Monday #s - TLJ 21.6M

[Lancelot Gold]

3D is worth it for big blockbusters in my opinion. Even converted ones. Marvel has really gotten better at the process. Doctor Strange was totally worth it. I really enjoyed GotG2 in 3D as well. Transformers movies have been amazing too. Only reason I saw TLJ in Imax 2D is cause the theater I go to was bought out and stopped all imax 3D showings. I'll be going to the MN Zoo Imax screen, biggest screen in MN, to see in 3D there.

[TwoMisfits]

Off Star Wars...Coco had a 66% Mon drop (2nd highest in top 10, although partly due to good Sunday)...with this heading to some discount theaters Wed (still unbelievable to me) and with seemingly higher family competition with Jumanji and Ferdinand (and the trilogy, not the off-shoot, which demands screens) and with all the other openers just crushing holdover screen chances, does this have $200M in it or will theater drops tomorrow and this weekend sink it?

 

It's only $14M behind Moana right now and Moana had $248M+ in it, so you'd think $234Mish...but that Monday number is less than 1/2 of same Monday for Moana...even with slight school calendar change effects, will it be around as much to benefit from the early Jan school swap or will it get dropped too fast?

 

Edit: Moana kept 2500+ screens through Jan 12...

Edited December 19, 2017 by TwoMisfits

[EmpireCity]

2 minutes ago, Barnack said:

And it was what, at least the third 3D hollywood crazy, 50s, early 80s, and 2008 to 2013 or so, was it the biggest ? I can see the next one to stick and stay someone relevant if it is glassless, does not reduce brightness, no speed issues..... otherwise could go as it went the previous time 3d movie had some peak popularity.

The movie industry has been around 100+ years now and they have tried every craze and gimmick from 3D to 4D chairs to HFR to whatever.  The reality is only one thing has always stuck, and that a good ol' fashioned bright 2D image projected onto a crisp white screen with good sound.  

 

I don't think that will ever change unless they come up with something so mind blowing and cheap that they can put it in 5,000 theaters across the country from New York City and Los Angeles to some place in the rural mid-west.  

[redfirebird2008]

21 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

Well he seems to believe HDR is the future, he's raised the technological bar before he can do it again.

 

Anyone here catch Titanic 20th anniversary re-release? It was in this new HDR format... didn't get the re-relase here in the UK

 

I am curious about Dolby Vision, but so far it's only in AMC theaters for the most part. None of my local theaters have it. The closest AMC to me is around a 5 hour drive. Not doing that for Dolby Vision. The screen size is similar to a typical PLF. True IMAX (70mm or Laser) at 60+ feet tall is the only thing worth driving that distance.

[Plain Old Tele]

Just now, EmpireCity said:

The movie industry has been around 100+ years now and they have tried every craze and gimmick from 3D to 4D chairs to HFR to whatever.  The reality is only one thing has always stuck, and that a good ol' fashioned bright 2D image projected onto a crisp white screen with good sound.  

 

I don't think that will ever change unless they come up with something so mind blowing and cheap that they can put it in 5,000 theaters across the country from New York City and Los Angeles to some place in the rural mid-west.  

 

I'm really interesting in seeing Trumbull's crazy solution. Seems like it's essentially doable with existing tech. (Well, screen size would be an issue, but in theory you could lose some immersion and just go with an existing screen if you're a smaller/independent exhibitor).

[hw64]

8 minutes ago, Agafin said:

To the best of my knowledge, the UK doesn't track admissions. Those numbers are definitely incorrect though as there's no way that a movie like Avatar whose business was largely driven by 3D would have a ticket price which is under 5% of the average. In pretty much every country where grosses and admissions are available (Japan, Germany, France etc), Avatar's ticket prices were 20 to 50% higher than the average.

Average ticket price in 2009: £5.44

Average ticket price for Avatar: £5.69

 

That's not "under the average", it's over. You clearly misread.

