Weekend Thread 7/7-7/9 | ABSOLUTELY NO SPOILERS ALLOWED | SMH 117M, DM3 34M, BD 12.5M, WW 10.1M, TF5 6.3M, Biggus Dickus 3.65

[grey ghost]

12 minutes ago, Spidey Freak said:

Hathaway's Catwoman was verily watered down. Pfeiffer's Catwoman was terrifically acted and written, but I still feel that character should have been Poison Ivy and not Catwoman. Uma Thurman played a very superficial version of Ivy but god bless her for having loads of fun with it. 

 

I'm scared for Gotham City Sirens now. They are possibly the most complex female figures in comics and while I don't find Ayer offensive like many other folks do, I would hate to see this movie savaged by the critics like SS, or worse, like Catwoman.

 

No way it could be as bad as Catwoman.

 

They could film Batgirl taking a dump for 90 minutes and it would still be ten times better than Catwoman.

[Premium George]

Also iron man had the added story of rdj's comeback 

[MrGlass2]

13 minutes ago, grey ghost said:

 

Okay, I'll play your game.

 

How was the risk and reward bigger for Rocky than it was for Iron Man?

 

I mean, Iron Man wasn't even #1 for its year. Rocky was #1 in 1976.

 

If there is one movie that represents the risk and reward of early MCU, it would have to be The Avengers (that won its year). To be fair, it was made possible by IM1.

[Subzero]

6 minutes ago, baumer said:

Nothing yet on twitter for new numbers.

Faaack.

 

@baumer I don't know if FORBES count, but seems like they have the WW number ... they said she doppred 37% 9.8M for 6th weekend. So a little less than estimated.

Probably due to the Sunday drop

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2017/07/10/wonder-woman-box-office-nevertheless-she-persisted/#48c1093d3f62

 

As to whether it gets past Spider-Man or Iron Man 3 notwithstanding), it’s closer than I would have guessed even a week or two ago. Its $9.8 million sixth weekend was just behind Spider-Man and way ahead of Iron Man 3 ($10.3 million and $5.73m respectively) but with a larger drop (-28% and -31%) and a smaller 38-day total ($370m and $394m). Iron Man 3 wasn’t the leggiest blockbuster of our age, so it was essentially done by end of its second month. Spider-Man had another $33m to go, which if Wonder Woman follows suit puts it over/under $402m.

[Brainiac5]

3 minutes ago, baumer said:

 

My advantage is I was born in 1972 so even though I don't remember much about Superman at the theater I do recall 1989 pretty much with Crystal clarity. I'm far from a comic book fan but I just know that Superman and Batman were massive movies when they first came out.

I was born in 1984 and as far as I can remember, 

Ghostbusters,Batman 89 and Superman 79was still around and talked about years later.

Hell even when I was allowed to watch films on my own via HBO those few where still being handled as if they came out the year before.

[TwoMisfits]

1 hour ago, Wrath said:

I agree. The problem with the stakes being too high, a world-sized threat, is that there's no chance of failure. If the Avengers fail to stop Ultron, humanity is done along with all the movies. Therefore there's no plausible chance the heroes will fail. 

 

But if Cap is trying to stop Hydra from robbing Ft Knox, you don't know how it'll turn out because Hydra could totally win, which would probably serve as a stepping stone to a future plot-point. Smaller stakes are actually more interesting.

 

AMEN!  This is what I was getting at a few days ago...my spouse and I joke that we struggle so much to read these "OMG event series" comics with multi-crossovers b/c they take forever and you know how they have to end b/c when the entire universe is at risk, you just can't have the heroes lose...

 

Same concept applies to the movies...

[grey ghost]

10 minutes ago, ZeeSoh said:

 

Based on budget and resultant box office Rocky was a bigger pay off in percentage terms than IM. 

 

But anyone who knows anything about the marvel situation and the gamble they took with IM production knows how huge the risk they were taking was. If IM had failed not only would Marvel lose hundreds millions of dollars but would be hundreds of millions of dollar in debt and would lose the right to almost all of their remeining major characters including the avengers. To suggest that the gamble and risk was greater with rocky is laughable. 

 

Also in terms of box office. Rocky movies on average adjust to less than IM movies adjusted in domestic market. And worldwide rocky is no where near to IM in terms of popularity

 

Exactly!

