Weekend thread | IT Floats again in its 4th weekend: 17.3M...Cruise and Kingsman fight it out for 2nd: 17.016 and 17.0

[Jake Gittes]

1 hour ago, filmnerdjamie said:

Trying to think of the last example of that and I wanna say Batman Begins? And even that was still a blockbuster ($205M).

 

Pitch Perfect? Also John Wick pulled it off on a small scale. 

[Mojoguy]

Trying to think of the last example of that and I wanna say Batman Begins? And even that was still a blockbuster ($205M).

A film needs to be a success in order to get a sequel in the first place.

Flops don't get sequels that turn out to be huge hits, they are mostly forgotten.

[Barnack]

3 hours ago, Stutterng baumer Denbrough said:

Your problem Barnack is you use charts and graphs and you think that tells the whole story.  Sometimes there's more to the story than just numbers.  You should try being not so literal at times and just look at the films I've mentioned.  They are perfect examples.  

my statement was more often than not sequels do less than the previous entry, that is something that yes should be true or false by looking at say 700 sequels and looking at the percentage that did less vs than those that did more.

 

Has I said I looked at many study (released in different time), and from what I can remember they were all telling this. Now, you could look at all the sequels made between 1970 and 1980 or find a study that did it, showing that more than 50% of sequels did more than the previous entry to contradict what I am saying, but I'm not sure what would be the point of bringing a list of sequels that grew over the original has an argument, I could easily bring a bigger number of sequels that didn't and we would not be more advanced.

[Barnack]

23 minutes ago, Jake Gittes said:

 

Pitch Perfect? Also John Wick pulled it off on a small scale. 

Those 2 definitely:

 

Using that page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_film_sequels_by_box-office_improvement

 

And ranking them by original year of release, those 2 are the most recent with a giant 100% jump

 

Before those 2, movies that will have a spectacular jump on their sequel:

2005: Batman Begin

2004: Harold & Kumar

1999: Boondock Saints

1997: Austin Powers

1995: Desperado

 

Pretty much it post 1990.

Edited October 2, 2017 by Barnack

[baumer]

3 hours ago, Barnack said:

Those 2 definitely:

 

Using that page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_film_sequels_by_box-office_improvement

 

And ranking them by original year of release, those 2 are the most recent with a giant 100% jump

 

Before those 2, movies that will have a spectacular jump on their sequel:

2005: Batman Begin

2004: Harold & Kumar

1999: Boondock Saints

1997: Austin Powers

1995: Desperado

 

Pretty much it post 1990.

 

Bourne Identity

Captain America

Thor

Despicable Me

Ice Age

Insidious

21 Jump Street

LOTR

 

Shall I go on?

[Barnack]

17 minutes ago, Stutterng baumer Denbrough said:

 

Bourne Identity

Captain America

Thor

Despicable Me

Ice Age

Insidious

21 Jump Street

LOTR

 

Shall I go on?

What are those ? We were talking about movie that exploded on their sequels, not those who augmented (I just gave a wikipedia link with all of those)....

 

has for going on yes, there is over 4,000 sequel listed on IMDB:

http://www.imdb.com/search/title?keywords=sequel&title_type=feature&sort=release_date,asc

 

My point is that more than half of those did less than the original and that was something true in most era, listing 10 sequel for which it is untrue is not an argument against that point (my point is not that it never happen).

 

Even in your list of example, Many bourne sequel did less than the previous, many marvel movie did less than the previous, Hobbits did less than the previous and cancel out the 2 LOTR sequel, 2 Ice age sequel did less than the previous entry and cancel out the 2 that did more, Despicable me 3 did 136m less than despicable me 2, etc...

 

Come up with say a list of the 300 last sequels released and show that more than 50% did more than the previous entry (or just the second vs the first if this is your point) and will see, naming a bunch of counter example is not a solid argument here, because I can easily find 50 sequels that did less than the original (and that would not be a good argument to support my point either). There is many study on sequels box office out there, I'm not sure why you are arguing with a couple of cherry picked example.

