This **** is Bananas: Rampage as WB 2018 DOM highest grosser

[Jay Beezy]

10 hours ago, Barnack said:

In lead in a vast array of movie yes, but in a supporting comedy role ? He is a not a poison (in today world why a poison would ever appear in a studio movie it is not the golden era were the studio were contractually forced to use an actors a certain amount of time), he just did 150m with Neighbors and about the same I imagine with Showman.

 

Before Jumanji Johnson achieved that once outside the F&F franchise, with a giant budget destruction movie.

 

 

We're in an age where starpower is no longer enough currency to sell a movie on. In an age where the more powerful need to be held accountable, it's safe to say that the studio is to blame for fucking up movies, not the star. It’s marketable concept + strong execution that truly drives a successful film. Starpower is an enhancement provided it’s utilized correctly.

Edited January 22, 2018 by Jay Beezy

[Porthos]

15 hours ago, Porthos said:

Have to admit, I was a little underwhelmed by the TV spot today.

 

Out.

Okay so I've seen a couple of Winona'd reactions to this post, which I thought was odd, so I'll explain myself a bit more.

 

I think 'looks dumb, looks fun' movies can wrack up a ton of cash, so it isn't that.  I was a teeeeeeny bit put off by the dialogue in the tv spot, but not really enough to sway me one way or the other.

 

No I was underwhelmed by the trailer because the CGI/sfx just looked, well, off.  Maybe I wasn't paying enough attention, idk.  Something about it just felt off and/or off-putting.  Just one of those things that when I was looking at it I went "huh".

 

So bring on the Winona'd and Apocalypse's.  But that's where I was coming from.  Still think it'll do enough to get by in that other club.  Just don't think it's gonna be a massive breakout like some seem to think.

[Yandereprime101189]

After the surprise success of Jumanji, I can see Rampage pulling similar numbers. 

 

Now Rock just needs to do another animal movie and his Killer Animal Trilogy will be complete!

[KP1025]

I adore monster movies, so I'm hoping Rampage breaks out. However, I have a hard time seeing it pass $200 million let alone $300 million. It seems generic monster movies generally do not have a high ceiling unless they are based on a popular and well-known IP. 

 

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/genres/chart/?id=creaturefeature.htm

[MovieMan89]

11 hours ago, MCKillswitch123 said:

I'm hardcore stanning for this (and anyone who thinks this doesn't look like epic dumb shitty awesomeness is wack beyond their minds), but I'm OUT. Beasts 2 and Aquaman will fight for that spot.

 

If you want to join a more plausible Rampage club, join this one

Whu? If this is anywhere near what it looks like (a trainwreck, yes, but a delightfully fun, audience pleaser of a trainwreck with the Rock fighting giant monsters), why the hell would it implode after OW? Because of Infinity War? One bad weekend doesn't immediately kill the legs of a movie like this. This shit is not Baywatch, that looked like a bad trainwreck; this looks like a good, fun trainwreck. I'd be surprised if it has less than AT LEAST a 2.5x.

The Rock and the over the top action are good enough to sell an OW, but don't be surprised if this is a sub 30% stinker on RT with a 2.3x multi or something. Odds are already against a good multi as a video game adaptation as it is. I can see something like 50/120. 

[Barnack]

I imagine one element, would it miss the above 25 woman quadrant that is so big with many Johnson movies ?

 

Lot of Dwayne Johnson success came from making many quadrants products (like Jumanji/San Andreas).

 

San Andreas scored a massive 64% woman opening weekend crowd for example with a 70/30 above/under 25

Jumanji :51% males to 49% females, with 54/46 in the above/under 25 (pretty much as 4 quadrant as it can get)

Edited January 22, 2018 by Barnack

[MCKillswitch123]

2 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

The Rock and the over the top action are good enough to sell an OW, but don't be surprised if this is a sub 30% stinker on RT with a 2.3x multi or something. Odds are already against a good multi as a video game adaptation as it is. I can see something like 50/120. 

A video game adaptation that doesn't really have a built in audience. Seriously, who in the GA knows that this is even a video game? This ain't Assassin's Creed or Warcraft.

 

And again, unless the movie fails completely to deliever its promise of crazy fun thrills ft. The Rock vs. monsters, there's no way that this isn't an audience pleaser, so it can have sub-30% Tomatometers and it wouldn't really matter if audience wom is good. Chances are this'll be around the same quality or more enjoyable than San Andreas (also from Brad Peyton), which had mixed reviews and audience reception but still managed a 2.85x.

