What a WONDERful Weekend | WW down only 16% on Sunday. 103M weekend. pg 226

[Ethan Hunt]

5 minutes ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

There were a lot of outlets reporting that 65 million tracking number as if it were something that was set in stone and deeming the movie of failure before it came out.

Eh. I don't think they were really believing that was a bad number and anyways thing definitely turned out for the movie in the end

[Barnack]

21 minutes ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

There were a lot of outlets reporting that 65 million tracking number as if it were something that was set in stone and deeming the movie of failure before it came out.

 

That was from the studio itself that told those outlets to tell us those numbers.

[Mulder]

16 minutes ago, Barnack said:

 

That was from the studio itself that told those outlets to tell us those numbers.

No there was tracking numbers for WW saying 65 million like 2 months in advance.

[Barnack]

4 minutes ago, Mulder said:

No there was tracking numbers for WW saying 65 million like 2 months in advance.

 

Well that was the same tracking than Guardian of the galaxy at that point (i.e. pointing the movie to be a large success), my general point is that it seemed to be the narrative the studio wanted to be in the trades, they were the last one to have those low numbers. Those tracking number were not wishing the movie to be a failure, well I don't think so, those trade want click mostly, they had tracking number they published them and got clicks.

[Mulder]

Just now, Barnack said:

 

Well that was the same tracking than Guardian of the galaxy at that point (i.e. pointing the movie to be a large success), my general point is that it seemed to be the narrative the studio wanted to be in the trades, they were the last one to have those low numbers. Those tracking number were not wishing the movie to be a failure, well I don't think so, those trade want click mostly, they had tracking number they published them and got clicks.

There was definitely a negative slant by publishers about those numbers, the trades are pretty neutral but the way they were reported leaned negative.

[grim22]

47 minutes ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

There were a lot of outlets reporting that 65 million tracking number as if it were something that was set in stone and deeming the movie of failure before it came out.

 

Welcome to the forums. Have seen you on twitter a lot and know that you will be a great contributor here.

[UNDERDOG]

I was in class today, and I overheard two people talking about WW and how they wanna see it again, and I joined in on the conversation.

 

One of them said: "It was so good, which is surprising since its a DC film".

I've never seen people, outside of the internet, praise a DC film in everyday conversation. Or hell, even talk about them.

I've seen it for GOTG and other MCU films, but never for a DC movie.

Edited June 5, 2017 by UNDERDOG

[Barnack]

7 minutes ago, Mulder said:

There was definitely a negative slant by publishers about those numbers, the trades are pretty neutral but the way they were reported leaned negative.

 

I think you could be right (and that is general with tracking), maybe it is unattended in the sense they do not realize that most people do not know what tracking is and many article didn't explain that weeks before release tracking at 65 million does not mean they predict you will open at 65m, it make the news more attractive to not clearly explain that part (but that does not require having any bias against a movie, simply a bias for sensationalism)

 

Has for the way those article got quoted, that I would not be surprised that you would be right, didn't follow that much, my point was about the deadline/thr type reporting about actual tracking numbers.

[Zakiyyah6]

10 minutes ago, grim22 said:

 

Welcome to the forums. Have seen you on twitter a lot and know that you will be a great contributor here.

Thanks for the warm welcome.

[cory]

4 hours ago, Celedhring said:

Mmmm...coming up with the best multipliers for non-animated films opening over 90m in the summer, I get:

 

GotG1 : 3.5x (August)

JW: 3.1x

TA: 3x

TDK: 3.3x (9 years ago)

Dead Man's Chest: 3.1x (11 years ago)

Spider-Man: 3.5x (15 years ago).

Crystal Skull: 3.1x (9 years ago).

Iron Man 1: 3.2x (9 years ago)

Matrix Reloaded: 3x (13 years ago)

 

And that's it. Everything else - and there's a couple dozens films in there - falls below 3x. I think the pattern is clear.

 

So it seems to me that 3x is the absolute best case scenario for WW, and we should actually be looking at less than that given how few films have managed to get there in recent times, even with good WOM.  All in all, I'm not seeing those 300m predictions. Even a WOM wonder like the first Spider-Man film "only" managed 3.5x, 15 years ago. 

