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

[Porthos]

9 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

If we imagine a scenario where ROTK opened on a Friday, it likely could have pulled 100m. Now adjust that and it's total and you get a run that looks something like 150/555. That's over a 3.6x multi. 

RotK's 5 day adjusts to 180m+, FTR.

 

--

 

Also for the record, for the umpteenth time, I am not saying The Last Jedi has great legs.  I'll even say it's not having good legs, if only to try to move the discussion along*.  But I am disputing that it has horrible legs or even bad ones.

 

No more.  No less. 

 

* Mostly because I don't feel like having this discussion again. As people are probably aware, I think it has equivalent legs to Rogue One, more or less.

Edited January 2, 2018 by Porthos

[MovieMan89]

3 minutes ago, Porthos said:

RotK's 5 day adjusts to 180m+, FTR.

 

--

 

Also for the record, for the umpteenth time, I am not saying The Last Jedi has great legs.  I'll even say it's not having good legs.  But I am disputing that it has horrible legs or even bad ones.

 

No more.  No less. 

Is there really a huge difference between saying it's "not having good legs" and saying "its legs are bad?" Kinda seems like a matter of semantics. I'm sure no one is saying the movie is having toxic Fant4stic WOM for the record. 

[Porthos]

3 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

Is there really a huge difference between saying it's "not having good legs" and saying "its legs are bad?" Kinda seems like a matter of semantics. I'm sure no one is saying the movie is having toxic Fant4stic WOM for the record. 

Sure.  Average legs. Uninspiring legs.  Neither good nor bad.  The lukewarm scrambled eggs of breakfast legs. That's pretty different from bad, IMO.

 

(as I said in my edit, I think it's more or less like R1, but I am trying valiantly to move the discussion along a bit)

Edited January 2, 2018 by Porthos

[a2k]

Just now, grey ghost said:

How many direct sequels in December opened above 80 m?

 

How do you determine what's normal for a direct sequel that opens to 220 m in December?

I think 2.85-2.90x that TLJ is looking at is great multi for sequels (that too as a 220m opener) in part due to December. TLJ will be the 3rd/4th best multi in top 10 behind WONDR, DM3 and maybe BATB (using Fri openers). WONDR and BATB are non-sequels and DM3 was an animation. TLJ's OD of 104+ was bigger than WONDR and DM3 ows.

 

TLJ should also go over SMH's non-sequel multi (Even if SMH2 is as well received as SMH might still barely crack 2.5x imo).

 

Multis for 200+ dom Fri openers (no Coco, Jumanji) this year:

 

SW8 2.85-2.9x

BATB 2.88x

WONDR 4x

GOTG2 2.66x

SMH 2.86x

IT 2.65x

THOR3 2.54x

DM3 3.65x

JL 2.42x

LOGAN 2.56x

F8 2.29x

[MovieMan89]

Well I guess "bad" might be a bit strong of a word to use for the legs, but "poor" is certainly applicable. 

 

I just can't help but recall a mere two weeks ago when if you suggested a sub 3x multi you were crucified by some for basically suggesting that you were saying the WOM was going to be the worst thing ever for it to go that low. Now all of a sudden its no big deal to get a sub 3x multi to those same people. Means WOM was "neither good nor bad." So you'll excuse me if I'm finding it a bit hard to just let that slide. 

Edited January 2, 2018 by MovieMan89

[AndyLL]

5 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

Well I guess "bad" might be a bit strong of a word to use for the legs, but "poor" is certainly applicable. 

17 days... 517m... poor WOM.  

[grey ghost]

26 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

If we imagine a scenario where ROTK opened on a Friday, it likely could have pulled 100m, which is backed up by a 34m OD on a Wednesday. Now adjust that and it's total and you get a run that looks something like 150/555. That's over a 3.6x multi. Now take out 3D and PLF from TLJ because ROTK didn't have that, and you're talking about something like a 150 vs 200 OW. Hardly a "different stratosphere." 