[Barnack]

8 minutes ago, MCKillswitch123 said:

A video game adaptation that doesn't really have a built in audience. Seriously, who in the GA knows that this is even a video game? This ain't Assassin's Creed or Warcraft.

 

This, a big reason the odds tend to be against them is a creative team trying to respect the game and what not (when the video game studio that know nothing about movies is not in part in charge like Assassin Creed), there is nothing of that here.

 

Pacific Rim can make 400m, last King Kong did very well, giant stuff fighting each other can work, the video game aspect will probably be non-existent and how it will play and tracker will not necessarily even use them for their bank of comparable here. But yeah monster movie tend to be really frontloaded.

Edited January 22, 2018 by Barnack

[MovieMan89]

Just now, MCKillswitch123 said:

A video game adaptation that doesn't really have a built in audience. Seriously, who in the GA knows that this is even a video game? This ain't Assassin's Creed or Warcraft.

 

And again, unless the movie fails completely to deliever its promise of crazy fun thrills ft. The Rock vs. monsters, there's no way that this isn't an audience pleaser, so it can have sub-30% Tomatometers and it wouldn't really matter if audience wom is good. Chances are this'll be around the same quality or more enjoyable than San Andreas (also from Brad Peyton), which had mixed reviews and audience reception but still managed a 2.85x.

OK, if you want to ignore its nature as a video game adaptation since few know said video game, you have to at least acknowledge its nature as a monster movie. Those are also known for poor multis. Kong's 2.75x was definitely on the high end and that got good reviews and didn't look as train-wrecky as this, so I can't see it beating that. And then of course there's IW as you mentioned, can't really see it adding a whole lot once that hits. Really don't see better than 2.5x. 

[MCKillswitch123]

6 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

OK, if you want to ignore its nature as a video game adaptation since few know said video game, you have to at least acknowledge its nature as a monster movie. Those are also known for poor multis. Kong's 2.75x was definitely on the high end and that got good reviews and didn't look as train-wrecky as this, so I can't see it beating that. And then of course there's IW as you mentioned, can't really see it adding a whole lot once that hits. Really don't see better than 2.5x. 

You know why most monster movies don't have good multis? Well, for one, they're not very good. Rampage won't be either, but it sure as hell has potential to be very fun. And secondly, they don't really play well to all demographics. That's the main reason why Kong did as well as it did, besides decent wom: it was a total four-quadrant family-friendly flick, similarly to something like Jurassic World (which was a glorified monster movie as well, w/the Jurassic Park franchise paintjob attached to it). Rampage having The Rock in it immediately brings the female demo's attention, and unlike Baywatch, it has people excited for it, rather than dreading it from the trailers. And IW is one weekend; after that, legs carry on (especially since IW will burn off close to 50% of its demand on OW alone). Really don't see worse than 2.5x.

Edited January 22, 2018 by MCKillswitch123

[YM!]

43 minutes ago, MCKillswitch123 said:

And IW is one weekend; after that, legs carry on (especially since IW will burn off close to 50% of its demand on OW alone). Really don't see worse than 2.5x.

And even after IW completely falls off after OW, Dead2ool doesn’t attract as much families and could underperform and tbh I don’t think Solo will be big.

[MovieMan89]

This is bound to have a big second weekend drop. And its third weekend is IW, so another big drop. By then it won't be grossing enough for holds to matter that much. Even opening to 55m and being generous with the holds, I doubt it's above 10m by IW weekend. Then has one week to have a good hold before DP2 and Solo take most of its screens and kill it completely. 

 

55

23 -58%

10 -56%

6  -40%

2.5 -58%

1 -60%

1 remaining weekends

96.5m weekends/125m total (77% weekend gross vs F8's 78%)

2.27x multi

 

Also worth noting if Cloverfield 3 stays put and is about the monster like the first one as the hints are suggesting, that will definitely cut into the OW of this. Still expect this to come out on top, but C3 could mean this only does 40 or so on OW. 

 

 

 

Edited January 22, 2018 by MovieMan89

[MCKillswitch123]

9 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

This is bound to have a big second weekend drop. And its third weekend is IW, so another big drop. By then it won't be grossing enough for holds to matter that much. Even opening to 55m and being generous with the holds, I doubt it's above 10m by IW weekend. Then has one week to have a good hold before DP2 and Solo take most of its screens and kill it completely. 

