HAN SOLO MEMORIAL (day weekend) THREAD | Solo Flops Domestically with 83M/101M weekend. Spectacularly Bombs Overseas with 65M weekend.

[Deathlife]

Well, at least my boy Donald Glover is in both the number 1 song and movie in the United States.

 

Folks are saying they are trying to make him happen, lol, he’s already happened and he pretty much made it happen himself. Too bad Solo didn’t work out too well, everything he’s touched has been gold lately (Atlanta season 2 has been totally surreal and amazing; This is America is probably the best music video I’ve seen in years, I expect tons of awards for that piece of work next year).

 

That Deadpool drop though.....ouch! I can’t see any path to $700m for AIW but it doesn’t really matter though, it’s already gone over and above expectations.

[MovieMan89]

Just now, GirafficPark said:

not long term no, not once TV rights, Streaming and disc sales are added.

Since when do we use all of that when talking about box office? Who knows how many box office bombs have ended up profitable years later with all of that. That's irrelevant to the subject of losing money at the box office. 

[Water Bottle]

Just now, GraceRandolph said:

Well I agree. There is no point in comparing the MCU with the Star Wars. As I said one keeps increasing with each release and the other keeps falling. Either way the set up of the movies is irrelevant no one is preventing Star Wars from branching out. If anything branching out is MORE risky since people don’t like change (see TLJ). So with that said MCUs success is even more astonishing.  

 

But I suppose the DCEU would be a better pararell to Star Wars - with the divise nature that has greatly affected its box office. 

 

How do you explain Age of Ultron compared to the Avengers if each entry keeps increasing? Are you just ignoring that didn't happen?

[GirafficPark]

3 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

Since when do we use all of that when talking about box office? Who knows how many box office bombs have ended up profitable years later with all of that. That's irrelevant to the subject of losing money at the box office. 

This place might not, but the studios consider ALL revenue sources, not just the BO. The days of the BO being it all are long gone, the subject of losing money at the box office is now an irrelevant subject. Move with the times man.

Edited May 26, 2018 by GirafficPark

[GraceRandolph]

8 minutes ago, Water Bottle said:

 

I remember when the MCU fans freaked out when Age of Ultron dropped hard from The Avengers. 

1.6B - 1.4B = 200M 

2B - 1.3B = 700M

 

The drops aren’t even comparable. Also Ultron wasn’t a hated movie. TLJ was basically the “BVS” of Star Wars. It damaged the brand badly and now we are seeing the repercussions (108M). 

 

 

[Water Bottle]

1 minute ago, MovieMan89 said:

Since when do we use all of that when talking about box office? Who knows how many box office bombs have ended up profitable years later with all of that. That's irrelevant to the subject of losing money at the box office. 

 

If you bomb at the box office generally TV channels don't pay that much for the movie compared to a hit. Same with streaming. Disc sales have been a joke for years now. 

[Ledmonkey96]

Just now, Water Bottle said:

 

How do you explain Age of Ultron compared to the Avengers if each entry keeps increasing? Are you just ignoring that didn't happen?

1 sequel out of 9, soon to be 10 once Ant-man and the wasp out gross the first one. Then there are another 2 sequels next year, though A4 increasing is up in the air i definitely  see SM 2 increasing

[Ledmonkey96]

1 minute ago, GraceRandolph said:

1.6B - 1.4B = 200M 

2B - 1.3B = 700M

 

The drops aren’t even comparable. Also Ultron wasn’t a hated movie. TLJ was basically the “BVS” of Star Wars. It damaged the brand badly and now we are seeing the repercussions (108M). 

 

 

It was actually a 110mil decrease, 1.52 to 1.41

[Water Bottle]

Just now, GraceRandolph said:

1.6B - 1.4B = 200M 

2B - 1.3B = 700M

 

The drops aren’t even comparable. Also Ultron wasn’t a hated movie. TLJ was basically the “BVS” of Star Wars. It damaged the brand badly and now we are seeing the repercussions (108M). 

 

 

 

Lol 

 

Age of Ultron had a pretty divisive reception as well. 

[John Marston]

Wait did someone just compare To Solo?

