Tuesday Numbers (Dec 26): TLJ 27.7, Jumanji: 17.1, PP3 7.4, TGS 5.1 (actuals/estimates)

[wildphantom]

2 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

Whats more likely, >650m or <600m

Hard to say at this point. 

But I don’t think it’s getting anywhere near $700 million. 

[YM!]

5 minutes ago, MrGlass2 said:

Don't blame TLJ for the weak legs, it is the toxic WOM from TFA and R1 finally affecting the franchise!

That only works for OW.

[LonePirate]

2 minutes ago, MrGlass2 said:

Don't blame TLJ for the weak legs, it is the toxic WOM from TFA and R1 finally affecting the franchise!

Snark aside, it is possible there is some franchise fatigue at play here. Some people who saw TFA 5 or 6 times may only be seeing TLJ 3 or 4 times. Also, the running time may be inhibiting some people who would otherwise attend multiple showings in the same day. Then again, maybe audiences just don't like the film as much. Plus, Kylo Ren is no Darth Vader as far as villains are concerned.

[JonathanLB]

26 minutes ago, wildphantom said:

I fail to see how TLJ is going to go near $700 million as it stands. 

 

$650 million seems the limit to me. 

 

I don't think it hits $700M either but I also don't think $650M is anywhere near "the limit." If it holds near $20M for the next two days, even a bit under, and has a nice weekend, it should be well set up for a $685M finish. That's about the limit.

 

The idea that it misses $600M is frankly ridiculous, unless we see $10M today or something. Rogue One made $68M under $600M, and TLJ is running ahead of that already, and will pick up pace against Rogue One. It will be adding on top of those totals for the rest of the run, basically. 

 

PS: You are looking at days averaging probably $20M or close for Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and Monday. A few over, a few under, so that's 6 days let's call it even $115M plus $423M and you're already at $540M almost. Then you have at least slightly inflated weekdays for Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday, nothing too special don't get me wrong, but not piss poor either. A lot of people are still off. The following weekend even if you called it something like $25M, plus the mid-week numbers which should at least be $25M also, that's $50M on top. So you're almost at 600 actually by the end of the 4th weekend. Why is it always like this when a film is anywhere half-way or over through its run?

 

I remember having to argue why Rogue One would easily make $500M, which it was clear as day to anyone who understands math, because it was sitting at $450M lol.

Edited December 27, 2017 by JonathanLB

[fabiopazzo2]

1 hour ago, IronJimbo said:

Hahahagahaga

 

2.08b might be possible? You're jokinh right...

Easy over that. 

[wildphantom]

6 minutes ago, JonathanLB said:

 

I don't think it hits $700M either but I also don't think $650M is anywhere near "the limit." If it holds near $20M for the next two days, even a bit under, and has a nice weekend, it should be well set up for a $685M finish. That's about the limit.

 

The idea that it misses $600M is frankly ridiculous, unless we see $10M today or something. Rogue One made $68M under $600M, and TLJ is running ahead of that already, and will pick up pace against Rogue One. It will be adding on top of those totals for the rest of the run, basically. 

I hope you’re right for $685 million but we haven’t seen anything to suggest the weekend holds are going to be decent.

 

Since it’s OW it’s underwhelmed daily, based on just how massive that weekend was. I’m not saying it’s final gross isn’t going to be mightily impressive, because it is. Yet since that OW I haven’t seen a performance that paves the way for $685 million. 

 

All eyes on this weekend ....

Edited December 27, 2017 by wildphantom

[Poseidon]

I really thought Wonder would get through the holidays legging to $130m, but it really was hit hard.

The Theater Average tells you, that it shouldn't have been cut that much. 

 

Should still do a little over $125m in the end. A great success for Lionsgate. 

Edited December 28, 2017 by Poseidon

[redfirebird2008]

32 minutes ago, Porthos said:

I just think sometimes some folks draw the wrong conclusions, is all.  Take CA:CW. For whatever reason it didn't get the legs some folks thought it should.

 

Is it because the audience didn't care? Is it because the audience thought it was al light but didn't convince their friends to see it? Or is it more of a case that the folks who REALLY wanted to see it saw it early and other folks waited to home video no matter how many good things they heard.