 

55

23 -58%

10 -56%

6  -40%

2.5 -58%

1 -60%

1 remaining weekends

96.5m weekends/125m total (77% weekend gross vs F8's 78%)

2.27x multi

 

Also worth noting if Cloverfield 3 stays put and is about the monster like the first one as the hints are suggesting, that will definitely cut into the OW of this. Still expect this to come out on top, but C3 could mean this only does 40 or so on OW. 

 

 

 

Again, why is it bound to have a big 2nd weekend drop? Why? Because assuming that it will have a near 60% drop on 2nd weekend when:

 

1) it has no competition;

2) movies within the same geneological tree (of sorts) like San Andreas, Kong and Jurassic World didn't drop anywhere near as bad;

3) it has no estabilished fan base

 

is basically just hoping that it underperforms...... I would guess for self-vindication in favor of your "non-Disney movies under 100M until May" club that you had to change? Either way, you're putting franchise pressure on this movie, and while it certainly won't have Jumanji legs, the only chance it has legs as horrible as those you're predicting is if everyone hates it and has no real fun with it. And considering it's THE ROCK VS. GIANT CROCS AND GORILLAS AND FLYING WOLVES, it's almost impossible to make that concept not fun. Even Josh Trank would make that fun.

 

Also, don't put your eggs on the Cloverfield basket. Right now, I wouldn't say it's very likely that it actually stays in its current release date, precisely for the reasons you pointed out as arguments against Rampage. Cloverfield would be the one cut by the competition, not Rampage. But then again, this is Paramount, they're gonna be stupid about it.

[Broadwayfreak66]

On 1/21/2018 at 5:21 PM, YourMother the Edgelord said:

Hello it’s been a minute but I believe Rampage can be Warner Bros biggest film domestically for 2018 for a few reasons.

 

 Power Of the Rock - 

With Jumanji on its way to possibly being Sony’s biggest film ever domestic, we can no longer deny his power. Sure Baywatch bombed but Efron is box office poison anyways. Moana did $250M and F7 did $350M. F8te did $225M last year too.

 

Trailer Views

- 22M for a first trailer especially one that’s a new franchise is solid.

 

WB’s other releases

When you look at it, WB has three things that can stop George from going apeshit, they are Ready Player One, Beasts 2, and Aquaman. But they all have things in their way too. RP1

may not be able to effecientially find a big enough audience. Aquaman was not remarkable in JL and the December competition for it is stacked. Beasts 2, although the first did well, will likely not be as big as the original Potter films. Also consider the nature of sequels and I think for domestic, this might draw in more fans.

 

Breakout possibilities-

Now before we argue that New Line doesn’t have big films outside of the Tolkien sagas, lets take a look at how big IT broke out. Not to mention everything between it and Black Panther doesn’t look to strong.

 

They have a flying wolf

- A fucking flying wolf

 

"...s stacked. Beasts 2, although the first did well, will likely not be as big as the original Potter films."

 

...without discussing the other obvious reasons why it would do well, you literally mention one but still decide it won't do well. Determined much? 

 

The first one did better than one Harry Potter film with no proof of concept, so no, Crimes of Grindelwald will be their best performer with around 950 million WW and about 265 million, bottom.

 

I think Rampage has a chance at 120-220 mil, that's it. 

Edited January 22, 2018 by Broadwayfreak66

[YM!]

1 hour ago, Broadwayfreak66 said:

"...s stacked. Beasts 2, although the first did well, will likely not be as big as the original Potter films."

 

...without discussing the other obvious reasons why it would do well, you literally mention one but still decide it won't do well. Determined much? 

 

The first one did better than one Harry Potter film with no proof of concept, so no, Crimes of Grindelwald will be their best performer with around 950 million WW and about 265 million, bottom.

 

I think Rampage has a chance at 120-220 mil, that's it. 

I’m iffy about Grindelwald but I think internationally it’ll do $850M-$950M WW but I think Rampage might surprise people and that Aquaman and Beasts although $200M+ DOM are behind it. 

[kowhite]

I’m out.  Beasts I think will kind of just do similar business as this, and I’m not putting bets down on Rock breaking out Jumanji style two times in a row.

 

I could see this doing similar to this director/actor duo’s last film, San Andreas though.  I’d say if it’s good, but I don’t think it matters.  Just has to be silly fun like SA.

 

Side note I think it might be too it’s advantage this movie isn’t a known today video game property.  Honestly I think there’s some baggage there this movie doesn’t have.

