New Year's Day Weekend Thread: Late Friday estimates (DHD) - TLJ 19.5M, Jumanji 17.5M, PP3 6.7M, TGS 5.3M

[redfirebird2008]

6 minutes ago, bamajagala said:

I guess expectations are everything. For a movie that's burned off 484m of demand and still beating a movie that's only burned off 137m on a daily basis, and calling one's performance "meh" or worse, and the other "amazing, is to me funny in a backwards sort of way.

 

Sing was treated the same way against RO last year and The Revenant against TFA.

 

 

 

Look at the budgets though. 

[peludo]

3 minutes ago, bamajagala said:

I guess expectations are everything. For a movie that's burned off 484m of demand and still beating a movie that's only burned off 137m on a daily basis, and calling one's performance "meh" or worse, and the other "amazing, is to me funny in a backwards sort of way.

 

Sing was treated the same way against RO last year and The Revenant against TFA.

 

 

Are you really comparing Star Wars and Jumanji? The reality is that few people expected a boring run like TLJ's (if $650m can sometime be boring), and few people expected, maybe nobody, that Jumanji could make well over $200m. Expectations and PRECEDENTS imply that TLJ run is (a bit) disappointing and Jumanji is a surprise. No matters how look at it.

[John Marston]

2 minutes ago, fmpro said:

No way.. No freaking way

 Why not? 

[Ryan Reynolds]

5 minutes ago, John Marston said:

I can see Episode 9 dropping to 450m or even 400m

Definitely possible, especially if Solo is hated too

[The Futurist]

In your "oh the second Star Wars is always the least successful in the trilogy", you will have to decide if the Last Jedi is

 

Empire

 

or

 

Clones.

 

[ThiagoMaia]

9 minutes ago, bamajagala said:

I guess expectations are everything. For a movie that's burned off 484m of demand and still beating a movie that's only burned off 137m on a daily basis, and calling one's performance "meh" or worse, and the other "amazing, is to me funny in a backwards sort of way.

 

Sing was treated the same way against RO last year and The Revenant against TFA.

 

 

I was going to make this exact post. Literally I was going to start with "Expectations are everything" 

 

Does Jumanji have a chance of passing TLJ dailies tomorrow? Taking 2006 as an example, if TLJ goes like NatM, and Jumanji like most other movies that year, Jumanji will have a bigger Saturday. Thought Jumanji is probably more similar to NatM, right?

[Hatebox]

Insofar as Clones is literally one of the worst big budget franchise movies ever made, I think it's fair to say TLJ is at the very least closer to Empire.

[redfirebird2008]

31 minutes ago, NoLegMan said:

It didn't perform like it could have, many of those factors have already been said. But regardless it's still one of the most successful films of all time, even with the WOM Being mixed. I also don't think it will hurt the SW brand, and I also don't think Rian will lose his trilogy. Not reaching fanboys expectations. Doesn't make it less of a successful movie. Bad WOM and still crossing the billion dollar mark I'm sure every studio that makes films would love that.

 

That is flawed logic. Transformers franchise is an example of what eventually happens. 

[Fancyarcher]

6 minutes ago, ThiagoMaia said:

I was going to make this exact post. Literally I was going to start with "Expectations are everything" 

 

Does Jumanji have a chance of passing TLJ dailies tomorrow? Taking 2006 as an example, if TLJ goes like NatM, and Jumanji like most other movies that year, Jumanji will have a bigger Saturday. Thought Jumanji is probably more similar to NatM, right?

It basically is, which is why it'll probably pass 300m sometime in the next few weeks. Jumanji should also reach #1 by Monday. It has a higher PTA then TLJ, despite being in less theaters. 

Edited December 30, 2017 by Fancyarcher

[Barnack]

49 minutes ago, NoLegMan said:

It didn't perform like it could have, many of those factors have already been said. But regardless it's still one of the most successful films of all time, even with the WOM Being mixed. I also don't think it will hurt the SW brand, and I also don't think Rian will lose his trilogy. Not reaching fanboys expectations. Doesn't make it less of a successful movie. Bad WOM and still crossing the billion dollar mark I'm sure every studio that makes films would love that.

People speculating about a possible Disney disappointment surrounding Star wars past performance do not have the absolute box office number in mind that much (at least certainly not domestic).

 

It is more about what it will be doing WW versus what it could have (video game, merch, blu ray, sequels). That why people are looking in worlds markets legs more than the actual box office, there is no worry TLJ will be vastly profitable, but did it add or removed value to the franchise going on versus a reasonable to except reception, is what people are speculating about.