 

I would only add that the reward wasn't only Iron Man's box office revenue but the full amount of revenue earned from the entire MCU franchise, which is an ungodly amount of bread.

[MrGlass2]

2 minutes ago, TwoMisfits said:

 

AMEN!  This is what I was getting at a few days ago...my spouse and I joke that we struggle so much to read these "OMG event series" comics with multi-crossovers b/c they take forever and you know how they have to end b/c when the entire universe is at risk, you just can't have the heroes lose...

 

Same concept applies to the movies...

To be honest superheroes rarely fail in movies. Or heroes in general.

Edited July 10, 2017 by MrGlass2

[Subzero]

2 minutes ago, Brainiac5 said:

I was born in 1984 and as far as I can remember, 

Ghostbusters,Batman 89 and Superman 79was still around and talked about years later.

Hell even when I was allowed to watch films on my own via HBO those few where still being handled as if they came out the year before.

 

Heck we are still talking about today lol

[Brainiac5]

5 minutes ago, MrGlass2 said:

 

I mean, Iron Man wasn't even #1 for its year. Rocky was #1 in 1976.

 

If there is one movie that represents the risk and reward of early MCU, it would have to be The Avengers (that won its year). To be fair, it was made possible by IM1.

When Marvel was brought by Disney nothing was a risk anymore.

Im not hating but Disney has been proven to be more successful than any company in history.

The Company actually have an 99.9% success rate.

[titanic2187]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2017/07/10/wonder-woman-box-office-nevertheless-she-persisted/#121a31a13f62

'Wonder Woman' Box Office: Nevertheless, She Persisted

WW box office is persisted as the forbes author, he just keeping throwing WW at us DAILY!!!

[Brainiac5]

1 minute ago, Subzero said:

 

Heck we are still talking about today lol

Which is why it is impossible for today's DcEu movies to live up to those standards.

Those films were the first of thier kind.

 

[TwoMisfits]

2 minutes ago, MrGlass2 said:

To be honest superheroes rarely fail in movies. Or heroes in general.

 

One reason The Dark Knight was so amazing is that Batman couldn't save and solve everything and people died...low stakes can bring immense drama...

 

 

[grey ghost]

7 minutes ago, MrGlass2 said:

 

I mean, Iron Man wasn't even #1 for its year. Rocky was #1 in 1976.

 

If there is one movie that represents the risk and reward of early MCU, it would have to be The Avengers (that won its year). To be fair, it was made possible by IM1.

 

 

Some of you guys don't get it.

 

If Iron Man flopped there would be no MCU.

 

The MCU has made over 12 billion dollars with no signs of slowing down.

 

That doesn't include the money from home video, tv rights, and merchandising.

[Subzero]

Just now, Brainiac5 said:

Which is why it is impossible for today's DcEu movies to live up to those standards.

Those films were the first of thier kind.

 

 

Yep, I remember watching those over and over .... and even acted like them every chance I get in goofing around with my buddies .. those were crazy times.

[Chaz]

3 minutes ago, Brainiac5 said:

When Marvel was brought by Disney nothing was a risk anymore.

Im not hating but Disney has been proven to be more successful than any company in history.

The Company actually have an 99.9% success rate.

Uh....no.

[miketheavenger]

Still no actuals? Is Sony looking in Puerto Rico to get Homecoming over SM1's OW or why does it take so long?

[JohnnyGossamer]

Batman Forever was HUGE. Didn't hurt Bats. Batman and Robin though... Whoa. Killed it.

[Cochofles]

4 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2017/07/10/wonder-woman-box-office-nevertheless-she-persisted/#121a31a13f62

'Wonder Woman' Box Office: Nevertheless, She Persisted

WW box office is persisted as the forbes author, he just keeping throwing WW at us DAILY!!!

 

Again, an entertainment reporter at a magazine about money, finances and capitalism continuously covering a box office phenomenon? Shocking!  

[TwoMisfits]

Just now, grey ghost said:

 

 

Some of you guys don't get it.

 

If Iron Man flopped there would be no MCU.

 

The MCU has made over 12 billion dollars with no signs of slowing down.

 

That doesn't include the money from home video, tv rights, and merchandising.

 

There would be no MCU right now as it is...but someone would have bought Marvel for peanuts (rather than its windfall)...probably Disney again...and eventually, they would have looked for a different starting character and a different concept and tried another movie...and if that worked, they'd have kept going...