Jump to content

WrathOfHan

Weekend Estimates (Page 28): Magnificent 7 35M | Storks 21.8M | Sully 13.8M | Bridget Jones 4.5M

By WrathOfHan, in Numbers and Data

Recommended Posts

wildphantom Box Office Gold

wildphantom

Posted
Posted

Family audiences are pretty savvy. They know what's on the horizon. 

So, either they've taken a look at Storks and thought 'nah, I'll wait for Trolls'. 

 

Or they've looked at both and thought 'we'll wait for Moana, Fantastic Beasts and Star Wars thanks'. 

 

I tend to believe Trolls will do rather nicely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


babz06 Box Office Gold

babz06

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, wildphantom said:

Family audiences are pretty savvy. They know what's on the horizon. 

So, either they've taken a look at Storks and thought 'nah, I'll wait for Trolls'. 

 

Or they've looked at both and thought 'we'll wait for Moana, Fantastic Beasts and Star Wars thanks'. 

 

I tend to believe Trolls will do rather nicely. 

It's most likely the latter. Trolls is probably gonna do Peanuts movie numbers. This leaves the market wide open for Moana/Sing to blow up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


James Summer Tentpole

James

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, WeneedtotalkaboutKevin said:

Storks is gonna end up like Pete's Dragon and both of them will probably be in the red. One of the few stinkers for WB this year. 

I doubt Storks ends up in the red. OS should help it go past 200m WW and then you have home video which is always good for family movies. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
a2k Global Phenomenon

a2k

Posted
Posted

PD will do 77-78 dom on a 65 prod budget with already 42.5 os and counting.

It will do 2.5x+ it's budget ww. So will pay for prod budget and eat into marketing budget with global theatricals itself.

Auxiliary will ensure a healthy profit imo.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites






TalismanRing Global Phenomenon

TalismanRing

Posted
Posted
47 minutes ago, Jonwo said:

Storks' numbers is disappointing but not a disaster given the budget. If it can do $150-200m OS which is doable combined with a $80-90m domestic then it'll be profitable just not super profitable. 

 

 

 

It doesn't need to do that much, the budget was $70m and as a kids/family film it will have a long fruitful life in ancillary

 

Cloudy with A Chance of Meatballs cost $100m and did $243m WW.  It got a sequel.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Krissykins Global Phenomenon

Krissykins

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Jonwo said:

Storks' numbers is disappointing but not a disaster given the budget. If it can do $150-200m OS which is doable combined with a $80-90m domestic then it'll be profitable just not super profitable. 

 

 

 

It's the worst opening ever for a film in 3,900+ locations. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites


MCKillswitch123 Summer Tentpole

MCKillswitch123

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, Krissykins said:

 

It's the worst opening ever for a film in 3,900+ locations. 

 

Yeah, but most films opening with that high of a theater count have bigger (if not WAY bigger) budgets than 70M (around 140M w/P&A). If Storks performs decently both DOM and OS (and it's got until November to perform since the children's/family market is free until Trolls, unless Miss Peregrine overlaps), it'll still be profitable. This OW number is undoubtedly poor, but hardly is the film's BO totally doomed.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites






Jonwo Global Phenomenon

Jonwo

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

 

It doesn't need to do that much, the budget was $70m and as a kids/family film it will have a long fruitful life in ancillary

 

Cloudy with A Chance of Meatballs cost $100m and did $243m WW.  It got a sequel.

 

 

 

Cloudy had critical acclaim and TBH it was SPA's first big hit whereas WAG had The Lego Movie which was very successful. I think Storks is akin to Hop which was Ilumination's second film which opened well but had poor legs for a family film and didn't do great OS but was profitable due to its $63m budget. 

 

I imagine Storks won't get a sequel but WAG in the long run will be fine but I suspect if Smallfoot doesn't do better then original films will take a backseat in favour of Lego films and adaptations of characters that WB already owns 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Gumby Indie Sensation

Gumby

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, No Prisoners said:

I just the read the Eastwood article. Loved it. 

ESQ: Politically, you’re the Anti-Pussy party?

ScottE: That’s right. No candy-asses.

ClintE: Yeah, I’m anti–the pussy generation. Not to be confused with pussy.

 

Yeah, that most likely helped him with the target audience for the film.

 

I can't imagine many SJW college kids who have to run and hide in a safe space if a conservative speaker comes to campus (if they don't get that speaker's appearance cancelled) would have much interest in Sully.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Gumby Indie Sensation

Gumby

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, Mojoguy said:



Because female audiences can't relate to fat actresses playing the leads in dramas, they must live vicariously through the hot actresses. Hollywood is just giving them what they want.

Why couldn't Emily Blunt have put some weight on for the role?

 

She didn't have to turn into Melissa McCarthy but she could have made her appearance fit the character a little bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites




Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.

  I accept