So you took ROTK's 5-day opening and assumed the 3-day opening would be bigger without two extra days?

 

Order of the Phoenix 

5-day OW - 139 m

 

Goblet of Fire

4-day OW - 102 m

 

Deathly Hallows pt. 1

3-day OW - 125 m

 

As consistent as the HP franchise is, these numbers are very inconsistent but prove you can't safely assume a 3-day OW will be bigger than a 5-day OW.

 

Also, wouldn't TTT be better example since it's second in the series like TLJ?

 

 

 

 

Edited January 2, 2018 by grey ghost

[a2k]

7 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

Well I guess "bad" might be a bit strong of a word to use for the legs, but "poor" is certainly applicable. 

 

I just can't help but recall a mere two weeks ago when if you suggested a sub 3x multi you were crucified by some for basically suggesting that you were saying the WOM was going to be the worst thing ever for it to go that low. Now all of a sudden its no big deal to get a sub 3x multi to those same people. Means WOM was "neither good nor bad." So you'll excuse me if I'm finding it a bit hard to just let that slide. 

true. but if you see gotg2's 2.66x, that's 24.5%+ drop in multi from 3.53x of gotg1. though in that case the ow bump was massive 146.5m vs 94m. tlj was never gonna have an ow bump and 220 is epic as it is. that made people hope that in decmeber the legs should not go below 3.0x after 3.77x of tfa and 3.41x of ro. to be fair 2.85x+ is very impressive for a 220+ opening sequel. just that if you couple it with a 12% drop in ow, the drop from predecessor is huge in absolute terms. could be 290-300 down from tfa and "only" 100-110 up form ro.

[MovieMan89]

2 minutes ago, a2knet said:

true. but if you see gotg2's 2.66x, that's 24.5%+ drop in multi from 3.53x of gotg1. though in that case the ow bump was massive 146.5m vs 94m. tlj was never gonna have an ow bump and 220 is epic as it is. that made people hope that in decmeber the legs should not go below 3.0x after 3.77x of tfa and 3.41x of ro. to be fair 2.85x+ is very impressive for a 220+ opening sequel. just that if you couple it with a 12% drop in ow, the drop from predecessor is huge in absolute terms. could be 290-300 down from tfa and "only" 100-110 up form ro.

I still think the two prior SW movies and the two LOTR sequels adjusted are enough of a sample size of huge OWs in December to prove that sub 3x really shouldn't be happening if WOM is good. 

[Porthos]

12 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

I just can't help but recall a mere two weeks ago when if you suggested a sub 3x multi you were crucified by some for basically suggesting that you were saying the WOM was going to be the worst thing ever for it to go that low. Now all of a sudden its no big deal to get a sub 3x multi to those same people. Means WOM was "neither good nor bad." So you'll excuse me if I'm finding it a bit hard to just let that slide. 

You know what?  I'm going to say you're right in spirit if not in exact language.   

 

But I think it's more due to us having unrealistic expectations for December movies. 

 

We have a loooooooooong history of what we should expect of December movies.

We have a very very short history of what we should expect from mega blockbuster movies.

We have an even shorter history of what we should expect from mega blockbusters in December.

 

Demand gets burned off in 220 OW movies.  That's an undeniable fact, IMO.  What should be expected as that demand gets burned off is the open question.

 

The more data we get, the more we learn.  That's my take at any rate.

[Porthos]

1 minute ago, MovieMan89 said:

I still think the two prior SW movies and the two LOTR sequels adjusted are enough of a sample size of huge OWs in December to prove that sub 3x really shouldn't be happening if WOM is good. 

Somewhere a statistician's  head is spinning over four data points being enough of a sample size.

 

More to the point, two of them were 14+ years ago. Even if we want to include them I don't think we can.  Any more than we include the legs of summer 2001 or 2002 movies in discussions about 2017 movies.