 

That's why while I think multiplier is important, I don't think it is the end-all, be-all.  And I also think getting more data now is good.

 

None of this is to say that I'll be defending vigorously a 3x multi for TLJ if it happens.  At the same time I honestly wonder what the hell the difference is between a say, 220/670 and a 205/655.  Maybe some folks here think one is better than the other, but I just have trouble seeing it.

 

Call it a personal hangup, if you will.

 

It’s more along the lines of comparing 220/650 with 220/750. That’s the reality of Last Jedi’s situation right now. 

[Porthos]

UA Laguna Village in Sacramento just went to reserved seating sometime in the last couple of days.

 

Yay.  Another theater that I'll have to check showing by showing when I feel like doing sellout counts for movies on preview nights. 

[baumer]

1 hour ago, NoLegMan said:

I would argue the total is more important.

 

And you would be wrong. What the multiplier tells us is that they need to fix some stuff or the next one might not be as successful.

[NoLegMan]

4 minutes ago, Christmas baumer said:

 

And you would be wrong. What the multiplier tells us is that they need to fix some stuff or the next one might not be as successful.

I didn't say the multiplier wasn't important, I said the total is more important, I also disagree that the multiplier of this film has an impact on the next one. 

[Ms Lady Hawk]

7 minutes ago, NoLegMan said:

I didn't say the multiplier wasn't important, I said the total is more important, I also disagree that the multiplier of this film has an impact on the next one. 

Although, I didn’t dislike BvS, the general

consensus was that it was not a good

movie. Therefore, the multiple for BvS certainly had an affect on JL. That partially explained the weak opening weekend. When people saw that the JL wasn’t nearly as “bad” as BvS and was more crowd pleasing, it developed okay legs. However, its fate was sealed. So yes, the reception of a preceding film can most definitely affect its successor adversely or positively. TLJ followed a generally well liked TFA, therefore its opening week was massive. 

 

[LonePirate]

12 minutes ago, Christmas baumer said:

 

And you would be wrong. What the multiplier tells us is that they need to fix some stuff or the next one might not be as successful.

I'm not sure it will be easy to fix the stuff people didn't like given the events of TLJ and the cast of characters at Abrams' disposal. Then again, if he can make me actually give a damn about Poe, he deserves all the praise I can offer him. If nothing else, hopefully he can remove the stench of the Twilight aura that seems to have permeated TLJ.

[NoLegMan]

RO didn't have a 3.0x multiplier I'm pretty sure. unless I'm looking at it incorrectly.

[aabattery]

1 minute ago, NoLegMan said:

RO didn't have a 3.0x multiplier I'm pretty sure. unless I'm looking at it incorrectly.

 

It did. 530-something total / 155 OW = 3.4-something-something.

[NoLegMan]

 

3 minutes ago, Ms Lady Hawk said:

Although, I didn’t dislike BvS, the general

consensus was that it was not a good

movie. Therefore, the multiple for BvS certainly had an affect on JL. That partially explained the weak opening weekend. When people saw that the JL wasn’t nearly as “bad” as BvS and was more crowd pleasing, it developed okay legs. However, its fate was sealed. So yes, the reception of a preceding film can most definitely affect its successor adversely or positively. TLJ followed a generally well liked TFA, therefore its opening week was massive. 

 

I'm not sure that is the same as this, BvS followed a meh Man of Steel film, then came suicide squad that underperformed as well, WW had amazing legs, and then JL underperformed.

[NoLegMan]

1 minute ago, ReyReyBattery said:

 

It did. 530-something total / 155 OW = 3.4-something-something.

Thanks for the correction, it was 2.05 through the first 11 days. it went up after that. I did not look at it correctly.

[aabattery]

3 minutes ago, NoLegMan said:

 

I'm not sure that is the same as this, BvS followed a meh Man of Steel film, then came suicide squad that underperformed as well, WW had amazing legs, and then JL underperformed.

 

Suicide Squad was a lot of things, but an under-performance it was not.

[NoLegMan]

based on my math it's currently performing like The second Hobbit.

[baumer]

Not sure how you can post on a box office site and say with a straight face that the reception of one film doesn't affect the gross of the next.