5-Day Weekend Thread | Saturday #s (Asgard p.109) - Coco 17.7, Justice League 15.7, Wonder 8.3, Thor: Ragnarok 6.4, Daddy's Home 2 5.3

[YM!]

Just now, TalismanRing said:

movies?  movie

 

And that had a little something to do with it being

 

1) Wonder Woman

2) The first big well reviewed female lead SH film

 

 

 

 

This is also very true but Aquaman has potential. I think $300M is happening for it.

[MrPink]

1 minute ago, TalismanRing said:

movies?  movie

 

And that had a little something to do with it being

 

1) Wonder Woman

2) The first big well reviewed female lead SH film

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah but this is gonna be the first well reviewed Jason Momoa film. 

[ThomasNicole]

17 minutes ago, TwoMisfits said:

Under $200M DOM without a nice amount WW (over and above Mexico) isn't gonna make this a "commercial success" b/c I doubt it has the toy/merchandise breakout of other Pixar movies...I mean, it is a rumored $225M Production budget, only $75M less than JL's supposed production budget...it needs big numbers, although not as big as JL...

I agreed it needs big numbers considering the budget, but right now i can't see this not doing big numbers hahah

 

I'm thinking $ 215M in USA [same 3.03x Moana have last year, but it could be higher with the lack of direct competition and the A+ cinemascore]

$ 55M in Mexico

$ 100M seems a lock in China [it could do $ 150M, let's see the next days]

 

Have a good appeal for japanese audiences, so it could do $ 50M there [or breakout like in China]

It will do great in Latin America, Europe should be good too

 

$ 750 - 800M is completely achievable in my vision

Sadly it will take months until we know for sure, since Japan for example opens just in march 2018

 

[MrPink]

1 minute ago, Sam said:

I think Aquaman will pull respectable number. It has a pretty good release date. It also has Wan as director, which makes me obligated to say that it’ll be a good movie too.

 

No idea what a Shazam is. 

 

MAH MAN

 

 

[Walt Disney]

Just now, ck5111 said:

There is, Aquaman is an entirely new aspect of a comic book movie that we've never seen before, under water?

 

It also benefits from Christmas and the fact that he's a fan favourite in JL (which, no one saw). 

But the same argument could have been made about the trippy visuals in Doctor Strange, which were truly awesome and never seen before. Yet Doctor Strange didn't hit $300M. I would think a number around Doctor Strange's domestic adjusted total right now. Of course that could change (either upwards or downwards) as we get closer to the movie's release date. But right now, I don't see the evidence to justify it.

[TalismanRing]

2 minutes ago, TwoMisfits said:

And if you look at the Casino bets, I said Coco's start would be really close to $70M, but I thought a touch under...it's right where I thought its opening would take it...and that opening isn't "OMG, this is so amazing" nor is it "OMG this is sure to crash and burn"...it's okay and its legs will tell the tale...I wouldn't get ahead of anything on this movie yet for a lot of reasons, but mainly...

 

1. Star Wars is coming...

2. Tons of openers at Xmas are coming...

3. It is not catching with little kids or being pushed by them - harder to sell an animated movie long term whose desire to see has to come from the parents, not the kids...

4. That Coco short - take it away and princess fans will feel burned...keep it and keep having adults feel burned...but it's a net problem right now...

 

Moana had Rogue One, not the next edition in the trilogy with Leia's last run...that more competition all by itself, so you can't presume a Moana run (and that movie also had a younger reach)...

 

I don't need to see the Casino bet I've been reading your posts about Coco for months.

 

How do you know it's not catching on with little kids?  Is this like your pronouncement only guys would like Thor while JL was a a four quadrant film?  One that would hurt Thor and then hurt Coco? While Coco wasn't also being hurt by The Star?

 

The Frozen short being there or not means shit except it cuts down on showtimes.  Like it - watch it. Don't - use it as a time to go to the concession stand and use the bathroom.  