Edited October 2, 2017 by Barnack

[Fancyarcher]

6 hours ago, YourMother said:

If there's a good thing about Disney and releasing at least they aren't making numerous sequels in the future to their animated movies in the next few years or try to do something like 4 animated movies are year like Sony and Universal. Dreamworks slate from 2019-2021 is all sequels except for Everest and Spooky Jack. Illumination is all sequels and an adaptation for the next few years.

I'm expecting to see a lot of underperforming sequels domestically in the next few years. It's gonna possibly be overkill in terms of sequels anyway.

 

6 hours ago, grey ghost said:

Let's not pretend Universal and WB are wining because of non-fanboy and non-franchise.

 

In fact, I'd argue it's impossible for a studio to win a year without franchises and fanboys.

 

Disney's biggest crime is pleasing their various fanbases.

You're not about the franchise part. The studio practically rely on them these days, Disney is no different. They happen to rely more on franchises then other studios though. 

Edited October 2, 2017 by Fancyarcher

[Fancyarcher]

5 hours ago, YourMother said:

That 5 films a year thing isn't set in stone but I'm pretty sure Universal is doing at least three a year (so 1-2 DWA/OD and 1 Illumination). As long as their quality animated movies and kids, animation will continue, audiences will just get more selective.

 

Minecraft, I can see it doing Angry Birds numbers. Rampage should make decent numbers. WAG however needs the most work. Scooby and Lego 2 should both do $150M/$300M at worst imo. (Maybe $100M/$300M for Scooby). TTG has the best chance for $100M between it and Smallfoot but both can go sub $100M/~$150M. Say what you want about SPA and Sony but they have been able to get 4 out of 6 of their films in the last two years get ~$200M WW, WAG only has 2.

I see Scooby doing around 130m domestically. Being released early in May with so far no real "kid film" competition, should help. 

[YM!]

1 minute ago, Fancyarcher said:

I see Scooby doing around 130m domestically. Being released early in May with so far no real "kid film" competition, should help. 

So do I. To be honest anything over $100M is a win for WB and WAG, since it'll likely be the only non Lego film to reach that mark unless TTG is decent and Smallfoot doesn't get screwed over like most WB animated September movies. However has their even been a time when a studio has two big movies in 2 back to back weeks (Scooby and GVK).

[Fancyarcher]

1 hour ago, Jonwo said:

Searchlight also has Goodbye Christopher Robin in two weeks which I have seen and liked but I’m not sure how it’ll fare in the US

Maybe around 7m. I doubt it's going to great business though.

[Fancyarcher]

6 minutes ago, YourMother said:

So do I. To be honest anything over $100M is a win for WB and WAG, since it'll likely be the only non Lego film to reach that mark unless TTG is decent and Smallfoot doesn't get screwed over like most WB animated September movies. However has their even been a time when a studio has two big movies in 2 back to back weeks (Scooby and GVK).

Recently Fox released Alien: Covenant and Diary of a Wimpy Kid: The Long Haul on the same day (lol). I think it's been a few years since a studio has released two decently budgeted two weekends in a row. Usually when a studio releases two films in the two weeks, they tend to be the popular opposite in term of audiences, which is exactly the case with Scooby and Godzilla Vs. Kong. 

Edited October 2, 2017 by Fancyarcher

[HesAPooka]

Quote

Nick Carpou, who heads up distribution for Universal Pictures, which is handling worldwide distribution for "American Made," said this debut is "the beginning of what will be a long playout and a successful one."

 

[YM!]

4 minutes ago, Fancyarcher said:

Recently Fox released Alien: Covenant and Diary of a Wimpy Kid: The Long Haul on the same day (lol). I think it's been a few years since a studio has released two decently budgeted two weekends in a row. Usually when a studio releases two films in the two weeks, they tend to be the popular opposite in term of audiences, which is exactly the case with Scooby and Godzilla Vs. Kong. 

