Wednesday Numbers: La La Land 1.86M, SING 959k, Long In The Tooth 921k

[filmlover]

1 hour ago, JB33 said:

I can't believe how much Live By Night is bombing so far! I figured Ben Affleck movies were a good bet.

Ben has always had a wildly inconsistent track record at the box office throughout his entire leading man career. In fact, you could definitely argue he's been in far more misses than hits.

Edited January 13, 2017 by filmlover

[JonathanLB]

Yeah Rogue One is losing way too many theaters for a movie that's still Top 3, I think. I suspect that's because there are a lot of tiny theaters with maybe only 1-3 screens that are switching to something newer. Then again my understanding of nationwide theater counts is always going to be terrible, because I have no point of reference. It makes no sense to me. I've never lived in a small town or remote area, so I don't know what that would look like from a theater perspective? In Portland, TFA had not lost a single theater when it had dropped to like 2,000 nationwide or whatever. Not one. Even the downtown 5-plex that should have dropped it by all means because it wasn't pulling in Top 5 dollars kept it for something like 11 weeks, which is absolutely insane. Every single week from like Week 6 onwards, I kept thinking, "Well that'll be the first theater to drop it, they're so small." Every week, it hung around, passing all kinds of movies that opened well after it. Even movies making more money still.

 

Almost every multiplex in Portland is 10 screens or above so a movie like TFA or Rogue One doesn't lose screens until about 8-10 weeks into the run, even though others apparently in random places are already ditching it. I guess I just have to be thankful I don't live in some podunk place where the movie that made the most money last Saturday and Sunday already gets axed a week later. 

[Eevin]

Fwiw a Revenant multiplier off of the Wednesday number gets Hidden Figures $16.4m for the 3-day. Apples and oranges, I know, especially considering it's adding 800 theaters this weekend compared to the 184 for Revenant, but $20m+ over four days (and the #1 spot) remains a strong possibility.

[redfirebird2008]

7 minutes ago, JonathanLB said:

Almost every multiplex in Portland is 10 screens or above so a movie like TFA or Rogue One doesn't lose screens until about 8-10 weeks into the run

 

Doesn't lose screens? I doubt that. 

[JonathanLB]

16 minutes ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

Doesn't lose screens? I doubt that. 

 

I meant doesn't lose THEATERS, they cut the screens of course from whatever (3 or 4) to 2 to 1 eventually, yes. That goes without saying. What I was saying is while the rest of the country was busy cutting half of TFA's theaters, Portland wasn't responsible for even one of those. That's why I could never understand where are these theaters? Where are these cuts coming from? Even right now, Rogue One loses 1/4 of its theaters, where? It hasn't lost any in Portland. 

[redfirebird2008]

1 minute ago, JonathanLB said:

 

I meant doesn't lose THEATERS, they cut the screens of course from whatever (3 or 4) to 2 to 1 eventually, yes. That goes without saying. 

 

That makes a lot more sense. You would be surprised at how many people in the media and on forums like this don't understand the difference between theater count and screen count. 

[JonathanLB]

7 minutes ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

That makes a lot more sense. You would be surprised at how many people in the media and on forums like this don't understand the difference between theater count and screen count. 

 

Yes, and I feel embarrassed to have mistyped that because there's a huge difference! It's one of my personal pet peeves actually, to see, "Rogue One opens this weekend on 4,100 screens." No, it doesn't, it's probably like 10,000 screens or something. They're not even close to the same thing. Does the media think every theater is a grand old school movie palace with one giant screen? ha ha, those days are over. 

 

Actually though speaking of "those days are over," isn't it now increasingly difficult to discern a screen count or am I misunderstanding the contracts? I mean for instance, if a theater wants to show Rogue One on all 18 screens at midnight (after the other movies played their 10 p.m. showings or whatever), they could do that right? Even if contractually Rogue One is "only" playing in 4 screens at the theater, at that particular time it could occupy all 18. Or I routinely see a movie sharing a screen with another movie, hell I've seen two movies get one showing per day and another getting two showings, so it's like 3 movies sharing the same screen. How does that mess with the screen counts? I guess that's why only "theater counts" are given in any official releases right?

[redfirebird2008]

35 minutes ago, JonathanLB said:

 

Yes, and I feel embarrassed to have mistyped that because there's a huge difference! It's one of my personal pet peeves actually, to see, "Rogue One opens this weekend on 4,100 screens." No, it doesn't, it's probably like 10,000 screens or something. They're not even close to the same thing. Does the media think every theater is a grand old school movie palace with one giant screen? ha ha, those days are over. 

 

Actually though speaking of "those days are over," isn't it now increasingly difficult to discern a screen count or am I misunderstanding the contracts? I mean for instance, if a theater wants to show Rogue One on all 18 screens at midnight (after the other movies played their 10 p.m. showings or whatever), they could do that right? Even if contractually Rogue One is "only" playing in 4 screens at the theater, at that particular time it could occupy all 18. Or I routinely see a movie sharing a screen with another movie, hell I've seen two movies get one showing per day and another getting two showings, so it's like 3 movies sharing the same screen. How does that mess with the screen counts? I guess that's why only "theater counts" are given in any official releases right?

