Weekend BO- Actuals Mo 18.53, OCP 16.89, FB 10.43, Arr 5.58, NA 3.16, MbtS 3.13

[Cochofles]

22 minutes ago, Christmas Baumer said:

 

Poor Jennifer Aniston. She made about 200 million off of Friends and shell continue to keep making gobs of money as long as it is in syndication which means she will be making millions of dollars off of it for the rest of her life. Also she's one of the few actresses who actually gets people to come out to her movies. She's not the biggest draw but she's also someone that people do recognize and will come out and see. You've got a really warped way of looking at things sometimes my dear. 

 

Bravo.

 

I am confused as to what else Jennifer Aniston is supposed to do to be perceived by certain people as a "movie star." Whether we like her or not, she is a household name, and I bet you anything that A WHOLE LOT more people are able to recognize her by name and by just looking at her face than they would recognize someone considered a "respected movie star" like Jessica Chastain or Cate Blanchett. That is the power of TV and the power of being a major player in a pop culture phenomenon like Friends. At this point she might never be the kind of box office draw that Julia Roberts, Sandra Bullock, and Meg Ryan were at some point, and she will never be the second coming of Meryl Streep in terms of respect and accolades, but I doubt she is crying over that; she is indeed a likeable, charismatic movie presence, and again, and unmistakable showbiz icon thanks to "Rachel."  

The last thing I would say about her is "poor Jennifer Aniston." 

Edited December 10, 2016 by Cochofles

[baumer]

Insert Citizen Kane clapping gif here.

[Xavier]

@Cochofles

Exactly, whatever else she does from now on is just gravy.

[Valonqar]

2 minutes ago, Cochofles said:

 

Bravo.

 

I am confused as to what else Jennifer Aniston is supposed to do to be perceived by certain people as a "movie star." Whether we like her or not, she is a household name, and I bet you anything that A WHOLE LOT more people are able to recognize her by name and by just looking at her face than they would recognize someone considered a "respected movie star" like Jessica Chastain or Cate Blanchett. That is the power of TV and the power of being a major player in a pop culture phenomenon like Friends. At this point she might never be the kind of box office draw that Julia Roberts, Sandra Bullock, and Meg Ryan were at some point, and she will never be the second coming of Meryl Streep in terms of respect and accolades, but I doubt she is crying over that; she is indeed a likeable, charismatic movie presence, and again, and unmistakable showbiz icon thanks to "Rachel."  

The last thing I would say about her is "poor Jennifer Aniston." 

 

Agreed. Also, someone made a great observation about why Fassbender is such a boxoffice poison and they said he spent too much time playing icy characters. GA don't warm up to that. Same is true of Blanchett and Chastain. OTOH, Aniston is playing warm characters even when they are villainous and people respond to that. Same goes for Bullock, Roberts, etc. Biggest movie stars, both male and female, are draws cause they are likable and often play characters who are either super likable or sympathetic/relatable in some way (example, Leo doesn't always play likable characters but they are definitely not cold so one can relate to them or at least be entertained by them). As far as female leads go, Aniston is one of more solid since she doesn't have a franchise where brand is a bigger draw than an actor/actress.

[terrestrial]

19 minutes ago, POTUS said:

Canada is 12% of Domestic, a part of Canada getting hit would could affect a portion of a few percent.

I am aware, I still expected 'there might be a less than predictied actuals chart' = as in being prepared for a little bit, with the possibility for more, if the weather spreads.

A few percentages change seems the reason to be disappointed for yis, the snow in CAN was only one example = the sum of a few little reasons can add up to whatever yis seems to be disappointed about. Xavier too seems to be interested, so...

I do not think there is a reason to be disappointed...

Giving some ~ supporting words does not mean I think there is anything wrong with the numbers or that I mean the impact will be huge, only that there might be reasons, = to wait and see the actuals and if still not happy, try to find out what might have played into the difference of maybe too high expectations and the reality of the actuals.

[yjs]

yeah, Jennifer is just fine. maybe since we are numbers people that are box office/award show nerds that sometimes we are immune to greatness and fail to recognize it while always seeking for something even bigger and greater.

 

 

Edited December 10, 2016 by yjs

[yjs]

1 minute ago, terrestrial said:

I am aware, I still expected 'there might be a less than predictied actuals chart' = as in being prepared for a little bit, with the possibility for more, if the weather spreads.

A few percentages change seems the reason to be disappointed for yis, the snow in CAN was only one example = the sum of a few little reasons can add up to whatever yis seems to be disappointed about. Xavier too seems to be interested, so...

I do not think there is a reason to be disappointed...

Giving some ~ supporting words does not mean I think there is anything wrong with the numbers or that I mean the impact will be huge, only that there might be reasons, = to wait and see the actuals and if still not happy, try to find out what might have played into the difference of maybe too high expectations and the reality of the actuals.

yeah, that was just a nice pick-me-up which was just fine and enough.  I mean, I was just a bit underwhelmed cause I was expecting bigger Friday jumps for both of them like last week but wasn't really like, baffled cause they were still not behaving noticeably abnormally or anything, so the accurate analysis wasn't really necessary anyway. 

[The Futurist]

Jennifer never really gave up " The Aniston " though.

