Weekend Actuals (Page 61): Kingsman 39M | It 29.8M | Ninjago 20.4M | AA 6.3M | mother! 3.3M | Friend Request 2M (lol)

[MCKillswitch123]

1 hour ago, a2knet said:

Annabelle1 was not one bit horror Ninjango. Made on a budget of only 6.5m, it brought 84 dom and 173 os.

The 257 ww is 39.5x the prod budget.

Yup, it wasn't their Ninjango. It was their Ninjago 

 

In all seriousness, if you're talking about being an underperformer for budget purposes, The Conjuring Universe will never have a Ninjago. The only movies of the franchise that are greenlit at higher budgets than at worst 25M will be the main series films (like Conjuring 2). Their spin-offs will probably top out at 15-20M budgets like Creation.

 

Annabelle was their Ninjago in terms of poor reception to a spin-off and a DOM total likely under 100M, which is a 1st for the series (well, A1 was the 2nd Conjuring franchise movie, but it's still the only one to pull that "feat" off).

 

But I guess you can compare Ninjago more easily to The Matrix Revolutions. Even though at least that made 100M+ DOM.

Edited September 23, 2017 by MCKillswitch123

[a2k]

3 minutes ago, Brainbug said:

 

 

thanks. i was searching in the wrong sub-forum

[Alli]

Hey...what the heck happened to the smileys?

[a2k]

9 minutes ago, MCKillswitch123 said:

Yup, it wasn't their Ninjango. It was their Ninjago 

 

In all seriousness, if you're talking about being an underperformer for budget purposes, The Conjuring Universe will never have a Ninjago. The only movies of the franchise that are greenlight at higher budgets than at worst 25M will be the main series films (like Conjuring 2). Their spin-offs will probably top out at 15-20M budgets like Creation.

 

Annabelle was their Ninjago in terms of poor reception to a spin-off and a DOM total likely under 100M, which is a 1st for the series (well, A1 was the 2nd Conjuring franchise movie, but it's still the only one to pull that "feat" off).

 

But I guess you can compare Ninjago more easily to The Matrix Revolutions. Even though at least that made 100M+ DOM.

low blow. that was a low blow. 

 

i think you were talking about ciritical reception while i was talking about profitability. i ignored critical reception cause i don't think Warner would have cared 2 hoots if they had a 6% RT movie like Emoji which did 3.5x to 85+ dom opposed to a 50% RT like Ninjago looking at 70m. so yes, looking at how low-budget horror is, even Crooked Man could churn a profit but at some point they will have to take a break on Conjuring spin-offs even at a low budget. imo Annabelle doesn't qualify just due to that ww = 39.5x the prod budget equation cause 39.5x is a little insane.

 

you right that like with ninjago, annabelle1 is their first badly received movie of it's franchise and they recovered amazingly well. never saw it coming: annabelle sequel beating a conjuring sequel.

Edited September 23, 2017 by a2knet

[MrFanaticGuy34]

Hmm? Wonder why a Star Wars-film isn't put in the near beginning of January instead? If that happened, we would have the first $100M+ opener there.

 

Or put a bigger blockbuster in October. Both January & October are the only months left without a $100M+ OW.

 

Much safer than going in a more competitive month.

[Jonwo]

10 minutes ago, MrFanaticGuy34 said:

Hmm? Wonder why a Star Wars-film isn't put in the near beginning of January instead? If that happened, we would have the first $100M+ opener there.

 

Or put a bigger blockbuster in October. Both January & October are the only months left without a $100M+ OW.

 

Much safer than going in a more competitive month.

Star Wars is never going to January when it can make huge money in summer and December 

 

I could see a Bond film go to October but that’s it really 

[MCKillswitch123]

19 minutes ago, a2knet said:

low blow. that was a low blow. 

 

i think you were talking about ciritical reception while i was talking about profitability. i ignored critical reception cause i don't think Warner would have cared 2 hoots if they had a 6% RT movie like Emoji which did 3.5x to 85+ dom opposed to a 50% RT like Ninjago looking at 70m. so yes, looking at how low-budget horror is, even Crooked Man could churn a profit but at some point they will have to take a break on Conjuring spin-offs even at a low budget. imo Annabelle doesn't qualify just due to that ww = 39.5x the prod budget equation cause 39.5x is a little insane.

