Jump to content
That One Guy

It: Chapter Two | September 6, 2019 | 11th Most Profitable Movie of 2019

Recommended Posts

Just now, The Horror of Lucas Films said:

 

1. I doubt it.

2, US is the only succesfull Horror storie this year, and even this one was a disappointment when it comes to legs.

3. Glass opened almost $20m below tracking, and underperformed just like pretty much every movie this year.

4. HTTYD3 grossed less than the second movie, and that one was considered a disaster back in 2014.

5. JW3 is one of the few succesfull stories this year. Too bad it's only one movie.

 

Do you really not see a trend formed this year? Are you blind? We received all the signs showing that people aren't going to movies anymore like they did in the past, and IT2 is just another one that will suffer from it.

 

1. Please show me when a drama over a 2.5 hours crossed the 200 mil mark in the past decade.

 

2. Again that was because of audience reception. There was very clear hype to see that movie. Your point was that no one wanted to see a non-Disney when people clearly did based on that opening weekend.

 

3. Tracking was at 50 mil. And it underperformed in terms of legs again because people didn't like it like they liked Split.

 

4. But HTTYD 3 still had the biggest opening in the franchise. I'm talking purely openings, not gross.

 

5. In your last comment H&S was the only success but now JW3 is the only success? 

 

Also, what you are talking about isn't a trend. People aren't going to the cinemas as much as before but there has to be a massive decrease for other studios from last year if people are going to just watch Disney movies. WB, and Universal will only end up having a small drop from last year (last year was both of their second best year of the decade) in terms of DOM gross, Sony will increase and Lionsgate has already increased from last year so your claims are completely unfounded. The only two companies that will have a huge loss this year are Paramount and the company that Disney actually bought.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't even seen Glass, it's just one of those echo chamber-y things where someone says its an "underperformer" so that becomes the narrative and everyone else repeats it.

Edited by MOVIEGUY
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, LawrenceBrolivier said:

I think the joke is that the movies don't have that scene, whereas the book does... the book has multiple instances of child sex in it, actually... King made some pretty questionable decisions during his most successful period as an author, and hinging his biggest novel (sales and size-wize) on the prospect of a bunch of 13 year olds all having sex with each other as some sort of holy ritual is one of the most questionable decisions in his entire career... 

I don't think the book should be skipped, but only because there's a lot of subtext about the town and the nature of communities to knowingly ignore and leave behind its vulnerable members... and almost none of that is really in the movie. But if those elements show up in the sequel, then I think its possible that the book could be skipped entirely... because otherwise it's one of those adaptations that improves on the novel considerably. 

 

So far as its box office prospects... I think IT will do just fine. Even if people aren't going to movies as much because it's become the amusement park... IT is considered one of the best rides to go on... Scheduling is going to help it... everyone's going to be in the mood to see something scary, and they already know they like this, because they saw part 1 and loved it a couple years ago...

honestly, this children gang-bang part will attract online outrage if it was released in today world.

 

IT2 has everything to retain its audience so far, well-received predecessor, great marketing campaign, the novelty of pennywise is still there and horror experience is harder to be replicated at home. Domestic 250m and WW's 650m is where I am thinking.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, The Horror of Lucas Films said:

 

The Revenant grossed almost $200m, despite not having a popular director behind it drawing audiences like the combo of QT + Leo. Plus, it's a far less acessible movie for audiences, and it was released in JANUARY. Do you really want me to believe that OUATIH couldn't have grossed $200m few years ago?

The Revenant was a revenge western with an easy hook and visuals that begged to be seen on the big screen, released in the peak of the Oscar season and benefitting massively from being the most nominated movie of the year and the one for which Leo was finally gonna win. OUATIH is a 160-minute movie about TV actors hanging out in LA 50 years ago. A combination of names doesn't just magically guarantee you a big box office gross. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its a little too early to declare the death of non-Disney films. We all knew what we were in for, Disney had so much massive IP playing this year no one should be surprised about the outcome. But for many of the non-Disney under-performers, there were clear reasons for why they disappointed. Did Glass's performance truly surprise anyone? The film's ending was divisive and it failed to match the previous two films in terms of quality. I would argue it performed just fine everything considered. Looking at each of the under-performers individually, they either represented big steps down in terms of quality, were part of fading franchises or played too damn close to some of the biggest movies of all time. Its not entirely the fault of moviegoers for why these films struggled at the BO. 

 

IT2 is playing far away from the Disney tentpoles and its offering something different from what moviegoers have gotten from the glut of massive Disney IP this year. Horror has also thrived in this new movie world order and I honestly have no worries about the film's quality thanks to Andy Muschietti and what we've seen in the trailers. Happy with an OW above 80m? I cant believe we have gotten to this point. I personally dont see any trend that would suggest a massive fall off for this movie, instead I see many movies whose performances makes total sense in retrospect. 

 

I would be absolutely shocked if this film were to open below 100m and I would not be surprised to see this film take the R-rated opening weekend record. I would stake real money on the former.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Justin4125 said:

I think its a little too early to declare the death of non-Disney films. We all knew what we were in for, Disney had so much massive IP playing this year no one should be surprised about the outcome. But for many of the non-Disney under-performers, there were clear reasons for why they disappointed. Did Glass's performance truly surprise anyone? The film's ending was divisive and it failed to match the previous two films in terms of quality. I would argue it performed just fine everything considered. Looking at each of the under-performers individually, they either represented big steps down in terms of quality, were part of fading franchises or played too damn close to some of the biggest movies of all time. Its not entirely the fault of moviegoers for why these films struggled at the BO. 

 

 

Yep.