[a2k]

19 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

I still think the two prior SW movies and the two LOTR sequels adjusted are enough of a sample size of huge OWs in December to prove that sub 3x really shouldn't be happening if WOM is good. 

- all lotrs are wed openers, so becomes much much easier to touch 3x. hell TF5 did 2.91x in summer due a wed od! so wed od + december makes 3x a joke frankly.

 

- but to support your point : return of the king did 3x+ off the 5-day ow!! 377.0/124.1. pretty amazing for a three-quel. now that's december + wom. however, lotr are a unique case in that they were not merely "good wom". it was path-breaking and even a great movie can fall short of lotrs's wom imo.

 

-when thinking about legs, if summer vs december balances out non-sequel vs sequel, then smh and tlj runs are equally impressive at 2.85x+. tlj more so going by the size of the ow : 100m+ more than smh. tlj previews of 45 were only a few below smh's entire od.

 

Edited January 2, 2018 by a2knet

[MovieMan89]

4 minutes ago, a2knet said:

- all lotrs are wed openers, so becomes much much easier to touch 3x. hell TF5 did 2.91x in summer due a wed od! so wed od + december makes 3x a joke frankly.

 

- but to support your point : return of the king did 3x+ off the 5-day ow!! 377.0/124.1. pretty amazing for a three-quel. now that's december + wom. however, lotr are a unique case in that they were not merely "good wom". it was path-breaking and even a great movie can fall short of lotrs's wom imo.

 

-when thinking about legs, if summer vs december balances out non-sequel vs sequel, then smh and tlj runs are equally impressive at 2.85x+. tlj more so going by the size of the ow : 100m+ more than smh. tlj previews of 45 were only a few below smh's entire od.

 

I don't think they balance each other out at all. You can take a sequel like Desolation of Smaug for example, which is widely regarded to have lukewarm reception at best, and yet still cleared 3.5x. Because that's how much of a difference December makes. Not to mention SMH was a CBM, a whole different beast regardless of release time for multis. 2.85x is fantastic for them. 

 

But agree to disagree I guess. 

Edited January 2, 2018 by MovieMan89

[NoLegMan]

The only thing I know about legs, is I have bad legs.

[WrathOfHan]

I just realized Proud Mary STILL hasn't been rated  Sony isn't uploading ads to their YouTube channel either despite 1,300+ airings. What the fuck are they doing with this?

[That One Girl]

6 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

I just realized Proud Mary STILL hasn't been rated  Sony isn't uploading ads to their YouTube channel either despite 1,300+ airings. What the fuck are they doing with this?

 

I saw an ad for it today and I was surprised they didn't even have a rating for it yet.  Lmao.  I assume it'll come tomorrow?  I remember they were late on rating Life too.

Edited January 2, 2018 by That One Guy

[filmlover]

7 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

I just realized Proud Mary STILL hasn't been rated  Sony isn't uploading ads to their YouTube channel either despite 1,300+ airings. What the fuck are they doing with this?

[WrathOfHan]

Just now, That One Guy said:

 

I saw an ad for it today and I was surprised they didn't even have a rating for it yet.  Lmao.  I assume it'll come tomorrow?

It has to! iSpot has an ad on their page that mostly uses trailer footage. Sony's strategy for this is very very very strange.

[a2k]

8 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

I just realized Proud Mary STILL hasn't been rated  Sony isn't uploading ads to their YouTube channel either despite 1,300+ airings. What the fuck are they doing with this?

they are too busy counting cash from jumanji.

probably are also in shock, tasting this new thing called 'success'.

 

before jumanji into-the-spider-verse had my curiosity, now it has my attention.

[lilmac]

Can we create a Jumanji 2 thread in the On the Lot forum? Seems like a foregone conclusion. :-)

 

Hope Sony doesn’t run this rare win into the ground (animated spinoff movie, sequels, shared universe). 

Edited January 2, 2018 by lilmac