 

That said, I hope to be proven wrong. It would be nice to have WW buck that trend and become a rare box office surprise. But BO history is not on her side.

 

 

It can hold 7% worse than JW (with similar competition) and still cross $300M. Definitely possible.

[Johnny Tran]

47 minutes ago, Barnack said:

 

That was from the studio itself that told those outlets to tell us those numbers.

 

Outlets should have known it was a conservative estimate and treat it as such.  Instead the hate train began..  

[Zakiyyah6]

I don't think the trades had any slant really but other outlets did. I suppose I should just ignore them especially now that we have actual box office numbers. And I don't think it was some Grand conspiracy or anything. I just think that DC has gotten itself into a hole where people are Uber skeptical so they're just going to report on most stories in a negative fashion, regardless of whether they should. I do wish that we had more professionalism in movie entertainment journalism.

Edited June 5, 2017 by Zakiyyah6

[The Panda]

If you adjust for inflation you can even compare WW to Transformers (which did open on a Wednesday, but it still would have managed well over 3x with a Friday opening)

 

Theres a few other comps you can compare to as well.

[The Panda]

5 minutes ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

I don't think the trades had any slant really but other outlets did. I suppose I should just ignore them especially now that we have actual box office numbers. And I don't think it was some Grand conspiracy or anything. I just think that DC has gotten itself into a hole where people are Uber skeptical so they're just going to report on most stories in a negative fashion, regardless of whether they should. I do wish that we had more professionalism in movie entertainment journalism.

 

Please don't spread that shitty gamergate nonsense to movies too.

 

[cory]

1 minute ago, Negative Panda Covfefe said:

If you adjust for inflation you can even compare WW to Transformers (which did open on a Wednesday, but it still would have managed well over 3x with a Friday opening)

 

Theres a few other comps you can compare to as well.

It opened on a Monday and it still did over 3x when you take out its Mon-Thurs gross. Insane.

[PPZVGOS]

So, pretty soon, the year's number 2, 3,4 and 5 movies will all be CMB-based. 

 

Superhero fatigue imminent? 

[cory]

13 minutes ago, PPZVGOS said:

So, pretty soon, the year's number 2, 3,4 and 5 movies will all be CMB-based. 

 

Superhero fatigue imminent? 

Nah, Spider-Man is the only traditional entry, and then it's a 5 month gap until Ragnarok and JL.

 

We saw Apoc suffer last year because it followed 2 traditional CMBs.

 

Next year however, will be the true test.

Edited June 5, 2017 by cory

[KP1025]

8 minutes ago, PPZVGOS said:

So, pretty soon, the year's number 2, 3,4 and 5 movies will all be CMB-based. 

 

Superhero fatigue imminent? 

 

Star Wars and Beauty and the Beast should both comfortably be #1 and #2 respectively (if you're talking this year), but otherwise I agree it is looking like the next 5 films on the list will all be CBMs.

[PPZVGOS]

6 minutes ago, cory said:

Nah, Spider-Man is the only traditional entry, and then it's a 5 month gap until Ragnarok and JL.

 

We saw Apoc suffer last year because it followed 2 traditional CMBs. 

 

 

My point is that SH movies still rule the roost. I expect that Spiderman, Thor 3 & JL will all do well. It's quite likely that 7 out of the year's Top 10 will be CMB movies, or 7 out of the Top 11/12. Only exceptions, Star Wars 8 (certain number 1) B&B and Despicable Me 3. 

 

1 minute ago, KP1025 said:

 

Star Wars and Beauty and the Beast should both comfortably be #1 and #2 respectively (if you're talking this year), but otherwise I agree it is looking like the next 5 films on the list will all be CBMs.

 

Spiderman, Justice League and Thor 3 will also be in the Top 10. Logan will probably be pushed down to 11 or 12. 

[Zakiyyah6]

21 minutes ago, Negative Panda Covfefe said:

 

Please don't spread that shitty gamergate nonsense to movies too.

 

Please don't compare me to those gamergate cretins.