 

Back in the days of midnight openings, you could end up with a theater complex playing the same movie on all screens. DH2 is the best example of this. As far as screen count reporting goes, BOM used to be good about it. They did bring back this feature during TFA's run but they aren't reporting it during Rogue One's weekends. 

 

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/?view=screens&yr=2015&wknd=51&p=.htm

[Fancyarcher]

La-La Land run is excellent. It's doing way better then I expected. 

[filmlover]

5 minutes ago, Fancyarcher said:

La-La Land run is excellent. It's doing way better then I expected. 

Remember when @baumer predicted it wouldn't make $30M in its entire run? Whoops!

[Fancyarcher]

14 minutes ago, filmlover said:

Remember when @baumer predicted it wouldn't make $30M in its entire run? Whoops!

 

Well nobody expected it to do as well as it did. Helps that it turned out to be such an amazing movie. 

 

2 hours ago, filmlover said:

Ben has always had a wildly inconsistent track record at the box office throughout his entire leading man career. In fact, you could definitely argue he's been in far more misses than hits.

 

 

So like any supposed modern box office draw, it's more about the concepts he attaches himself to, then him being in the film or not. Basically, he's not really technically a draw. 

Edited January 13, 2017 by Fancyarcher

[Fancyarcher]

7 hours ago, WrathOfHan said:

Lionsgate is run by morons.

 

We've known this for a very long time. 

[filmlover]

3 minutes ago, Fancyarcher said:

So like any supposed modern box office draw, it's more about the concepts he attaches himself to, then him being in the film or not. Basically, he's not really technically a draw. 

To be fair, most of his film choices have often made people question his judgement (the man was in Gigli - nuff said).

[Fancyarcher]

4 minutes ago, filmlover said:

To be fair, most of his film choices have often made people question his judgement (the man was in Gigli - nuff said).

 

Yeah, but his film choices as of late haven't been AS crappy as they have circa 2002 - 2005. Honestly, Affleck can be a solid actor, he just doesn't seem capable of constantly picking great scripts (doesn't always help when he works on the scripts either). Probably doesn't help LBN either, that he already had two major releases out earlier this year. 

Edited January 13, 2017 by Fancyarcher

[terrestrial]

8 hours ago, CoolEric258 said:

Here ya go.

 

Thank you very much! 

 

     

 

 

6 hours ago, trifle said:

There is definitely a thread on it. I'll find it and bump it. I THINK it is in this forum, but I'm not sure.

 

You too!

     

 

 

I think there is no link in the archive, I looked in both archive threads, but I was very very tired as I looked, I'll have to recheck that

[DeeCee]

3 hours ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

Back in the days of midnight openings, you could end up with a theater complex playing the same movie on all screens. DH2 is the best example of this. As far as screen count reporting goes, BOM used to be good about it. They did bring back this feature during TFA's run but they aren't reporting it during Rogue One's weekends. 

 

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/?view=screens&yr=2015&wknd=51&p=.htm

With virtually all screens digital now screen count is almost meaningless since a 16 screen complex could put a film on all 16 screens if it wanted and doesn't have to worry about extra prints. 

[redfirebird2008]

18 minutes ago, DeeCee said:

With virtually all screens digital now screen count is almost meaningless since a 16 screen complex could put a film on all 16 screens if it wanted and doesn't have to worry about extra prints. 

 

Except they have contracts that force them to show a bunch of different movies. Even if they wanted to, they would not be able to have all 20 screens of a movie theater running Star Wars for the entire weekend for instance.

 

Screen count is still important in that it gives a film a bigger potential weekend if it's playing on more screens. Force Awakens was playing on 14,400 screens. That is 2,600 more screens than The Avengers and 5,100 more screens than The Dark Knight. Do the math on 4 showtimes per day for each screen spread across 3 days. It adds up. The bigger the screen count, the bigger the movie's potential. 

Edited January 13, 2017 by redfirebird2008

[Noctis]

55 minutes ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

Except they have contracts that force them to show a bunch of different movies. Even if they wanted to, they would not be able to have all 20 screens of a movie theater running Star Wars for the entire weekend for instance.

 

Screen count is still important in that it gives a film a bigger potential weekend if it's playing on more screens. Force Awakens was playing on 14,400 screens. That is 2,600 more screens than The Avengers and 5,100 more screens than The Dark Knight. Do the math on 4 showtimes per day for each screen spread across 3 days. It adds up. The bigger the screen count, the bigger the movie's potential. 

 

Do you know how many screens DH2 was in?

[BadAtGender]

9 minutes ago, Noctis said:

 

Do you know how many screens DH2 was in?

Boy estimated 143k showtimes on 11k screens for the opening weekend. 

 

Sadly, screen counts haven't been done since just before Mockingjay 1 opened. 

[redfirebird2008]

3 hours ago, DamienRoc said:

Boy estimated 143k showtimes on 11k screens for the opening weekend. 

 

Sadly, screen counts haven't been done since just before Mockingjay 1 opened. 

 

TFA has them. Otherwise you are correct. Wish they still kept track of it. That was one of my favorite features on BOM.