 

Moana had Fantastic Beasts, Rogue One and Sing.  Coco has Star Wars and if you want to stan for it  Ferdinand.

 

 

 

[Deja23]

4 minutes ago, TwoMisfits said:

3. It is not catching with little kids or being pushed by them - harder to sell an animated movie long term whose desire to see has to come from the parents, not the kids...

4. That Coco short - take it away and princess fans will feel burned...keep it and keep having adults feel burned...but it's a net problem right now...

My little brother was the reason we watched Coco. And he refused to wait for the next day and has been listening to the soundtrack so I’m not so sure kids aren’t interested. Your kids and other kids you know may not be, but others can bring up examples of kids taken by the music and the colorful images. 

 

The short has always been a limited attachement for Coco, likely just something to increase initial interest. The commercials on Disney Channel mention that it’s for a limited time so I don’t see how people watching specifically for the short will feel burned by something that Disney has already made them aware of. 

[YM!]

Don’t come at Misfits for The Star since a long time ago I thought it’d be a smash hit.

 

 

 

[Dementeleus]

46 minutes ago, MrGlass2 said:

JL slightly above BvS? Deep Wang was right!

 

11 minutes ago, ck5111 said:

@grim22

 

 

FWIW, Deep Wang was right.  

[Rumpot]

13 minutes ago, TwoMisfits said:

And if you look at the Casino bets, I said Coco's start would be really close to $70M, but I thought a touch under...it's right where I thought its opening would take it...and that opening isn't "OMG, this is so amazing" nor is it "OMG this is sure to crash and burn"...it's okay and its legs will tell the tale...I wouldn't get ahead of anything on this movie yet for a lot of reasons, but mainly...

 

1. Star Wars is coming...

2. Tons of openers at Xmas are coming...

3. It is not catching with little kids or being pushed by them - harder to sell an animated movie long term whose desire to see has to come from the parents, not the kids...

4. That Coco short - take it away and princess fans will feel burned...keep it and keep having adults feel burned...but it's a net problem right now...

 

Moana had Rogue One, not the next edition in the trilogy with Leia's last run...that more competition all by itself, so you can't presume a Moana run (and that movie also had a younger reach)...

On social media this movie seems very well regarded by Mexican posters and it comes at a time when recent politics have made many feel slighted.  I still see that as an unquantifiable but potentially very large tailwind.  The movie is clearly well regarded by other demographics as well.  As for children, I have no insights except for a few examples which doesn't give me an idea how it stacks vs other animated movies - I will say I can see how it would have an older appeal than a movie with talking animals but it seems perfectly entertaining for 7 and older to me.  Better appeal to adults is not a bad thing either and may help weekdays.

 

The Frozen short needs to go.  I think most telling to me is a few Mexican posters saying how beautifully that it represented them but annoyance that the authenticity is hurt by this frozen short.  If the movie is going to be driven by a lot of repeat watching from this demo then it will unquestionably hurt the legs to make them watch something they hate over and over.

 

To be clear here I'm not making any sort of political/social statement myself but trying to analyze what I am seeing.

Edited November 26, 2017 by Rumpot

[ddddeeee]

9 minutes ago, Sam said:

I think Aquaman will pull respectable number. It has a pretty good release date. It also has Wan as director, which makes me obligated to say that it’ll be a good movie too.

 

No idea what a Shazam is. 

It's one of the words Tobey says to try and shoot web in Spider-Man. It's a funny line, but I can't see how they make a whole movie about it.

[YM!]

To be fair, there’s a lot of family competition in December for Coco (look at Jedi, Ferdinand, Jumanji and Showman) but Coco can benefit from Jedi double features and the fact that it has excellent WOM. I have no real reason to believe under $200M.

[TalismanRing]

3 minutes ago, YourMother said:

Don’t come at Misfits for The Star since a long time ago I thought it’d be a smash hit.

 

Shared B.O. insanity is no less insane.  

[Carlangonz]

Meanwhile in Mexico, Coco has become the first $1B pesos grosser (unadjusted).

