The Box Office Buzz and Tracking Thread: Electric Boogaloo

[TalismanRing]

13 minutes ago, FantasticBeasts said:

Obviously they expect way more than $65m...

What makes sense is that If this does $100m you will have titles like "Huge OW for WW" "Beats expectations by a large margin" and so on..

If they were saying $90-100.

An $100m weekend would be seen as "I line with expectations"

We can all remember Disney saying $120m for Beauty and many other examples.

 

Sure but the studio low balling that much loses control of the narrative.  The trades having it doing $90m- $100m and the trades write the headlines after it opens.  

[FantasticBeasts]

1 minute ago, TalismanRing said:

 

Sure but the studio low balling that much loses control of the narrative.  The trades having it doing $90m- $100m and the trades write the headlines after it opens.  

It is not that rare though to lowball THAT much. I agree that something like $80-90m would have been more reasonable but as I said, Disney was off by 55m for Beauty.

[grim22]

The only SS MT comps I could find. 

 

On 8/4/2016 at 8:21 AM, Nova said:

SS up to 50% on MT. On the East coast, previews start in 6.5 hours. 

 

 

 

On 8/4/2016 at 0:45 PM, Nova said:

Its currently at 56% on MT, 2 hours away from previews. 

 

Using the comparison I made earlier, finding dory was in the high 60s around this time. 

 

BvS and CW were in the 70s. 

 

It's like the forum didn't care enough to update MT on the last day for SS

[AdamKendall]

2 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

 

Sure but the studio low balling that much loses control of the narrative.  The trades having it doing $90m- $100m and the trades write the headlines after it opens.  

Yeah, it makes for a ridiculous entry in the story as nothing suggests an opening anywhere close to 65 million.  I mean I get where they're trying to be protective of the IP, but lol.

[filmlover]

It could be that WB is taking into account two things: the first being the mostly chilly reception to the DCEU movies until now, and the other being the poor history of female superhero movies. They probably want the element surprise as much as possible.

[Nova]

4 minutes ago, filmlover said:

It could be that WB is taking into account two things: the first being the mostly chilly reception to the DCEU movies until now, and the other being the poor history of female superhero movies. They probably want the element surprise as much as possible.

I'm sorry but that's not enough for them to low ball the film this much. At this point in time, it's pretty clear that this film is going to be really big. And considering the fact that the trades are on a completely different page, they don't really get to have the narrative they want. I don't expect them to say yea $95M+ for the weekend but they're still sticking with $65M? That's laughable and embarrassing in my opinion. 

[Barnack]

31 minutes ago, FantasticBeasts said:

It is not that rare though to lowball THAT much. I agree that something like $80-90m would have been more reasonable but as I said, Disney was off by 55m for Beauty.

 

That must have been a really hard to track movie, musical/family movie that open a Thursday like a fanboy franchise event, their tracking must have been all over the place dependent of the model they plugged the metric in, that movie had basically no good precedent to use, they could not plug the pre-salse ticket into a Jungle Book model but not a Civil War either. 

 

Wonder Woman (classic SH, or more like Hunger games, it could play like a family movie), deadpool (superheroes or typical R-rated comedy) also are probably not easy to know which tracking model to use.

Edited June 1, 2017 by Barnack

[Arlborn]

1 hour ago, CoolEric258 said:

Also of note, CU is tracking in the $25 million range. (It also apparently only costed $38M to produce...wow.)

 

Eh? That sounds awfully cheap and hard to believe. Weren't they saying 60-80M before?

[BeastByTheBay]

Weird, when i go to MovieTickets it's stuck on the same % from Monday

[Premium George]

1 minute ago, BeastByTheBay said:

Weird, when i go to MovieTickets it's stuck on the same % from Monday

Desktop site is not changing, mobile is.

[BeastByTheBay]

2 minutes ago, damnitgeorge08 said:

Desktop site is not changing, mobile is.

 

Figures 

[baumer]

1 hour ago, Nova said:

I'm sorry but that's not enough for them to low ball the film this much. At this point in time, it's pretty clear that this film is going to be really big. And considering the fact that the trades are on a completely different page, they don't really get to have the narrative they want. I don't expect them to say yea $95M+ for the weekend but they're still sticking with $65M? That's laughable and embarrassing in my opinion. 

 

Can you explain whats embarrassing about not expecting your movie to over perform?

[Nova]

2 minutes ago, baumer said:

 

Can you explain whats embarrassing about not expecting your movie to over perform?

Is WW making $90M over performing when it's been tracking by several publications to do just that for over the past week? If WW makes $90M the only folks claiming it over performed would be Warner brothers. It's gotten great reviews, great reception and it's presales (from those who have given us presales) all indicate at least a $90M debut, if not more. So yes their effort to low ball the film when literally every single sign out there indicates an opening way way higher than $65M is embarrassing. 

[John Marston]

1 hour ago, grim22 said:

The only SS MT comps I could find. 

 

 

 

 

 

It's like the forum didn't care enough to update MT on the last day for SS

 

 

probably depressed from the bad reviews

[baumer]

So they should hang their hands in shame?

 

Hmmm.....i think theyll get over it of it opens north of their prediction. 

[grey ghost]

Studios have little to gain from overshooting their projections.

 

It's much wiser to go way under and have your film beat expectations by 60 m. 

 

 

[75Live]

8 minutes ago, baumer said:

So they should hang their hands in shame?

 

Hmmm.....i think theyll get over it of it opens north of their prediction. 

 

of course they should feel shame.  or I'll put it this way if they undershoot the estimates:

 

You do that, you go to the box, you know. Two minutes, by yourself, you know and you feel shame, you know. And then you get free.  

Edited June 1, 2017 by 75live

[Brainiac5]

10 hours ago, Nova said:

Is WW making $90M over performing when it's been tracking by several publications to do just that for over the past week? If WW makes $90M the only folks claiming it over performed would be Warner brothers. It's gotten great reviews, great reception and it's presales (from those who have given us presales) all indicate at least a $90M debut, if not more. So yes their effort to low ball the film when literally every single sign out there indicates an opening way way higher than $65M is embarrassing. 

I don't get why you are even making this aThing .

Edited June 2, 2017 by Brainiac5

[Nova]

Just now, Brainiac5 said:

I don't get why you are even making this. Thing .

I was responding to another poster who asked me why I think it's embarrassing to low ball WW the way Warner Bros is. And I'm not the only one who thinks they're low balling the film nor am I the only one who has commented on it. If you don't like what I have to say, then just keep scrolling along. 

[The Panda]

Lol, calm down.  Studios lowball their estimates all of the time, it makes it where even if the film actually disappoints they can claim it was in line with their expectations.

 

That's just business practice.