Memorial Weekend Thread: 4-Day Actuals - Aladdin $116.81M | John Wick 3 $30.97M | Avengers Endgame $22.06M | Pokemon DP $17.25M

[snarkmachine]

2 minutes ago, harsh3090416 said:

Did it still doesn't make any sense. Like I said before they were going with the flow of people's reaction to the trailers instead of actually doing their job and writing an unbiased review.    

 

Some of the reviews:---->

"Smith understandably didn't want to compete with Williams, but as the big, blue, top-knotted Genie, he's uncharacteristically bland. Even the magic carpet in this movie looks bummed out"   "

Disney needs three wishes for its live-action "Aladdin" remake: for a better Genie, a better script and a soul." 

"After what we've seen and heard from the late, great Robin Williams, Will Smith's act -- even with some special effects -- wears thin rather quickly." 

i find these reviews kind of unfair. will was really great in the movie imho

[cdsacken]

12 minutes ago, That One Guy said:

My theater has 5 showtimes a day for The Intruder and 5 showtimes a day for A Dog's Journey.  Meanwhile, Endgame is down to 3 showtimes a day.  That's 10 for Dennis Quaid and 3 for Avengers

Most theaters will drop both of those as well as DP soon.

[harsh3090416]

3 minutes ago, That One Guy said:

 

did you read the full reviews or pull blurbs from Rotten Tomatoes

Seriously do I even need to read the entire reviews after looking at those pull blurbs? 

[LonePirate]

Let's check out how the new Verified User rating system at Rotten Tomatoes is doing.

 

Aladdin

58% Rotten with 266 reviews

94% Audience Score with 13,204 verified ratings

 

Booksmart

98% Fresh with 205 reviews

76% Audience Score with 976 verified ratings

 

It would seem the new system is working exactly the same as the old system except users must "prove" they have seen the movie.

[harsh3090416]

3 minutes ago, snarkmachine said:

i find these reviews kind of unfair. will was really great in the movie imho

That's what I keep saying. I don't know why people come out to support those insane reviews. Its clear to anyone's eyes that they were being biased and trying to go with the general flow of trailer reaction. 

[tonytr87]

51 minutes ago, LonePirate said:

Zathura says hello.

 

So does your mother. 

 

[ZackM]

9 minutes ago, LonePirate said:

Let's check out how the new Verified User rating system at Rotten Tomatoes is doing.

 

Aladdin

58% Rotten with 266 reviews

94% Audience Score with 13,204 verified ratings

 

Booksmart

98% Fresh with 205 reviews

76% Audience Score with 976 verified ratings

 

It would seem the new system is working exactly the same as the old system except users must "prove" they have seen the movie.

This is certainly conclusive.  Thank you for doing this extensive research.

[babz06]

56 minutes ago, lilmac said:

Aladdin went up again...$90m for the 3-day. I know Disney must be very relieved. Exceeded expectations.

 

Disney = Teflon.

 

If Aladdin can do this well amid bad early buzz this bodes well for Disney's 2020 which looks to be a down year by a significant margin.

I just looked at Disney's 2020 and yeah you right it does look like a down year.  They do have two untitled Marvel films slated though but i dont know what those could be. 

 

Onward

Mulan

Artemis Fowl

Untitled Pixar Animation

Jungle Cruise

The One and Only Ivan

Cruella

 

 

[TomeRide]

With Endgame passing $800M at the domestic box office, its just accured to me just how popular the MCU has become in NA over the last decade. While I won't try to make the argument its more popular than Star Wars (I mean, The Force Awakens did sell 10M+ more tickets than what Endgame will end with), its prevelancy in the top of the domestic chart is pretty damn similar to Star Wars in its prime. 

 

4 out the current 8 highest grossing films of all time are from the MCU with Endgame (#2), Black Panther (#4), Infinity War (#5), and the original Avengers (#8). Comparatively, back in 1983, Star Wars (#2), Return of the Jedi (#4), and The Empire Strikes Back (#6) occupied 3 of the top 6 spots.

Edited May 27, 2019 by TomeRide

[mahnamahna]

Aladdin on the way to $270-320 million DOM.