Edited January 23, 2018 by kowhite

[MovieMan89]

6 hours ago, MCKillswitch123 said:

Again, why is it bound to have a big 2nd weekend drop? Why? Because assuming that it will have a near 60% drop on 2nd weekend when:

 

1) it has no competition;

2) movies within the same geneological tree (of sorts) like San Andreas, Kong and Jurassic World didn't drop anywhere near as bad;

3) it has no estabilished fan base

 

is basically just hoping that it underperforms...... I would guess for self-vindication in favor of your "non-Disney movies under 100M until May" club that you had to change? Either way, you're putting franchise pressure on this movie, and while it certainly won't have Jumanji legs, the only chance it has legs as horrible as those you're predicting is if everyone hates it and has no real fun with it. And considering it's THE ROCK VS. GIANT CROCS AND GORILLAS AND FLYING WOLVES, it's almost impossible to make that concept not fun. Even Josh Trank would make that fun.

 

Also, don't put your eggs on the Cloverfield basket. Right now, I wouldn't say it's very likely that it actually stays in its current release date, precisely for the reasons you pointed out as arguments against Rampage. Cloverfield would be the one cut by the competition, not Rampage. But then again, this is Paramount, they're gonna be stupid about it.

It will have a big second weekend drop because that is the nature of this kind of film. Even Kong dropped 55% with good reception and Spring break. Why are you assuming WOM is going to be so good for this? The trailers give off major Razzie vibes, it looks like Michael Bay does monsters. I'm not saying audiences will be as hard on it as critics, but it will surely be a frontloaded film. 

 

As for C3, both would be hurt by each other. Rampage would almost surely come out on top, but not without losing several mil it wouldn't have otherwise without C3. 

[MCKillswitch123]

3 hours ago, MovieMan89 said:

It will have a big second weekend drop because that is the nature of this kind of film. Even Kong dropped 55% with good reception and Spring break. Why are you assuming WOM is going to be so good for this? The trailers give off major Razzie vibes, it looks like Michael Bay does monsters. I'm not saying audiences will be as hard on it as critics, but it will surely be a frontloaded film. 

 

As for C3, both would be hurt by each other. Rampage would almost surely come out on top, but not without losing several mil it wouldn't have otherwise without C3. 

First, Kong dropped 55% because it was a real franchise movie (not like Rampage, which doesn't even have a true to form fanbase), and because there was this thing called Beauty And The Beast opening on the same weekend, and it vied for the same kind of family audience (granted, it targeted girls especifically, but we all know that families flocked to BATB big time). Granted, it wouldn't have dropped much better without BATB around, but it still would've made a difference. And if San Andreas, which is also an apt comparison for this (same director, same lead, same disaster porn stuff going on), dropped 52% with more noteworthy movies opening on its 2nd frame, then I don't see why Rampage would be anywhere near frontloaded enough to drop almost 60% on its sophomore hold. It would need bad WOM for that to happen.

 

Second, the reason I'm assuming WOM is going to be so good for this is the same as I'm assuming audience WOM is gonna be great for Jurassic World 2 (despite me not being a fan of that teaser): it's because this looks exactly like the type of movie that audiences devour. And no, it doesn't give Razzie vibes to me at all: Baywatch did. It doesn't give me Michael Bay monster movie vibes: Pacific Rim 2 did (that shit looks like Transformers V2). Does it look super dumb? Yes. Does it look super FUN? Yes. Is super dumb but super fun escapism exactly what people look for these days? Yes. And being effectively an original, I don't see any reason why it would be as frontloaded as you think it's gonna be, apart from the weekends with stiff competition (Avengers more than anything).

 

And third, yes, Cloverfield's presence would hurt Rampage too, but it would be nothing compared to the damage that it would take in comparison. I still think Paramount is gonna change the release date, because why the hell would they want to release a monster movie of theirs next to another monster movie that has a much bigger profile right now than anything Cloverfield in the near future? Release God Particle in the Summer, maybe around late July (since August looks lame), and you're good to go.

Edited January 23, 2018 by MCKillswitch123

[Asyulus]

Out. Although Rock doesn’t definitely suck.

[Jay Beezy]

40 minutes ago, Asyulus said:

Out. Although Rock doesn’t definitely suck.

He has a problem with overhyping, though.

 

It's not Baywatch levels of overhype, but the sense of fun he put into his Instagram posts for Rampage I'm not seeing in the trailers/spots. It sure as hell does not look as fun as Jumanji.

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/BTe8kphFv6M/

 

Quote

George not happy. Me not happy. When animals like you, they lick you. When they don't like you, they kill you. 
I will hunt down the bad people who did this to my best friend. 
And when I find them, I will not lick them.

 

Edited January 23, 2018 by Jay Beezy