Monday numbers - Us 6M

[terrestrial]

Its not always about competition, its about the amount of people who actually go to the cinemas in the US in summer.

And as such the movies released in that time, if opening big enough to create buzz,... usually get better legs per a lot more people actually have the time to not only watch it, but even - if the movie / its story inspires it - twice...

 

Do I have to repost the numbers per months again?

Since the '80 between March and e.g. July... roughly double

 

And btw in case of CM I do even not think it would have be such a big difference than usually in other cases, but for very atypical reasons, that have not even to do with how a lot of the people perceive the movie.

 

But as CM had to be released before Endgame,....

 

[LouisianaArkansasGeorgia]

1 hour ago, FilmBuff said:

 

Are you flipping kidding me with this nonsense?? Of course it would’ve done better in summer. That’s not even up for debate.

If audiences in the summer were as meh about CM as they are in the spring, it would not have done "better" in the summer (and I put quotation marks because as it is, CM is doing spectacularly well).  AT the end of the day, how audiences receive a film and how they respond to it is more instrumental in its success than season of release.

[Nova]

Btw summer releases tend to get better legs, but opening weekends tend to be more deflated. If your argument is that Captain Marvel would have better legs then sure you'd be right because that's just how the calendar works. Like how December releases get better legs off of smaller opening weekends. But if you're trying to argue the overall total for Captain Marvel would have been better had it been released in the summer, well then I don't know what to tell you because there is no proof that would have happened. 

 

Is there really a difference between a movie doing $150M OW/$400M total in March and a movie doing $125M/$400M total in the summer? The latter movie had "better" legs but both movies made the same. 

Edited March 27, 2019 by Nova

[terrestrial]

3 minutes ago, Nova said:

Btw summer releases tend to get better legs, but opening weekends tend to be more deflated. If your argument is that Captain Marvel would have better legs then sure you'd be right because that's just how the calendar works. Like how December releases get better legs off of smaller opening weekends. But if you're trying to argue the overall total for Captain Marvel would have been better had it been released in the summer, well then I don't know what to tell you because there is no proof that would have happened. 

 

Is there really a difference between a movie doing $150M OW/$400M total in March and a movie doing $125M/$400M total in the summer? The latter movie had "better" legs but both movies made the same. 

Yes!

I guess the whole 'discussion' started, as some try to interpret quality marks on legs as a general rule, happens also with part 2 or 3 movies that are typical more front-loaded anyway but still a few try.

Differentiated POVs for reasons vs standard rules of standard following movies probably?

[LouisianaArkansasGeorgia]

In the end, it does not matter.

WW was a better film and it got a much better reception from audiences (great reviews and more importantly, audience reception and multiplier prove it).

CM was alright and its reviews were sorta kinda mixed, and it will get an average multiplier.

And yet, they are both incredibly important and I feel that they have both changed the [CBM] game.

 

Regardless of what reasons compelled people to watch those films, their success has sent and undeniable message to the powers that be: audiences at large are not averse to watching female superheroes in solo adventures (which was the narrative that Hollywood used to push). 

They made crappy superheroine [or pseudo-superheroine] big-screen films (Supergirl, Catwoman, Elektra, Barb Wire, Aeon Flux), and when audiences rejected them due to their crappiness, Hollywood never took responsibility for those films' failure and always blamed it on the audience.: "See?? Audiences are not interested in superhero films about women! Therefore, making them is a futile endeavor!" 

Thus, the self-fulfilling prophecy. 

Now thanks to the smashing success of Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel, there is no excuse.

Give us a well-crafted superheroine film with decent action and solid characterization/compelling characters, and audiences (of all genders) will be there.

 So thanks, WW and CM, because now studios won't be so opposed to taking chances on the ladies who punch!! 

 

 

 

Edited March 27, 2019 by LouisianaArkansasGeorgia

[FilmBuff]

25 minutes ago, LouisianaArkansasGeorgia said:

If audiences in the summer were as meh about CM as they are in the spring, it would not have done "better" in the summer (and I put quotation marks because as it is, CM is doing spectacularly well).  AT the end of the day, how audiences receive a film and how they respond to it is more instrumental in its success than season of release.

Audiences weren’t ‘meh’ about Captain Marvel. Stop putting words in my mouth. I stick by what I said. Captain Marvel would have done better in the Summer. That’s not really up for debate.

 

I don’t even know why I’m responding back to you. You have infinitesimal knowledge of how the box office works.

[FilmBuff]

Do people really think a movie like Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom would’ve grossed the same amount in the Spring or Fall? Lmao x1000000

[cdsacken]

If audiences were meh about it, it would have cratered like BVS did with a sub 2.0 multiplier. 

 

By the end of this week it will be a 2.3 multiplier with a several decent weeks left behind.

 

People need to get over calling it a mediocre film. Medicore films can do well internationally but they struggle to do well in DOM. It will probably end up 415 just to make all the bitter folks angry. Probably 4.5 Tuesday

Edited March 27, 2019 by cdsacken

[LouisianaArkansasGeorgia]

19 minutes ago, Nova said:

But if you're trying to argue the overall total for Captain Marvel would have been better had it been released in the summer, well then I don't know what to tell you because there is no proof that would have happened. 

 

Exactly.

It's funny how some people seem to act as if they had some sort of supernatural insight into alternate timelines/realities and claim that "it is not up to debate that this WOULD HAVE happened had these circumstances had been such and such"...

But to each their own, I guess...

 

[KJsooner]

3 minutes ago, FilmBuff said:

Do people really think a movie like Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom would’ve grossed the same amount in the Spring or Fall? Lmao x1000000

Jurassic World and it’s sequel were totally freaks of nature at the box office.

