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

[TwoMisfits]

5 minutes ago, Brainbug said:

 

I dont think anyone really believes that Hotel Transylvania 3 will gross 2,5B worldwide

No, but I've seen some huge numbers for Jurassic...and its 1st of the new "trilogy/arc" already had giant numbers:)...

 

Not saying I buy it, but my predicting skills aren't always the best:)...

Edited December 31, 2017 by TwoMisfits

[Brainbug]

4 minutes ago, TwoMisfits said:

No, but I've seen some huge numbers for Jurassic...and its 1st of the new "trilogy/arc" already had giant numbers:)...

 

Not saying I buy it, but my predicting skills aren't always the best:)...

 

Youre talking to the biggest JP/JW fan of the world right now and the new JW trilogy doesnt have a shot at matching the SW ST trilogy. But i agree, it will come quite closer than anyone could have expected. Fallen Kingdom i expect to gross between 1B and 1.2B worldwide and JW 3 is so far out that i wont predict something precise for it, but another 1B worldwide is certainly in play.

[JonathanLB]

I would think dinosaurs translate great to any other country. I am almost surprised JW didn’t make even more, though it did amazing of course. I remember back in the day Jurassic Park was #1 worldwide for a while right? Before Titanic.

[Brainbug]

Just now, JonathanLB said:

I would think dinosaurs translate great to any other country. I am almost surprised JW didn’t make even more, though it did amazing of course. I remember back in the day Jurassic Park was #1 worldwide for a while right? Before Titanic.

 Im still bitter it fell short of 1.7B worldwide. Still hoping for a re-release someday to catch that 30M.

 

Jurassic Park was the No.1 from 1993 to 1998 (Titanic outgrossed it in 1998, not 1997). It was a monster especially OS for the time. That JW not only came close to it, but practically matched its gross adjusted is still mind-blowing.

[Porthos]

Well even if it underperforms in North America, Avatar will blow the doors off of everyone else, if only because of that first installment.

 

Now I'm not nearly as bullish as some (*cough*) about Avatar's chances in China.  But if/when Avatar 2-5 ever gets released, they will still rack up a ton of money, which will get added to the gobsmacking 2.7b WW total already sitting out there.

[Brainbug]

1 minute ago, Porthos said:

Well even if it underperforms in North America, Avatar will blow the doors off of everyone else, if only because of that first installment.

 

Now I'm not nearly as bullish as some (*cough*) about Avatar's chances in China.  But if/when Avatar 2-5 ever gets released, they will still rack up a ton of money, which will get added to the gobsmacking 2.7b WW total already sitting out there.

 

Key word here is "Trilogy": If Cameron plans to do 4 sequels, that all will hardly count as one trilogy SW is safe

[IronJimbo]

4 minutes ago, Brainbug said:

 

Key word here is "Trilogy": If Cameron plans to do 4 sequels, that all will hardly count as one trilogy SW is safe

but will that trilogy be safe from the duo of Avatar and A2?

[Brainbug]

3 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

but will that trilogy be safe from the duo of Avatar and A2?

 

Doesnt matter for the Trilogy comparison, because Avatar 1 & 2 aint one trilogy

 

But lets see:

 

TFA 2.07B + TLJ 1.35B + Ep. IX 1.5B (realistic scenario me thinks) equals 4,9B. Lets just say that the ST will get to 5B worlwide.

 

Avatar 2.8B and now i have no idea for Avatar 2 because its so unpredictable. But Avatar 2 grossing 2.2B (which is entirely possible) would be "enough" for the duo to overtake the ST.

[IronJimbo]

Just now, Brainbug said:

But lets see:

 

TFA 2.07B + TLJ 1.35B + Ep. IX 1.5B (realistic scenario me thinks) equals 4,9B. Lets just say that the ST will get to 5B worlwide.

 

Avatar 2.8B and now i have no idea for Avatar 2 because its so unpredictable. But Avatar 2 grossing 2.2B (which is entirely possible) would be "enough" for the duo to overtake the ST.

2.2b would be disappointing! Got it in the bag imo

[Brainbug]

Just now, IronJimbo said:

2.2b would be disappointing! Got it in the bag imo

 

God never change.

[IronJimbo]

7 minutes ago, Brainbug said:

 

God never change.

Fortune favours the bold.

[MovieMan89]

I'm 99.9% certain in Avatar 2 hitting 500 DOM. Cameron is just too good at what he does to miss knowing what audiences want, even if they don't necessarily know they want it. And 500m won't even be that many admissions in 2020, especially factoring in all the premiums. 

 

After 500 though, it's a crapshoot for me for now. No idea where it will land above that mark. 

Edited December 31, 2017 by MovieMan89

[SLAM!]

2 hours ago, Lordmandeep said:

I know the Hollywood types on here dismiss Bright as a trashy film and streaming as overrated, but the point is a film of that nature got a crapload of viewers from a single streaming service in 3 days in one country...

 

I am sure over the holidays it is a lot more viewers, but my point is if they churn out films like this, Netflix's movie releases on Fridays will become like actual movie releases to audiences. 

 

 

 

I really don't like this.

 

Things were just starting to look up for the box office prospects of small films, too, thanks to MoviePass.

 

I just, really, really, really, really am in disagreement with the implication of the amount of viewers that saw Bright, of all films, over the course of three days.

 

Netflix: Here's a trash film.