 

Glass = Sucked (also came off a Meh previous film, and Unbreakable never really blew up in popularity since release)

 

Lego Movie 2 = Meh (also kids had 12 Lego Games, 2 Lego Movies, 11 Direct-To-Dvd Lego films, 11 Lego TV Specials, and 10 Lego TV shows featuring the exact same humour between Lego Movie 1 & 2. The kids got sick of it. Even Marvel don’t pump out that much content. That’s fucking crazy).

 

Pets 2 = Never saw it (Ad campaign also played way too much like the first film, and they didn’t really explain to us why we need to leave our house to this. Parents of small kids were also content with letting their kids watch the 10 trailers for the film rather than take em to see it),

 

Godzilla 2 = sucked (also waited too long after the first sucky film)

 

Detective Pikachu = Meh (also way too slow for kids. Pokemon’s being based around brain-dead creatures with no personality which are all ultimately disposable didn’t build the brand loyalty they wanted. People saw Charizard in the trailer, why do they need to go see him in the film?)

 

Shazam = Good (also bad release date. Going smaller with the advertising to account for the films smaller budget also wasn’t that wise).

 

Dark Phoenix = who cares

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, AJG said:

Shazam = Good (also bad release date. Going smaller with the advertising to account for the films smaller budget also wasn’t that wise).

WB marketing also sucks ass

  • ...wtf 1
  • Not Cool 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/31/2019 at 6:58 PM, The Futurist said:

3h movies is the new 2h.

 

Has movie get back to the length they were back in the old days, make you wonder if the 2H maximum run time of the VHS (and/or print-cost) didn't had some impact

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Horror of Lucas Films said:

 

The Revenant grossed almost $200m, despite not having a popular director behind it drawing audiences like the combo of QT + Leo. Plus, it's a far less acessible movie for audiences, and it was released in JANUARY. Do you really want me to believe that OUATIH couldn't have grossed $200m few years ago?

 

We already had QT+Leo released in the past, the excellent Django Unchained went to do 162M (184M adjusted), must be easy to believer than it would have been possible for OUATIH to not reach 200M a few year's ago.

 

The giant spectacle/Lubezki shoot actions like Gravity/epic/must been seen in theater presented in the trailers for The Revenant were important factor:

 

 

Edited by Barnack
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Revenant is pretty straight-forward even if it's 2 1/2 hours long, plus it opened wide during Oscar season with the hype around Leo finally getting his Oscar win.

Edited by cookie
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, The Horror of Lucas Films said:

 

Spider Man is part of MCU, it doesn't count. OUATIH is doing well, but if it were released few years ago, a movie with QT + Pitt + Leo would be grossing $250m, not $150m. HAS is one of the few bright stories in a year full of disappointments.

 

I'm not assuming people won't watch it because it doesn't have a Disney logo, I'm assuming people will skip it like they did with pretty much every single movie this year, since they only care for one kind of movie these days.

In absolutely no scenario would a film with the pacing and narrative of OUATIH have grossed $250 million 3 years ago, or now.

Edited by PDC1987
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, The Horror of Lucas Films said:

2, US is the only succesfull Horror storie this year, and even this one was a disappointment when it comes to legs.

 

Yet made almost exactly the same as GO in total. What sort of legs were you expecting for a R-Rated Horror film with a hot (i.e. has a following) director that exploded to a $71 million OW?

 

And I'm pretty sure WB views ACH a success after topping $70 million domestically alone on a production cost of $20 million or under, and TCOLL topping $54 million domestically on a $9 million production cost. Same with Sony after ER topped $57 million domestically on a $9 million production cost.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw 8 minutes of the movie. What I saw really, really good. It's the restaurant scene so it gave good chance to showcase the cast's chemistry (which was amazing and hilarious). Muschetti also seems to be showing off his directing skills a bit more (with the editing and camera work) in this movie and Benjamin Wallfisch's score is great again. 

 

Oh yeah, and Bill Hader was definitely the best here. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, lorddemaxus said:

Saw 8 minutes of the movie. What I saw really, really good. It's the restaurant scene so it gave good chance to showcase the cast's chemistry (which was amazing and hilarious). Muschetti also seems to be showing off his directing skills a bit more (with the editing and camera work) in this movie and Benjamin Wallfisch's score is great again. 

 

Oh yeah, and Bill Hader was definitely the best here. 

Did you go see the first one's re-release to be able to see that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, The Horror of Lucas Films said:

 

2, US is the only succesfull Horror storie this year, and even this one was a disappointment when it comes to legs.

 

 

how is Us the only successful horror movie this year? name me one 1 horror wide release that flopped this year. everything did great to fine from what I've seen. 

Escape Room 9M budget/155M WW
Pet Sematary 21M budget/112M WW
Happy Death Day 2 9M budget/64M WW
Midsommar 9M budget/31M (P&A was mostly just social media so this is fine)
Brightburn 6M budget/32M WW
Annabelle 3 27M budget/211M WW
The Curse of La Llorona 9M budget/122M (this is actually more impressive than Annabelle tbh..)
The Prodigy 6M budget/19.7M WW
Child's Play 10M budget/44M WW
Ma 5M budget/60M WW

:thinking:


 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • ...wtf 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The book is an absolute must read, it's also 1300 pages +, but well worth it. I'm really waiting for the director's cut for chapter one (which Barbara Muschietti addressed a few months ago on IG, it IS coming), and there will be one for chapter two as well. 

 

I feel the first film is 20-30 min away from being great, more character moments, let it breathe a bit more. About the infamous "gang bang" scene, it is weird and seems like a really odd choice initially but King explained the rationale back in the day, and it does work and it does make sense in the way he explains it. But even Fukunaga who had some extreme stuff in his draft, said no no to including the scene. It's meant for the book only, it would just be too iffy to be seen on screen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.