 

Star Wars is particularly robust in some market, it went throught the prequels not too damaged, that is saying a lot, but if Disney had plan to open the franchise to new market, and will for the sequels there is also an under what Force Awaken expectation set.

 

There seem to have been a shift of expectation created by Awaken level of success (that probably lead to change about what they wanted for Rogue One and bringing a new writer/director to do it), that will not necessarily be met here, future will tell. A bit like Warner Brother firing after BvS, it was not the box office total that was particularly worisome and loose your job worthy, certainly not Suicide Squad box office, it was those movie reception. 

Edited December 30, 2017 by Barnack

[NoLegMan]

5 minutes ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

That is flawed logic. Transformers franchise is an example of what eventually happens. 

Transformers also made multiple bad films in a row, star wars hasn't really done that since TFA and RO mostly had good word of mouth. Basing the future of a franchise on one film seems dumb to me. Thor 2 sucked. Thor 3 didn't. Avengers 2 was meh Avengers 3 won't fail at the BO. Iron Man 2 sucked Iron Man 3 did better. Comparing Star Wars which has mostly solid films. To Transformers is illogical.

[redfirebird2008]

1 minute ago, NoLegMan said:

Transformers also made multiple bad films in a row, star wars hasn't really done that since TFA and RO mostly had good word of mouth. Basing the future of a franchise on one film seems dumb to me. Thor 2 sucked. Thor 3 didn't. Avengers 2 was meh Avengers 3 won't fail at the BO. Iron Man 2 sucked Iron Man 3 did better. Comparing Star Wars which has mostly solid films. To Transformers is illogical.

 

Only was commenting on your statement that the studio would be happy with mixed WOM and good box office. I think they would rather have great results on both ends. 

[ACSlater]

Jumanji Time.

 

Love AMC's morning cheapo tickets.

[Barnack]

Not sure I fully agree with Rogue One reception here (was not my feeling from my part of the world or my crowd when I saw it), Avengers 2 was meh, Civil War took a drop.

 

Star Wars has mostly solid film but relied quite a bit on the established lore and nostalgia has of now, that could affect the toys selling quite a bit (and that what those movie are also if not mostly about, a giant publicity for other products).

 

Thor 3 success was linked to Guardian of the Galaxy success imo, something Star wars cannot necessarily do as easily.

 

But Star Wars is the biggest and maybe most robust of them all, a well received SW 9 inventing an interesting new toy and everything could settle in, video games sales and merch pick up etc....

[WrathOfHan]

3 minutes ago, ACSlater said:

Jumanji Time.

 

Love AMC's morning cheapo tickets.

I don't because it attracts more seniors  

[NoLegMan]

Just now, Barnack said:

Not sure I fully agree with Rogue One reception here (was not my feeling from my part of the world or my crowd when I saw it), Avengers 2 was meh, Civil War took a drop.

 

Star Wars has mostly solid film but relied quite a bit on the established lore and nostalgia has of now, that could affect the toys selling quite a bit (and that what those movie are also if not mostly about, a giant publicity for other products).

 

Thor 3 success was linked to Guardian of the Galaxy success imo, something Star wars cannot necessarily do as easily.

 

But Star Wars is the biggest and maybe most robust of them all, a well received SW 9 inventing an interesting new toy and everything could settle in, video games sales and merch pick up etc....

Civil War isnt an Avengers sequel it's a captain America sequel nice try though. And it out performed winter soilder.

[Barnack]

Just now, NoLegMan said:

Civil War isnt an Avengers sequel it's a captain America sequel nice try though. And it out performed winter soilder.

The events portrayed in Age of Ultron are directly rooted in the very reason the conflict between avengers are happening in that movie no ? Follow pretty directly, it is much more an Ultron sequel than Jurassic World is a sequel of Jurassic Park.

[Hatebox]

3 minutes ago, NoLegMan said:

Civil War isnt an Avengers sequel it's a captain America sequel nice try though. And it out performed winter soilder.

This debate got so boring I believe the board collectively agreed that it was somewhere in between. Which it was.

 

 

Edited December 30, 2017 by Hatebox

[NoLegMan]

8 minutes ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

Only was commenting on your statement that the studio would be happy with mixed WOM and good box office. I think they would rather have great results on both ends. 

They would rather have both I agree. Can't counter that point.

[redfirebird2008]

1 minute ago, Hatebox said:

This debate got so boring I believe the board collectively agreed that it was somewhere in between. Which it was.

 

 

 

Avengers 2.5