Weekend Actuals (Page 150): Apes 56.3M | SMH 44.2M | DM3 19.4M | Baby 8.7M | Big Dick 7.5M | WW 6.8M | Wish Upon 5.5M | Tomatoes losing their power

[AHepBurn]

34 minutes ago, Harpospoke said:

 

Part of me is rooting for SM:H under SS so it will drive a nail into the coffin of one of the many "measurements for quality in art" that some use.   There are already a ton of them, but being able to say "Homecoming made less than Suicide Squad so box office doesn't prove anything either" would be a nice addition.

Suicide Squad is a bit of a sore spot for me. Because I think all of its individual parts - the cast, the costumes, the art design, the well deserved makeup recognition, etc. - were excellent. But sadly it was unfortunately undone by how all those individual parts were put together.

 

That said, I'm now actually actively rooting for SM:H to come underneath SS. Largely because it would be an interesting factoid and meta note in the overall history of the movie industry.

 

And also because that, in addition to the freakout over SS winning an Oscar, whatever level of disappointment I had in how SS came out would be vastly overshadowed by the sheer comedy it will have brought me. For me, SS just seems to be the gift that keeps on giving.

[grey ghost]

Using the percentage benefits the studios.

 

Most movies don't get anywhere close to 8.5 rating and "8.5" doesn't even sound that brag worthy even though it's a major accomplishment based on RT's standards.

[XO21]

 

Lmao y'all twist anything to the point of making it looking like a failure 

Edited July 15, 2017 by XO21

[AHepBurn]

38 minutes ago, Mulder said:

Wow guys Spider-Man: Homecoming drops the way most MCU movies drop and it's apparently now flopping. 

Never change BOT, never change lmao. 

Most Marvel movies don't get the amount of praise SM:H has gotten. Most Marvel movies don't have RDJ/IM, and thost that do consistently pulled $400mil DOM, $1bil WW in recent history. Most Marvel movies don't have Spider-Man, Marvel's most popular character. And most Marvel movies don't have all the above things yet are pulling in SM:H's numbers, which while "good" are below what the above factors dictate they should be. Hence the concern.

[The Futurist]

6 minutes ago, grey ghost said:

Using the percentage benefits the studios.

 

Most movies don't get anywhere close to 8.5 rating and "8.5" doesn't even sound that brag worthy even though it's a major accomplishment based on RT's standards.

 

That s a great point.

How many big spectacle movies have a 8+, 80+ MC score each year ?

3, 4 ?

[EmpireCity]

35 minutes ago, marveldcfox said:

Sadly, I was right about Apes 3 opening the lowest and grossing the least of the 3 apes flicks. But imagine if this hadn't received amazing reviews...probably wouldn't have done more than 45M OW.

 

Next Valerian 15M

This simply isn't the year for sequels no matter how good the reviews. Keeping that in mind, things are not looking good for Kingsman 2. If I was an exec at fox I would have pushed up Kingsman 2 to August. Sigh. Really want this to become the next big action/spy franchise. Hoping it matches atleast first one at the boxoffice domestically.

 

Kingsman will be fine.  

[MyMovieCanBeatUpYourMovie]

30 minutes ago, Barnack said:

 

That is mostly a misunderstanding of the RT score (arguably exclusively an misunderstanding of the RT score)

 

The same percentage of critic think that SpiderMan Homecoming was a 6/10 or more movie than Dark Knight, that does not mean they graded the 2 the same.

 

Dark Knight:

94%

Average Rating: 8.6/10

Reviews Counted: 324

Fresh: 304

Rotten: 20

 

SMH

93%

Average Rating: 7.6/10

Reviews Counted: 262

Fresh: 244

Rotten: 18

 

How much one is above to the average vs the other is significant, 8.6 v 7.6 is a lot.

 

If you want to combine the percentage and average Rotten Tomatoes score to get a better spread for the films, good way to do it, I think, would be to take the percentage and then multiply by the average as if it were a percentage.

 

Superhero films in 90% range on R.T.

 

So...

 

The Dark Knight (94 x .86) = 80.84

Spider-Man 2 (94 x .82)     = 78.02

Avengers (92 x .80)           = 73.6

Logan (93 x .79)               = 73.47 

Guardians Vol. 1 (91 x .78) = 70.98

Homecoming (93 x .76)     = 70.68

Wonder Woman (92 x .75) = 69.0

Civil War (90 x .76)           = 68.4

Doctor Strange (90 x .73)  = 65.7

 

Now, doing that gives you a much wider range for percentages that are very close and probably a better idea of general critical reception.  But Rotten Tomatoes would never do something like that because, to anybody who grew up in the U.S. educational system, those are not attractive numbers to stick in your marketing.  

 

The 60-69 range was a D in the places I went to school.  That's why you never see Metacritic scores used in advertising, IMO (at least I haven't).

Edited July 15, 2017 by MyMovieCanBeatUpYourMovie

[baumer]

2 hours ago, WrathOfHan said:

I think you're overestimating how wide appealing the film is. Just look at how The Big Sick is performing. Rural areas probably aren't going to go for Girls Trip.

 

Just like they didnt for Think Like A Man.

[Barnack]

9 minutes ago, straggler said:

I agree. RT is becoming all or nothing. It does not seem to be able to measure middle of the road.