[JB33]

@EmpireCity Looking at the box office trends from 2006, is there a chance that Star Wars being the huge brand it is can compensate a bit for those trends? The Monday drop obviously did hold true to the 2006 data, but I'm still wondering if we could see a bit better 2nd weekend for TLJ than most here are prognosticating.

[Porthos]

8 minutes ago, Barnack said:

And it was what, at least the third 3D hollywood crazy, 50s, early 80s, and 2008 to 2013 or so, was it the biggest ? I can see the next one to stick and stay someone relevant if it is glassless, does not reduce brightness, no speed issues..... otherwise could go as it went the previous time 3d movie had some peak popularity.

The key difference between this time and the 50s and 80s is 3D actually stuck around as a minority distribution release channel instead of disappearing completely/being a novelty/gimmick.

 

That is in fact noteworthy, IMO.  Cameron was in fact wrong about it being 'the future' (so far at least).  He wasn't wrong at all about it being an option for the future.  A slight difference, sure.  But 3D is still around post-Avatar and that does in fact say something.

[IronJimbo]

2 minutes ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

I am curious about Dolby Vision, but so far it's only in AMC theaters for the most part. None of my local theaters have it. The closest AMC to me is around a 5 hour drive. Not doing that for Dolby Vision. The screen size is similar to a typical PLF. True IMAX (70mm or Laser) at 60+ feet tall is the only thing worth driving that distance.

well he claims it's beyond 70mm.

 

Quote

 

When Titanic hits theaters again in December, will you go see it?

Yeah, I want to see it in its entirety. I want to bring family and friends to see it in HDR. . . . Seeing a film that everybody knows, but seeing it in HDR in 3-D with proper light levels on a Dolby Vision laser projector—it’s really a glimpse of the future. . . . We had the whole film remastered in HDR, and it’s stunning. It’s beyond 70 millimeter, it’s beyond any format that you’ve seen before. What we’re trying to do is get Paramount and Fox to support the rollout of the Dolby Vision cinema project. It occurred to me, hey, we’ve got a movie that’s an evergreen that people love, why don’t we slam it into theaters and let people see it, not in a way it should be seen, but a way far beyond what any movie looks like right now, other than some new films are being authored in HDR? Obviously the [new] Avatar films will be [in Dolby Vision] as well, and in fact, we’re also going to do a conversion of Avatar to HDR. We’ll re-release that at some point down the line; I want to try to help this rollout of the Dolby cinemas, because I think it’s fantastic what they’re doing.

 

 

[IronJimbo]

3 minutes ago, hw64 said:

Average ticket price in 2009: £5.44

Average ticket price for Avatar: £5.69

 

That's not "under the average", it's over. You clearly misread.

Think he meant "no way it's less than +5% ticket price"

[redfirebird2008]

Just now, IronJimbo said:

well he claims it's beyond 70mm.

 

 

He means regular 70mm, which is a far cry from IMAX 70mm. The Dolby Vision screen size is not big enough to justify a 5 hour drive in my opinion. IMAX 70mm and IMAX Laser are worth it. Gigantic screen and crystal clear image.

[ThomasNicole]

30 minutes ago, TwoMisfits said:

Off Star Wars...Coco had a 66% Mon drop (2nd highest in top 10, although partly due to good Sunday)...with this heading to some discount theaters Wed (still unbelievable to me) and with seemingly higher family competition with Jumanji and Ferdinand (and the trilogy, not the off-shoot, which demands screens) and with all the other openers just crushing holdover screen chances, does this have $200M in it or will theater drops tomorrow and this weekend sink it?

 

It's only $14M behind Moana right now and Moana had $248M+ in it, so you'd think $234Mish...but that Monday number is less than 1/2 of same Monday for Moana...even with slight school calendar change effects, will it be around as much to benefit from the early Jan school swap or will it get dropped too fast?

 

Edit: Moana kept 2500+ screens through Jan 12...