 

She changed the world for sure.

 

 

 

 

[POTUS 2020]

25 minutes ago, yjs said:

yeah, that was just a nice pick-me-up which was just fine and enough.  I mean, I was just a bit underwhelmed cause I was expecting bigger Friday jumps for both of them like last week but wasn't really like, baffled cause they were still not behaving noticeably abnormally or anything, so the accurate analysis wasn't really necessary anyway. 

Last week historically does have a bigger Friday jump. I think the midweek is suppressed after Thanksgiving as the Wednesday to weekend multi is higher than normal.

[Gumby]

I see Miss Sloane's advertising strategy of targeting Hillary Clinton supporters on Twitter did just about as well as Hillary's campaign strategy in the Rust Belt.

[titanic2187]

i knew i'm slow learner but i just learn that suicide squad has gone out from cinema!!!

Why? Like it or not, it holds pretty good, and still get $200k in its last week, why WB/DC pull it out so quickly?? they could have make a final expansion for this on thankgiving! 

[filmlover]

Arrival could actually make it to $100M after all with Oscar nominations.

 

[terrestrial]

19 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

i knew i'm slow learner but i just learn that suicide squad has gone out from cinema!!!

Why? Like it or not, it holds pretty good, and still get $200k in its last week, why WB/DC pull it out so quickly?? they could have make a final expansion for this on thankgiving! 

It was 2 weeks longer in release than e.g. BvS, but less than typically more long legged holiday releases of WB see e.g. Hobbit

It's not an award contender see American Sniper (that started rather small before going wide and as such has even more weeks in release) and it's release year shows other in-release-week-counts patterns like ~ 10 years back

VOD/dics release starts way earlier now too, sadly. And is in discussions to get even earlier releases, incl the cinemas might get a part of that income for their to expect damages (for how long and ho much for how long...?)

 

edit:

acc. BOM, SSs last week was even higher

Nov 4–10

25

$324,638

-15.6%

245

-87

$1,325

$325,100,054

14

Edited December 10, 2016 by terrestrial
typos/gramar

[yjs]

15 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

i knew i'm slow learner but i just learn that suicide squad has gone out from cinema!!!

Why? Like it or not, it holds pretty good, and still get $200k in its last week, why WB/DC pull it out so quickly?? they could have make a final expansion for this on thankgiving! 

pulling out after three months is not that too soon for live-action blockbusters especially for front-loaded ones likes BvS or SS. Thanksgiving was already too packed and crowded and WB had to push Fantastic Beasts with full force, and even if SS had gotten an expansion it would have only had a minor bump like a million or two extra, so just not worth it. 

Edited December 10, 2016 by yjs

[titanic2187]

it's weird to see that moana could lead 3 consecutive week but way behind frozen in total, which just on top for 2 weeks(week 2 and week 6)

[titanic2187]

1 hour ago, terrestrial said:

It was 2 weeks longer in release than e.g. BvS, but less than typically more long legged holiday releases of WB see e.g. Hobbit

It's not an award contender see American Sniper (that started rather small before going wide and as such has even more weeks in release) and it's release year shows other in-release-week-counts patterns like ~ 10 years back

VOD/dics release starts way earlier now too, sadly. And is in discussions to get even earlier releases, incl the cinemas might get a part of that income for their to expect damages (for how long and ho much for how long...?)

 

edit:

acc. BOM, SSs last week was even higher

Nov 4–10

25

$324,638

-15.6%

245

-87

$1,325

$325,100,054

14

maybe they just dont wish that SS ahead of BvS, it would be very unpleasant for WB/DC to see their top brand lose out to SS 

[terrestrial]

21 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

maybe they just dont wish that SS ahead of BvS, it would be very unpleasant for WB/DC to see their top brand lose out to SS 

I do not think so, they do the week count limitation too often.

edit:Beside that: difference is too big anyway, even if the would have added Thanksgiving, see the post about maybe adding $1m for that.

 

 

 

http://variety.com/2016/film/news/box-office-christmas-party-moana-2-1201938327/

 

Quote

“Office Christmas Party” is heading for a respectable $15 million opening weekend.... early estimates showed Friday.

... “Moana,” which should take in somewhere in the $15 million to $16 million range ...

... Fantastic Beasts...with about $10 million

“Arrival” ... with about $6 million,,,

,,“Allied” will follow in fifth with about $5 million ...

... “Miss Sloane” to 1,598 theaters appears to be showing little traction with early estimates in the $3 millio

Year-to-date box office has hit $10.3 billion, 3.5% ahead of the same point last year, ....

 

Edited December 10, 2016 by terrestrial

[MovieMan89]

Damn, really wanted at least 4.5 for Moana. It keeps holding unusually well on Sunday, so hopefully that happens and it gets to at least 19 for the weekend.

 

Arrival is for sure getting to 100 with a BP nom, maybe without too.  

Edited December 10, 2016 by MovieMan89

[filmlover]

La La Land and Manchester by the Sea both kicking ass on specialty front. So excited for these runs.

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

$45M for Office Christmas Party, does this party have a petting zoo of reindeer imported from the North Pole? Aniston's a bigger star than anyone in Bad Moms but that only cost $20m or so.