[Brainbug]

3 minutes ago, FilmBuff said:

Do people really think a movie like Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom would’ve grossed the same amount in the Spring or Fall? Lmao x1000000

 

A total masterpiece like JW: Fallen Kingdom would have grossed its 1,3B total even if it got released in September or January of course.

[LouisianaArkansasGeorgia]

1 minute ago, cdsacken said:

If audiences were meh about it, it would have cratered like BVS did with a sub 2.0 multiplier. 

Bad analogy.

People were not meh on BvS.

GA audiences flat out hated it.

 

It is a good thing that Superman and Batman are iconic and had so many staunch fans already; had a films starring an unknown character like CM gotten not just so-so reviews, but awful ones like BvS did and an awful audience response, I feel that it probably would have made an even worse multiplier than the Snyder turkey.

[cdsacken]

Movies that are hated don't do 330 million DOM and 850 ww

 

I didn't like it but you exaggerate this situation greatly.

 

 

[Nova]

13 minutes ago, FilmBuff said:

Do people really think a movie like Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom would’ve grossed the same amount in the Spring or Fall? Lmao x1000000

Yes. I don't know what proof you have to say otherwise. There have been plenty of films that have done gangbusters outside of the summer so what proof do you have that it would have done less?  

Off the top of my head: Black Panther, Beauty and the Beast, Deadpool, IT, Thor 3, Zootopia, Moana, Furious 7.....I mean I could go on. All these films had non summer releases and still made a shit ton of money. So why wouldnt a movie that grossed over a billion dollars still find success during another part of the year? 

Edited March 27, 2019 by Nova

[lorddemaxus]

5 minutes ago, cdsacken said:

Movies that are hated don't do 330 million DOM and 850 ww

 

1

Movies that are hated finish with less than double their opening weekend which BvS did. Reaching 330 mil is very easy with a 166 mil opening. Captain Marvel will have reached that number on its 28th day (less than a month) with a 153 mil opening. BvS reached that same number in 12 weeks.

Edited March 27, 2019 by lorddemaxus

[FilmBuff]

10 minutes ago, Nova said:

Yes. I don't know what proof you have to say otherwise. There have been plenty of films that have done gangbusters outside of the summer so what proof do you have that it would have done less?  

 

My reasoning? Jurassic World had a worse critical/audience reception than Captain Marvel. Open slightly smaller than Captain Marvel at 5 million dollars(148 mil ow to 153 mil ow). And it will outgross Captain Marvel by about 15 million dollars domestically. I believe we can attribute that to summer movie going season.  

 

Edit: I remember back in 2011, we had a 100 mil+ grosser starting in early May going all the way to Mid August. Every weekend. It was fun to track.

Edited March 27, 2019 by FilmBuff

[LouisianaArkansasGeorgia]

19 minutes ago, cdsacken said:

People need to get over calling it a mediocre film. Mediocre films can do well internationally but they struggle to do well in DOM.

The Beauty and the Beast remake, Jurassic World, the Transformers franchise,  the series of Pirates of the Caribbean films and Jumanji (as well as Captain Marvel itself) all want a word with you.

Edited March 27, 2019 by LouisianaArkansasGeorgia

[terrestrial]

8 minutes ago, LouisianaArkansasGeorgia said:

WW was a better film and it got a much better reception from audiences (great reviews and more importantly, audience reception and multiplier prove it).

If you wouldn't have added this...

mp nope, not in this case.

Beside a lot of the ones I already gave: one reason it will have less repeat views... males are less willing to accompany females a 2nd time for a movie they liked, but felt not over-the-top for, than the other way around.

Out of many years of observations,....

I think for the most males, that did enjoy it to a... lets say 7/10 degree or higher, it is an intro to be seen once, but now lets watch the next instalment movie. Especially as the next one is not far away and the most of the GA only watches a few movies per year. Its very time-near this time.

 

Audience reactions:

lets look into female audience reactions, both had a few who didn't like it at all, but both had only very few who think so.

CM average rating per females 7.9

WW average female rating 7.8

 

= that is not less for WW, as movies that are out for a while tend to loose a bit of a rating = equal

 

But WW did not have a huge anti-campaign of certain males (but had some too):

Beside WW, as out for a time, already has more than twice male ratings as CM, it has only something over the half of male 1-star counts.

rating diff male to male 0.5 - for that amount of 1-star raters, that's nothing.

 

So if you'd stop to squeeze in so often such kind of qualifiers, way less people would react vs your POV, maybe even agree to the remaining parts of your posts fully.

[Claudio]

6 minutes ago, cdsacken said:

Movies that are hated don't do 330 million DOM and 850 ww

 

I didn't like it but you exaggerate this situation greatly.

 

 

C’mon we all know BvS made that much amount of money thanks to its hype which leads to the gigantic opening weekend $440M+ around the world. It should be able to reach $1B at least with those numbers but instead it’s collapsing DOM with 1.99 multiplier and also less than 2 multiplier for its worldwide total. I don’t know any other reason why it can made that kind of multiplier unless the audience hated or at  very least didn’t like it.

[DisposedData]

28 minutes ago, FilmBuff said:

Audiences weren’t ‘meh’ about Captain Marvel. Stop putting words in my mouth. I stick by what I said. Captain Marvel would have done better in the Summer. That’s not really up for debate.

 

I don’t even know why I’m responding back to you. You have infinitesimal knowledge of how the box office works.

It is up for debate. There is absolutely nothing that indicates that Captain Marvel would have done better in the summer especially with how jam packed it is.