There's still some schools in sessions... maybe it's because of that

 

And probably will have a really big bump tomorrow

 

And yes, $ 200M is basically locked unless it completely collapse, which doesn't seem realistic

Edited December 19, 2017 by ThomasNicole

[EmpireCity]

17 minutes ago, Porthos said:

The key difference between this time and the 50s and 80s is 3D actually stuck around as a minority distribution release channel instead of disappearing completely/being a novelty/gimmick.

 

That is in fact noteworthy, IMO.  Cameron was in fact wrong about it being 'the future' (so far at least).  He wasn't wrong at all about it being an option for the future.  A slight difference, sure.  But 3D is still around post-Avatar and that does in fact say something.

 

I think that is a bit misleading.  3D stuck around so long this time because of it being artificially propped up by the studios, RealD and theater owners trying to recover investment.  

 

If tomorrow theater owners had no pressure to play 3D, then I think it was fall to complete niche almost instantly.  

[SteveJaros]

Ruh-Roh, that $21m is ominously low ... maybe the weekend was front-loaded because people wanted to get Star Wars out of the way so they could see Jumanji and Father Figures this week? 

[YM!]

4 minutes ago, SteveJaros said:

Ruh-Roh, that $21m is ominously low ... maybe the weekend was front-loaded because people wanted to get Star Wars out of the way so they could see Jumanji and Father Figures this week? 

Is it enough for it top JL though? 🤔

[TwoMisfits]

7 minutes ago, SteveJaros said:

Ruh-Roh, that $21m is ominously low ... maybe the weekend was front-loaded because people wanted to get Star Wars out of the way so they could see Jumanji and Father Figures this week? 

You know you make fun of Jumanji...but apparently that last trailer led my teen and tween daughter to actually say they want to see it...I looked at them like they were nuts, but they were serious...totally different reaction than what they had to original preview months ago...

 

Now, I didn't say we'd go (we actually are talking about a discount outing to The Star or Coco since they are both unbelievably at my discount tomorrow, and that theater is also still doing BOGO deals til Dec 21 - I mean, can you beat $2/ticket?:)...but I was surprised...

 

They are gamers, so the video game thing that got more emphasized totally appealed...

 

EDIT: And of course the discount theater's lineup is pushing off my Star Wars viewing b/c $2 vs $13/person for a good movie...sigh...maybe for near New Years:)...

Edited December 19, 2017 by TwoMisfits

[redfirebird2008]

10 minutes ago, EmpireCity said:

 

I think that is a bit misleading.  3D stuck around so long this time because of it being artificially propped up by the studios, RealD and theater owners trying to recover investment.  

 

If tomorrow theater owners had no pressure to play 3D, then I think it was fall to complete niche almost instantly.  

 

Yeah, they spent a crazy amount of money overhauling their projectors and auditoriums for 3D. Cannot blame them for wanting to get their money back on the investment.

 

We had a situation in 2010 at my local theater where they literally had zero showtimes in 2D for Toy Story 3. This was not because there was zero demand for 2D shows, it was because the theater operator was refusing to offer the shows and trying to get their money back on the 3D expenses. I'm just glad over time they finally gave more choices for people who just wanted to watch a movie the old fashioned way.

[RandomCat]

6 minutes ago, YourMother the Edgelord said:

Is it enough for it top JL though? 🤔

You know...We have 20 pages of discussion, and plenty of people pointing out what 20M+ means here.

 

You'd think someone would actually read any of it.

[Brainbug]

17 minutes ago, SteveJaros said:

Ruh-Roh, that $21m is ominously low ... maybe the weekend was front-loaded because people wanted to get Star Wars out of the way so they could see Jumanji and Father Figures this week? 

 

[Porthos]

25 minutes ago, SteveJaros said:

Ruh-Roh, that $21m is ominously low ... maybe the weekend was front-loaded because people wanted to get Star Wars out of the way so they could see Jumanji and Father Figures this week?