Viewer: Well, it's trash, but it's Netflix, and it's easy to watch, and I've devoted myself to a world system that makes me like to do things the easy way, so I'll watch it anyway.

Netflix: Good. Here's another film that's trash, just like more than half of the films we're placing on the site (because why put effort in our films when they'll watch it anyway, if they were dumb enough to follow the stream of casual viewers right into Bright's egregiously inflated viewership).

Filmmakers That Actually Care: Hey, why isn't the film that I put blood, sweat, and tears into doing so poorly at the box office?

Netflix: Because your potential viewers have been conquered by us business moguls, at least until Disney conquers them back with their own streaming service.

Viewers: I feel like something is missing in the majority of the content I am watching. But I don't care enough to find out. Oh well.

 

At least, the above script-style scenario is my own personal nightmare scenario. I just really don't want to see Netflix eat up the rest of the small films. I just really don't want Netflix to leave theaters with nothing. I just really don't want that to happen.

[JB33]

2 minutes ago, slambros said:

 

I really don't like this.

 

Things were just starting to look up for the box office prospects of small films, too, thanks to MoviePass.

 

I just, really, really, really, really am in disagreement with the implication of the amount of viewers that saw Bright, of all films, over the course of three days.

 

Netflix: Here's a trash film.

Viewer: Well, it's trash, but it's Netflix, and it's easy to watch, and I've devoted myself to a world system that makes me like to do things the easy way, so I'll watch it anyway.

Netflix: Good. Here's another film that's trash, just like more than half of the films we're placing on the site (because why put effort in our films when they'll watch it anyway, if they were dumb enough to follow the stream of casual viewers right into Bright's egregiously inflated viewership).

Filmmakers That Actually Care: Hey, why isn't the film that I put blood, sweat, and tears into doing so poorly at the box office?

Netflix: Because your potential viewers have been conquered by us business moguls, at least until Disney conquers them back with their own streaming service.

Viewers: I feel like something is missing in the majority of the content I am watching. But I don't care enough to find out. Oh well.

 

At least, the above script-style scenario is my own personal nightmare scenario. I just really don't want to see Netflix eat up the rest of the small films. I just really don't want Netflix to leave theaters with nothing. I just really don't want that to happen.

Can't like this post enough. This is exactly what scares me too. Less and less people appreciate the movie theatre experience and more and more people are content to sit on their couches.

[Lordmandeep]

4 minutes ago, slambros said:

 

I really don't like this.

 

Things were just starting to look up for the box office prospects of small films, too, thanks to MoviePass.

 

I just, really, really, really, really am in disagreement with the implication of the amount of viewers that saw Bright, of all films, over the course of three days.

 

Netflix: Here's a trash film.

Viewer: Well, it's trash, but it's Netflix, and it's easy to watch, and I've devoted myself to a world system that makes me like to do things the easy way, so I'll watch it anyway.

Netflix: Good. Here's another film that's trash, just like more than half of the films we're placing on the site (because why put effort in our films when they'll watch it anyway, if they were dumb enough to follow the stream of casual viewers right into Bright's egregiously inflated viewership).

Filmmakers That Actually Care: Hey, why isn't the film that I put blood, sweat, and tears into doing so poorly at the box office?

Netflix: Because your potential viewers have been conquered by us business moguls, at least until Disney conquers them back with their own streaming service.

Viewers: I feel like something is missing in the majority of the content I am watching. But I don't care enough to find out. Oh well.

 

At least, the above script-style scenario is my own personal nightmare scenario. I just really don't want to see Netflix eat up the rest of the small films. I just really don't want Netflix to leave theaters with nothing. I just really don't want that to happen.

I do agree, but at least you don't have your head in the sand like some users here who think its 2008. 

 

I will be brutally honest, if I watched Bright at theatres I would hate it, but at home, it was okay timepass.

 

 The reason was I did not spend 20 bucks.

Edited December 31, 2017 by Lordmandeep

[That One Girl]

Bright is an awful movie no matter where you watch it

[JB33]

28 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

2.2b would be disappointing! Got it in the bag imo

I thought a 3x multi was in the bag for TLJ as well. Some advice: don't assume anything. Who knows if audiences will like Avatar 2 or even give a shit.

[JonathanLB]

Without something like MoviePass I don’t think there’s any future for most movie theaters at what they charge. I’m a HUGE moviegoer and I would never go to a theater to see an adult drama or serious indie film. No thanks. I hate leaving the house if I can avoid it and at $12/ticket I’ll only be bothered for blockbuster movies just like most moviegoers. That will leave room for almost nothing beneath an effects-laden blockbuster and are there enough of those per year to keep theaters in business? Maybe not all of them. They can get people out more for movies with MoviePass as at least I check out stuff like Happy Death Day and Flatliners that I would otherwise skip. 

 

Either the studios will need even more big budget blockbusters or the pricing model needs to change from the inside. MoviePass is trying to change it from the outside, which may or may not work. I hope it does. 

[Lordmandeep]

3 minutes ago, That One Guy said:

Bright is an awful movie no matter where you watch it

 

 

The big difference is when people watch movies at home, they don't go on Rotten Tomatoes first. 

 

 

Bright in theaters would have flopped bad, but on Netflix it is getting tens of millions of viewers. 

Edited December 31, 2017 by Lordmandeep

[That One Girl]

Just now, JonathanLB said:

Either the studios will need even more big budget blockbusters

 

As if we don't already get enough lmfao