Weekend Numbers: Fantastic Beasts 75M, Strange 17.6M, Trolls 17.5M, Arrival 11.8M, Edge of 17 4.8M, Bleed 2.35M, Billy Lynn 930k

[Kvikk Lunsj]

3 minutes ago, grey ghost said:

 

And Star Wars.

 

That damn mouse hit the jackpot.

Hopefully Rogue One can do good.  

[yjs]

14 minutes ago, langer said:

To me it's falling right into expectations.  I don't understand the meltdowns. 

I think some people were just way overestimating this one with $100M+ OW predictions. If it does $70M+, I'd still call it quite respectable. 

[EmpireCity]

Lol at @Christmas Baumer and @GiantCALBears celebrating as if this has a single thing to do with Rogue One.  

[Goffe]

21 minutes ago, Jayhawk said:

Ouch. Should still do well, but everytime a studio announces these elaborate universes (like more than 3 movies) it tends to backfire pretty quickly. Other than Marvel, obviously.

Part of the problem is that Rowling and her studio are not so much telling a story as erecting another “tentpole,” the Hollywood name for a “franchise” that becomes a virus — but is nonetheless regarded as a remedy for red ink. I only wish there were a vaccine. 

http://www.vulture.com/2016/11/review-fantastic-beasts-is-a-tedious-slog.html

[GiantCALBears]

Could be. Personally, I've always said Baumer's club was possible. Guess what I'm saying is that you could read this as a tea leaf in whatever direction you think fits your preferred narrative.

You can do that with almost anything in life Jay. If you honestly think this number means NOTHING in forecasting RO, then I can't help you.

[kswiston]

7 minutes ago, GiantCALBears said:

It's delusional. Legs won't be great at all outside of the usual holiday bump.

 

Even if it has OK legs, I am seeing some DOM totals as high as $225M despite the fact that Skyfall is the only live action November film in the past decade to debut over $50M and still break the 3x OW multiplier barrier.  

[water]

i can't with this rogue one talk. anything 300+ is good for it

[elcaballero]

Warner better hope that this doesn't play like a Potter movie. If it's that front-loaded, it's in trouble.

[baumer]

This is a spin off. This is a film that exist in the same universe but is not the Harry Potter that everyone knows and loves. This was never destined to do big numbers that people were predicting.

 

Sounds like some other film......

[Plain Old Tele]

So the Potter movieverse now has its Hobbit. 

[GiantCALBears]

 
exactly, it doesn't indicate anything in either way, but yes it's funny that one can take it in either direction on their preference though [emoji14] 

If you think this number means NOTHING or is even good for RO then your opinion really is irrelevant. That's my personal feeling because it makes zero sense logically.

[EmpireCity]

2 minutes ago, GiantCALBears said:

 

Want to bet $ on RO performance? Can't wait to bump all of your comments on OW & beyond.

 

 

So are you going to actually address how you are wrong on what you said or are you going to flail around like a child about a completely different and unrelated topic that is a month away from release?

[babz06]

I mean if it hits 70m that would be in line with tracking; plus the holidays will give it a buffer. 150m is all but assured with as much as 200m. For a Harry Potter spin off thats pretty good, so I don't understand the meltdowns.

 

 

[wildphantom]

Just now, Goffe said:

Part of the problem is that Rowling and her studio are not so much telling a story as erecting another “tentpole,” the Hollywood name for a “franchise” that becomes a virus — but is nonetheless regarded as a remedy for red ink. I only wish there were a vaccine. 

http://www.vulture.com/2016/11/review-fantastic-beasts-is-a-tedious-slog.html

 

Which is a load of shit. We might know that there's five films planned in total, but if you didn't know that you wouldn't come out of this movie thinking you'd seen a fifth of the story. It absolutely tells its own tale with a beginning, middle and an end. Just as Sorcerer's Stone did back in 2001. 

 

Such lazy, cynical film criticism. 

[filmlover]

I think if it does $70M+ this weekend its fine (since that was what the studio was forecasting). Anything less would be trouble, yes.

[Dbot1800]

 

[GiantCALBears]

 
So are you going to actually address how you are wrong on what you said or are you going to flail around like a child about a completely different and unrelated topic that is a month away from release?

I asked a question, did I say fantastic Beasts was going to bomb? No. Thanks for playing.

[Michael Gary Scott]

This opening has nothing to do with how Rogue One will perform. 

[water]

sure fb is technically a spinoff but a 5-movie plan with a story meant to be as big as hp isn't the same as a spinoff the way that rogue one is a standalone one-off side movie while the main saga is still happening. fb is a full-blown franchise, and it's failing to be in the leagues of hp, twilight, thg, and sw because of bad decisions they made

[JohnnyGossamer]

3 minutes ago, Christmas Baumer said:

This is a spin off. This is a film that exist in the same universe but is not the Harry Potter that everyone knows and loves. This was never destined to do big numbers that people were predicting.

 

Sounds like some other film......

I'd agree more if Rogue One wasn't following on the heels of $925M DOM earner. This is much different. Rogue One also features Vader. Fantastic Beasts do not feature Voldemort in his youth/prime. Rogue also takes place on the same planets, etc. as Star Wars with Storm Troopers, Death Star, diverse cast, etc.