 

There is still movie getting between 40 and 75 rt score (depending of what you define as middle of the road)

 

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/valerian_and_the_city_of_a_thousand_planets/

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/black_mass_2015

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/miss_sloane

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_bfg_2016

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/nocturnal_animals

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/avengers_age_of_ultron

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_secret_life_of_pets

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/trumbo

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/fantastic_beasts_and_where_to_find_them

 

 

You can use :

https://www.cinesift.com

 

To easily last all of them in recent year's, Birth of a nation, the last Potter, Age of Ultron, Alien Covenant, Beauty and the beast, Cafe Society, Jurassic World, last 2 hunger games, Central Intellligence, Crimson Peak, Life, Cars 3, Man From Uncle, Fate of the furious, there is a list of giant title or giant director with middle of the road RT score.

 

You could maybe take 500 recent title and break them down by category (0-20, 20-40, etc...) and do the exercise for movie from 2008 to 2010 and see if there is a shift in more all and nothing (with the best site above it would be easy), from a quick test it does not seem to be the case.

 

 

[baumer]

2 hours ago, That One Guy said:

 

This is not true.

 

You're right I'm short-changing it just a little bit. There was actually two things that happened in the movie and then it ended.

[DAR]

4 minutes ago, EmpireCity said:

 

Kingsman will be fine.  

Anything coming up that might surprise us or more of we're hitting the dead spot on the calendar 

[Xavier]

35 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

 

RT Tomatometer is not the equivalent of an average score. 

It is for the non initiated, and they buy tickets.

[baumer]

2 hours ago, filmlover said:

Yeah, I didn't love The Beguiled but to say "nothing happens" for most of the movie is being...small-minded.

 

Nothing happens. 

[Barnack]

5 minutes ago, MyMovieCanBeatUpYourMovie said:

The 60-69 range was a D in the places I went to school.  That's why you never see Metacritic scores used in advertising, IMO (at least I haven't).

 

Yeah you often hear people describing a movie has average and then give it a score way different than 5/10 at the end, like if average is 7/10 for them, because of the school system they grew up with were below 60% was failure and class average were between 70-80%.

 

Studio is the RT percentage maybe for the reason said above, but mostly I would think because it is the most well known and followed by audience, and they chosen it over the competition, one reason is that it is the only movie metric that exist that really use all the wide range of result between 0 and 100, almost none other do (probably none).

 

[Water Bottle]

I think SMH had crappy marketing. My sister saw a trailer before the Mummy and said it looked bad. Was shocked when I told her it had 93 percent on RT. Don't know if she saw it or not but the trailers didn't sell a lot of people on a new SM movie.

 

I don't care how good your reviews or your WoM is. Reviews and WOM only convince people on the fence to go see it. People who saw the trailer and decided not to see it? They will skip watching it in theaters.

 

As for Apes, I'm going to guess the problem was marketing. Lots of people noted it didn't look fun. As in it needed that Marvel humor everyone loves to hate on to do well in the summer. Don't know but it should have by all logic increased. Oh well.

 

Should be noted neither movies are a failure. I think Sony is very happy with SMH. FOX could be happier with Apes but still it should make them money.

[baumer]

1 hour ago, Cochofles said:

 

Let's not sugarcoat it: people always underestimate films with predominantly black casts. Expressions like "will it play between the coasts?" "rural areas won't go for it" and "it's a niche film" are basically code for "white people don't like to see black movies." Which I believe is BS. 

 

Yes! 1000 times yes. I know you and I have talked about this before and a few other posters have said the same thing. Just because the Tyler Perry films have taken a nosedive in the last few years doesn't mean that other well written and well-received films aimed  predominately at black people won't do well. And as I said... the producer of this film has quite a few hits under his resume so I think girls trip will do really well.

[Deep Wang]

1 hour ago, Cochofles said:

 

Why are so many people so sure that the Homecoming sequel will increase (I am genuinely curious)? I don't think that Wonder Woman 2, despite the undeniably strong word-of-mouth of WW, will increase. I would love if it did, but I would not bet on it.

 

I'm not certain it will, but at the same time, I think it's also silly to be certain it won't increase either.  

 

Wonder Woman will be hitting a peak much higher than SMH will, so the chances of it increasing are of course slim.  

 

A great Spider-Man sequel could easily increase now that the stink of the TASM movies has been cleaned off.   

[The Futurist]

The two most striking shots in SMH trailers weren't even in the freaking movie.

[John Marston]

3 minutes ago, Water Bottle said:

I think SMH had crappy marketing. My sister saw a trailer before the Mummy and said it looked bad. Was shocked when I told her it had 93 percent on RT. Don't know if she saw it or not but the trailers didn't sell a lot of people on a new SM movie.

 

I don't care how good your reviews or your WoM is. Reviews and WOM only convince people on the fence to go see it. People who saw the trailer and decided not to see it? They will skip watching it in theaters.

 

As for Apes, I'm going to guess the problem was marketing. Lots of people noted it didn't look fun. As in it needed that Marvel humor everyone loves to hate on to do well in the summer. Don't know but it should have by all logic increased. Oh well.

 

Should be noted neither movies are a failure. I think Sony is very happy with SMH. FOX could be happier with Apes but still it should make them money.

 

 

How did it have crapoy marketing when it opened well? It's just that it ls legs won't be great 

[AndyK]

As a matter of interest, what BO total were Spidey fans expecting ?

 

I expect its going to hit $350m, I don't see why anyone would be expecting more than that.