True but they need to market Scooby as well. WAG isn't the best at marketing and their future isn't the brightest. However I'm hoping for the best. 

[Fancyarcher]

6 minutes ago, YourMother said:

True but they need to market Scooby as well. WAG isn't the best at marketing and their future isn't the brightest. However I'm hoping for the best. 

WAG just needs to make more quality films, and stop overusing on brands too much. That and they could make more exciting trailers too. Hopefully Scooby's good, at least. 

[YM!]

10 minutes ago, Fancyarcher said:

WAG just needs to make more quality films, and stop overusing on brands too much. That and they could make more exciting trailers too. Hopefully Scooby's good, at least. 

Trailers especially. Storks and Ninjago could've benefited from better and more frequent marketing. Better dates would help too, they should stick to February, and try the mid May or early November spots. However I think ironically TTG outgrosses Smallfoot and can do $100M if good. If I were to predict now:

TTG: $30M/$100M

SF: $20M/$70M

Lego 2: $60M/$200M

Scooby: $40M/$130M

Edited October 2, 2017 by YourMother

[BXT]

1 hour ago, Jake Gittes said:

 

Pitch Perfect? Also John Wick pulled it off on a small scale. 

 

Pitch Perfect is an old school kind of hit. Universal initially dumped it in 200 theaters but the WOM was so strong that it legged it to $65 million and then took off on home video. I haven't checked its DVD sales numbers recently but at one point it was outselling super-hero movies on home video. Pitch perfect 2 was always going to be huge.

[TalismanRing]

3 hours ago, grey ghost said:

What?

 

It's a biopic.

 

Accuracy helps explore the significance of the event and historical figures.

Margot Robbie is getting plaudits for Tonya Harding.  Jake G in Stronger is playing a man who is 5'6.  Lanky 6'5 John Lithgow just won an Emmy playing 5'6 rotund Winston Churchill.   Philip Seymour Hoffman played diminutive Truman Capote.  40 plus Matt Damon played an 18 year old in that Liberace movie with Michael Douglas.

[Fancyarcher]

4 minutes ago, YourMother said:

Trailers especially. Storks and Ninjago could've benefited from better and more frequent marketing. Better dates would help too, they should stick to February, and try them if May or early November spots. However I think ironically TTG outgrosses Smallfoot and can do $100M if good. If I were to predict now:

TTG: $30M/$100M

SF: $20M/$70M

Lego 2: $60M/$200M

Scooby: $40M/$130M

I don't see TTG making that much. My prediction is more like 25 / 83m. I see it doing fine business, the budget should be very small too.

 

I do think they would be wise to release most of these films in February or March though. 

[YM!]

8 minutes ago, Fancyarcher said:

I don't see TTG making that much. My prediction is more like 25 / 83m. I see it doing fine business, the budget should be very small too.

 

I do think they would be wise to release most of these films in February or March though. 

February or Mid May or Early November also works good too.

 

TTG seems like for Emoji Movie numbers but if it appeals to anyone over the 10 and perhaps bring the OG Titans back, I think $100M can happen moreso than Smallfoot. It should make nice cash though.

[Jonwo]

32 minutes ago, YourMother said:

True but they need to market Scooby as well. WAG isn't the best at marketing and their future isn't the brightest. However I'm hoping for the best. 

I'd say WAG is fine, Ninjago underperforming doesn't mean they're going to close up shop. WB learnt from BvS and Suicide Squad and so I think they'll change tact with future WAG films.

23 minutes ago, Fancyarcher said:

WAG just needs to make more quality films, and stop overusing on brands too much. That and they could make more exciting trailers too. Hopefully Scooby's good, at least. 

WAG has two critically acclaim films under their belt. It's not like SPA which seems to throwing ideas against the wall whereas WAG has a clear idea what they're doing with a mix of known titles and originals. Scooby as an animated film is a no brainer because it's one of WB's best selling brands. I think Bone should be their next original film as it's a fantastic comic and it would be quite fun as a film,