 

 

winter Soldier made 259m which Solo isn’t  making and 714m worldwide which Solo isn’t even dreaming of coming close to 

Edited May 26, 2018 by John Marston

[Valonqar]

@Zakiyyah6

 

Believe it or not I want Star Wars to succeed. I do however want them to stop living in the past with these side stories so yes Solo flopping is a good thing. It forces LF and Disney to question staying in the past and sticking with characters that we already know when it comes to Star Wars side stories. 

 

Yeah, why is pointing out problems including boxoffice woes considered rooting for failure? Sweeping problems under the rug and acting like there's none are not going to help the franchise recovery. There's fandom discontent that way exceeds loud minority with their own agenda to push. Boxoffice is falling hard, and again, loud minority can't make 700M disappear and whatever Solo will end up losing in comparison to RO. So there's a big problem because a lot of people are not coming back since the brand is not satisfying their needs (satisfying target audience =/= pandering). 

[MovieMan89]

Ultron could have had another 100m DOM with better reception. In which case, it would have actually increased over TA WW. Point being, AoU reception was lukewarm, which OS audiences didn't really care about but led to a bit of a harsher drop DOM than would have happened otherwise (probably about 100m lower like I said). It was nothing like flat out divisive reception though. 

Edited May 26, 2018 by MovieMan89

[Water Bottle]

1 minute ago, Ledmonkey96 said:

1 sequel out of 9, soon to be 10 once Ant-man and the wasp out gross the first one. Then there are another 2 sequels next year, though A4 increasing is up in the air i definitely  see SM 2 increasing

 

Solo isn't really a sequel though so what is it dropping from?

[harrycaul]

7 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

Since when do we use all of that when talking about box office? Who knows how many box office bombs have ended up profitable years later with all of that. That's irrelevant to the subject of losing money at the box office. 

 

"Losing money at the box office" is an arbitrary measure. It's good for clickbait level analysis, I suppose, but not much else.

[Orestes]

1 hour ago, Chewy said:

 

Pretty much exactly a DC situation, audiences are rejecting some of what they put out and they need to course correct

The big difference between the two situations is that DC needed to make that course correction after MoS. Instead, they doubled then tripled down on it. Hopefully LF doesn't drag their feet the same way.

[MovieMan89]

1 minute ago, harrycaul said:

 

"Losing money at the box office" is an arbitrary measure. It's good for clickbait level analysis, I suppose, but not much else.

Ok, then in that case no one should ever call something a bomb again based on the box office performance. Since that's not going to happen though, let's not get into "arbitrary measure" debates and whatnot. 

Edited May 26, 2018 by MovieMan89

[harrycaul]

1 minute ago, MovieMan89 said:

Ok, then in that case no one should ever call something a bomb again based on the box office performance. 

 

I agree with this, because doing so on that basis alone is simplistic and often wrong.

[MovieMan89]

1 minute ago, harrycaul said:

 

I agree with this, because doing so on that basis alone is simplistic and often wrong.

Ok but it's still how those of us that track box office and the industry media measure things. Because no one is going to wait years just to find out if something ends up being profitable in the end and then flash the headlines "2011's Green Lantern actually profitable now!" in 2018. 

Edited May 26, 2018 by MovieMan89

[harrycaul]

Just now, MovieMan89 said:

Ok but it's still how those of us that track box office and the industry media measure things. Because no one is going to wait years just to find out if something ends up being profitable in the end and then flash the headlines "2011's Green Lantern actually profitable now!" in 2018. 

 

You can do whatever you want. It'll still be wrong to do it that way.

[Thrylos 7]

46 minutes ago, GirafficPark said:

TLJ and Solo only look bad because TFA and RO over performed. I doubt Disney expected RO to do as well as it did, or TFA.

 

TFA filled a hole for many sure, but it wasn't exactly a compelling story, and didnt make you hunger for more. RO benefited from the hype left in TFA wake. By the time TLJ came round the hype had well and truly burned off and Solo is now just behaving like a SW story thats non-essential. Remember its not even like a Marvel 'solo' movie in that it doesn't tie in to the grander, forward moving story in any way. Despite that its still going to take more than 6 and possibly 7 MCU movies

You are correct about TLJ but solo is shaping up to be a gigantic flop and it won’t take any post phase one MCU films worldwide, which is what really matters despite the myopic talk of only about the u.s. There are markets that are flourishing right now and becoming bigger and bigger each year and marvel is developing a stronghold in these markets. Star Wars on the other hand......