 

John Wick 3 is already well above the first two. It's equivalent to Austin Powers in terms of franchise growth. $150-160 million DOM is excellent and likely the franchise's peak. I don't see how Chapter 4 doesn't decline at least slightly ($100-110 million DOM would be my guess). 

 

Endgame could possibly inch its way to $850 million DOM with the help of a Far from Home/Labor Day re-release. $835-840 million is a more realistic and utterly phenomenal number for a franchise that seemingly reached its attendance peak in 2012. 

 

Detective Pikachu is performing solidly. The rough legs aren't shocking to anyone who's taken a look at how the first three theatrical Pokémon movies performed. The first one got less than a 3x in an era when a G-rated film doing that was practically unheard of. The $150 million DOM it's heading for is solid considering a film with audience crossover two weeks prior did $350 million+ OW. 

 

Booksmart and Brighburn are doing fine for their budgets. A Dog's Journey wasn't helped by coming out the same year as A Dog's Way Home. Universal should have considered a delay to August 2020 to leave some space between the two. The Intruder is a nice low-budget hit. It has had solid legs for a Screen Gems thriller.

 

Long Shot was poorly marketed and has to settle for being an underperformer. The Hustle is doing well enough, but it likely needed to do about double to make a decent profit for UA. 

[DAR]

46 minutes ago, babz06 said:

I just looked at Disney's 2020 and yeah you right it does look like a down year.  They do have two untitled Marvel films slated though but i dont know what those could be. 

 

Onward

Mulan

Artemis Fowl

Untitled Pixar Animation

Jungle Cruise

The One and Only Ivan

Cruella

 

 

I’m still not sure about Artemis Fowl not getting a theatrical release 

[Menor the Destroyer]

42 minutes ago, TomeRide said:

With Endgame passing $800M at the domestic box office, its just accured to me just how popular the MCU has become in NA over the last decade. While I won't try to make the argument its more popular than Star Wars (I mean, The Force Awakens did sell 10M+ more tickets than what Endgame will end with), its prevelancy in the top of the domestic chart is pretty damn similar to Star Wars in its prime. 

 

4 out the current 8 highest grossing films of all time are from the MCU with Endgame (#2), Black Panther (#4), Infinity War (#5), and the original Avengers (#8). Comparatively, back in 1983, Star Wars (#2), Return of the Jedi (#4), and The Empire Strikes Back (#6) occupied 3 of the top 6 spots.

I think Star Wars has a higher peak than the MCU, but the median Avengers film would gross more than the median SW "episode" film at this point. But we won't be getting any more of either for a while (forever for the episodes), so its a bit of a useless comparison.

[VanillaSkies]

1 hour ago, LonePirate said:

Let's check out how the new Verified User rating system at Rotten Tomatoes is doing.

 

Aladdin

58% Rotten with 266 reviews

94% Audience Score with 13,204 verified ratings

 

Booksmart

98% Fresh with 205 reviews

76% Audience Score with 976 verified ratings

 

It would seem the new system is working exactly the same as the old system except users must "prove" they have seen the movie.

You're comparing the wrong data. 

That is the critics reviews vs. the verified audience reviews. 

 

You need to compare the verified audience reviews vs. the all audience (verified and unverified) reviews. 

That's where there is going to be a difference. The change did not affect the critic review portion in any way and was not meant to... so;

 

Aladdin

94% Verified Audience Score with 13,433 verified ratings

91% All Audience Score with 19, 887 total ratings

 

Booksmart

76% Verified Audience Score with 998 verified ratings

74% All Audience Score with 2207 total ratings

 

Birghtburn 

69% Verified Audience Score with 1501 verified ratings

67% All Audience Score with 2755 total ratings

 

Also, it's only been 3 days, so it's too soon to really do any in depth analysis. 
We need more films and  those films to have a larger pool of ratings to really dig into the effects. 

However, a preliminary analysis shows that in all cases the verified scores are a few % higher than the unverified. We could deduce from that that the new system is working exactly as it should, by weeding out 'review bombers' and 'trolls' who haven't actually seen a movie but rate it low fox 'x', 'y' or 'z' reason. 
Finally, and this theory will become clearer as more time passes, the new system has probably encourage a lot of trolls to give up trying, because the verified score is the one that is going to be widely referenced. And that score is rightly made up of people who have actually seen the movie. 