 

you right that like with ninjago, annabelle1 is their first badly received movie of it's franchise and they recovered amazingly well. never saw it coming: annabelle sequel beating a conjuring sequel.

Ok now, I'm sorry  It was right there man, I just had to..... I'm so sorry, the asshole in me spoke louder than my conscience 

 

But yeah. Yes, I agree that if The Crooked Man stumbles, WB/NL will have to put the breaks on Conjuring spin-offs for a while. I think The Nun will do great, but Crooked Man..... I mean, he was definitely creepy and effective in The Conjuring 2, but unless you make that movie more unique and fresh compared to the others, I see audiences thinking it might be more of the same. Now, more of the same has worked like hell so far, but good wom can only carry for so long until something goes a little off. It depends on who they get to direct, what kind of vision do they have for it...... who knows. I do see them getting a little overconfident with Conjuring spin-offs, but I think this Ninjago thing might teach them to balance out main series + spin-off entries a little better. We might actually not see TCM until after The Conjuring 3 (though that would be risky, given how it was a Conjuring 2 creation).

 

And yes, the upgrade from the original to Creation is actually unprecedented in Hollywood. It's not the 1st time that a sequel outgrosses the original (Saw II and Insidious 2 both did that, off the top of my head... both of them James Wan-created franchises as well), but a prequel doing that and grossing 100M when the original didn't, despite opening SMALLER than the original for that matter, is spectacular. Even Paranormal Activity 3 did less than the 1st one (both at over 100M DOM). A 3x multiplier for a horror prequel is absolutely stunning, for the matter. Never doubt the Sandberg factor, it seems.

Edited September 23, 2017 by MCKillswitch123

[Boxofficerules]

2 minutes ago, MCKillswitch123 said:

And yes, the upgrade from the original to Creation is actually unprecedented in Hollywood. It's not the 1st time that a sequel outgrosses the original (Saw II and Insidious 2 both did that, off the top of my head), but a prequel doing that and grossing 100M when the original didn't, and opening SMALLER than the original for that matter, is spectacular. Even Paranormal Activity 3 did less than the 1st one (both at over 100M DOM). A 3x multiplier for a horror prequel is absolutely stunning, for the matter. Never doubt the Sandberg factor, it seems.

The dead August probably helped. If it was anything like that year GOTG and TMNT came out I doubt Creation would have made that much.

Edited September 23, 2017 by Boxofficerules

[Jonwo]

The Conjuring spinoffs at least are different enough from each other that you can watch them without needing to watch any other Conjuring films and all look and feel different from each other 

 

[WrathOfHan]

That's ok for Kingsman. A drop from early estimates to be sure, but 40M still looks good.

Very good for It.

JESUS @ Ninjago. I'm curious how legs will be on this. Theaters like to keep at least one family film around, but if this has bad legs, will they keep it around with the swath of October releases?

A very disappointing start for Stronger. It'll be kucky to expand into 100-200 more theaters.

mother!  

Shit hold for AA too.

Great hold for Home Again, and solid ones for THB and WR given the competition.

Great starts for Battle of the Sexes and especially Victoria and Abdul.

Friend Request LOL

[a2k]

2 minutes ago, MCKillswitch123 said:

Ok now, I'm sorry  It was right there man, I just had to..... I'm so sorry, the asshole in me spoke louder than my conscience 

 

But yeah. Yes, I agree that if The Crooked Man stumbles, WB/NL will have to put the breaks on Conjuring spin-offs for a while. I think The Nun will do great, but Crooked Man..... I mean, he was definitely creepy and effective in The Conjuring 2, but unless you make that movie more unique and fresh compared to the others, I see audiences thinking it might be more of the same. Now, more of the same has worked like hell so far, but good wom can only carry for so long until something goes a little off. It depends on who they get to direct, what kind of vision do they have for it...... who knows. I do see them getting a little overconfident with Conjuring spin-offs, but I think this Ninjago thing might teach them to balance out main series + spin-off entries a little better. We might actually not see TCM until after The Conjuring 3 (though that would be risky, given how it was a Conjuring 2 creation).