[TwoMisfits]

8 minutes ago, YourMother said:

Don’t come at Misfits for The Star since a long time ago I thought it’d be a smash hit.

 

 

 

Yep, that's what happens with bold predicts 11 months out:)...but it's gonna beat the Mr. Fox club, so small victories:)...

[Walt Disney]

24 minutes ago, Sam said:

I think Aquaman will pull respectable number. It has a pretty good release date. It also has Wan as director, which makes me obligated to say that it’ll be a good movie too.

 

No idea what a Shazam is. 

Shazam is one of the most interesting comic book characters. Not because of the character, but because of the back story surrounding him. Shazam is actually a superhero named Captain Marvel. In the 1940's, Fawcett Comics created a superhero named Captain Marvel. Captain Marvel surpassed Superman in popularity and became the most popular superhero. DC's owner at the time sued in court for copyright infringement claiming the character was too similar to Superman because both had super human strength. For some reason, the court actually bought the argument and that basically put an end to Captain Marvel and Fawcett Comics' success.

 

Then, years later, DC's comic's owner bought Captain Marvel from Fawcett Comics. Since they owned the copyright to Superman, they didn't have to worry about any lawsuits. But, before they bought Captain Marvel, Marvel Comics established their own Captain Marvel comic book (the one that you have heard of). So DC had to change the name of their Captain Marvel comic book to Shazam.

Edited November 26, 2017 by Walt Disney

[ThomasNicole]

20 minutes ago, YourMother said:

To be fair, there’s a lot of family competition in December for Coco (look at Jedi, Ferdinand, Jumanji and Showman) but Coco can benefit from Jedi double features and the fact that it has excellent WOM. I have no real reason to believe under $200M.

Exactly... Moana last year have Trolls days before [the last big animation since Coco was DM3 months ago], and also face FB, SW and Sing

Still, it could manage a 3.03x

 

Coco doesn't have more competition than Moana, so it should do at least the same 3.03x

Under $ 200M seems really improbable 

[Sam]

6 minutes ago, Walt Disney said:

Shazam is one of the most interesting comic book characters. Not because of the character, but because of the back story surrounding him. Shazam is actually a superhero named Captain Marvel. In the 1940's, Fawcett Comics created a superhero named Captain Marvel. Captain Marvel surpassed Superman in popularity and became the most popular superhero. DC's owner at the time sued in court for copyright infringement claiming the character was too similar to Superman because both had super human strength. For some reason, the court actually bought the argument and that basically put an end to Captain Marvel and Fawcett Comics' success.

 

Then, years later, DC's comic's owner bought Captain Marvel from Fawcett Comics. Since they owned the copyright to Superman, they didn't have to worry about any lawsuits. But, before they bought Captain Marvel, Marvel Comics established their own Captain Marvel comic book (the one that you have heard of). So DC had to change the name of their Captain Marvel comic book to Shazam.

My statement was made in jest.

 

But thanks anyway.

[John Marston]

Did mredman talk about how incredible of a hold that is for JL yet?

Edited November 26, 2017 by John Marston

[The Panda]

3 hours ago, TalismanRing said:

I doubt that because:

 

1. There are more Avengers fans + GA audience fans than there are GOTG + GA fans.    

2. I don't see how watching IW will be more dependent on a core group of fans than CW was and in 2017 ticket prices CW would be $420m+ domestic (AOU about $480m)

3. CW was still for all the Avengers in it a Cap movie in tone and style

4. IW is more of an event movie than CW and also coming off Thor and Black Panther which might bring in new fans

 

1. Not necessarily, GOTG has much more Outside appeal from non-fans of the franchise as it doesn't require somebody to see 10 different movies to get what's going on.  The core Marvel fan base that is excited for IW also saw Guardians 2

 

2.  It will in the fact that IW requires even more movies to see than CW, diminishing returns.  The higher the amount of movies needed to see to understand the movie, the more you limit Outside appeal and the lower the ceiling