don't think this is simply anecdotal evidence.  I think there's enough here to show that there has to be some merit to it.  I think CW may have pleased a lot of the Marvel fans/loonies, but not the casual movie goer, hence the bad multiplier.

 

I respect your opinion Nile, I just don't care for being called silly.