 

And yes, the upgrade from the original to Creation is actually unprecedented in Hollywood. It's not the 1st time that a sequel outgrosses the original (Saw II and Insidious 2 both did that, off the top of my head... both of them James Wan-created franchises as well), but a prequel doing that and grossing 100M when the original didn't, and opening SMALLER than the original for that matter, is spectacular. Even Paranormal Activity 3 did less than the 1st one (both at over 100M DOM). A 3x multiplier for a horror prequel is absolutely stunning, for the matter. Never doubt the Sandberg factor, it seems.

 

Balancing spinoffs and main series will be important. With Lego franchise they released 2 spin-offs back to back that too in the same year.

I think if they are serious about going ahead with Crooked Man we will see an appearance from him in Conjuring3 too.

 

Creation beating Annabelle with a smaller ow is itself creditable but that a spin-off sequel beat a main-film sequel (Conjuring2, that too a well received one and which opened bigger) is also very surprising.

[WrathOfHan]

I feel like Ninjago would have performed this way anywhere. There's only so much you can do with a poorly received product. 

Edited September 23, 2017 by WrathOfHan

[CJohn]

43 minutes ago, MCKillswitch123 said:

Yup, it wasn't their Ninjango. It was their Ninjago 

 

In all seriousness, if you're talking about being an underperformer for budget purposes, The Conjuring Universe will never have a Ninjago. The only movies of the franchise that are greenlit at higher budgets than at worst 25M will be the main series films (like Conjuring 2). Their spin-offs will probably top out at 15-20M budgets like Creation.

 

Annabelle was their Ninjago in terms of poor reception to a spin-off and a DOM total likely under 100M, which is a 1st for the series (well, A1 was the 2nd Conjuring franchise movie, but it's still the only one to pull that "feat" off).

 

But I guess you can compare Ninjago more easily to The Matrix Revolutions. Even though at least that made 100M+ DOM.

The Conjuring 2 was so expensive because they spent like 15M in reshoots. It was crazy. Wan asked to change the main demon in March of that year and had to reshoot a fuck ton of scenes. It wasn't The Nun originally. Of course, New Line/WB agreed immediately to please their visionary.

[filmlover]

Yeah, that's not good for Ninjago.

 

Disappointing numbers for Stronger too. People clearly just don't want to see movies about or centered around the Boston Marathon bombing.

 

Great start for Battle of the Sexes, though. Good numbers for Victoria & Abdul too.

[baumer]

3 hours ago, MrFanaticGuy34 said:

Hmm? Wonder why a Star Wars-film isn't put in the near beginning of January instead? If that happened, we would have the first $100M+ opener there.

 

Or put a bigger blockbuster in October. Both January & October are the only months left without a $100M+ OW.

 

Much safer than going in a more competitive month.

 

Because Christmas week is two weeks of massive grosses.  Why put the biggest film of the year in a month that doesn't lend itself to maximum viewing opportunity?

[miketheavenger]

Do you guys think Gyllenhaal could get his Oscar for Stronger? I know it's still really early in the awards season, but his role seems like something the Academy loves to reward.

[YM!]

Ironically WB has the worse luck when it comes to Fall animation unlike Sony Animation (which is doing shitty this year) which have consistently had hits in the September-October Corridor: HT1, HT2, Cloudy 1, and Cloudy 2 all did over $120M domestic and two of them had worse or the same reception as Storks and Ninjago. Open Season adjusts to $100M and Goosebumps is above both Storks and Ninjago.

Edited September 23, 2017 by YourMother

[filmlover]

1 minute ago, miketheavenger said:

Do you guys think Gyllenhaal could get his Oscar for Stronger? I know it's still really early in the awards season, but his role seems like something the Academy loves to reward.

Depends on how other contenders that haven't been seen yet (Hanks, DDL) fare. His film's low box office in September certainly makes it a challenge.

[KeepItU25071906]

22 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

JESUS @ Ninjago. I'm curious how legs will be on this.

Less than "Storks". It will be more frontloaded. Final 65 mln, not more.

[KeepItU25071906]

3 minutes ago, miketheavenger said:

Do you guys think Gyllenhaal could get his Oscar for Stronger? I know it's still really early in the awards season, but his role seems like something the Academy loves to reward.

Of course not. Even nomination. Oldman is a frontrunner