I think the new system is working exactly as RT would like it to. 

Once some more chains get on board, audiences will be able to verify themselves through other sources besides just Fandango, and we will have an overall more accurate score from here forward. 

 

[ban1o]

I'm not one to automatically snide at critics but Aladdin is definitely better than BATB lol. Like not even a question. The reviews are very weird for these films. 

[ban1o]

2 minutes ago, VanillaSkies said:

You're comparing the wrong data. 

That is the critics reviews vs. the verified audience reviews. 

 

You need to compare the verified audience reviews vs. the all audience (verified and unverified) reviews. 

That's where there is going to be a difference. The change did not affect the critic review portion in any way and was not meant to... so;

 

Aladdin

94% Verified Audience Score with 13,433 verified ratings

91% All Audience Score with 19, 887 total ratings

 

Booksmart

76% Verified Audience Score with 998 verified ratings

74% All Audience Score with 2207 total ratings

 

Birghtburn 

69% Verified Audience Score with 1501 verified ratings

67% All Audience Score with 2755 total ratings

 

Also, it's only been 3 days, so it's too soon to really do any in depth analysis. 
We need more films and  those films to have a larger pool of ratings to really dig into the effects. 

However, a preliminary analysis shows that in all cases the verified scores are a few % higher than the unverified. We could deduce from that that the new system is working exactly as it should, by weeding out 'review bombers' and 'trolls' who haven't actually seen a movie but rate it low fox 'x', 'y' or 'z' reason. 
Finally, and this theory will become clearer as more time passes, the new system has probably encourage a lot of trolls to give up trying, because the verified score is the one that is going to be widely referenced. And that score is rightly made up of people who have actually seen the movie. 

I think the new system is working exactly as RT would like it to. 

Once some more chains get on board, audiences will be able to verify themselves through other sources besides just Fandango, and we will have an overall more accurate score from here forward. 

 

I actually agree there doesn't seem to be much of a difference. Like how can you prove you've seen it? Anybody could easily do that if they want to downvote a movie. But tbf these type of movies aren't the ones that usually get reviews bombed. 

[narniadis]

Just from what I have personally heard from friends that have seen both BATB and Aladdin, nobody gets the trashy reviews. Now, when I eventually see it and make up my own mind it may well be trash - but otherwise, it sounds like the critics just for some reason didn't click with it and or were expecting something completely different from the rest of the audience?

 

Also, that never ending discussion about a director's poor box office for a film - you who started it, you realize that can be applied to EVERY SINGLE director with more than 1 or 2 movies? Jon F is fine - his track record with Disney has been more than fine and his career overall has been solid - which again can be applied to a lot of directors once they cross more than 2 movies and have an actual record. We get you don't care for Cowboys & Aliens - welcome to the club, a lot of us don't. But the direction wasn't the issue, the poor / horrid script was the problem.

[narniadis]

6 minutes ago, ban1o said:

I actually agree there doesn't seem to be much of a difference. Like how can you prove you've seen it? Anybody could easily do that if they want to downvote a movie. But tbf these type of movies aren't the ones that usually get reviews bombed. 

The proof of seeing it comes from having purchased a ticket from fandango - thats how the review gets "verified." Much different from the review bombing that was happening days in advance of the film releasing.

 

[VanillaSkies]

3 minutes ago, ban1o said:

I actually agree there doesn't seem to be much of a difference. Like how can you prove you've seen it? Anybody could easily do that if they want to downvote a movie. But tbf these type of movies aren't the ones that usually get reviews bombed. 

Right now you can only become a verified voter if you purchased the ticket through the Fandango app or website. So not anyone can do it. They would literally have to buy a ticket just to downvote. I don't think most people are going to do that. 

 

https://variety.com/2019/digital/news/rotten-tomatoes-audience-scores-verified-fandango-ticket-buyers-1203224424/

 

"initially, the only way users can have their ratings count toward the Audience Score will be through a Fandango purchase."

 

"Fandango insists that boosting ticket purchases was not the primary driver of the Audience Score change, noting that it has deals with AMC Theatres, Regal and Cinemark Theatres to participate in the program to let their customers verify their ticket purchases on Rotten Tomatoes sometime later this year."

Again, it's early days, so it's too soon for any conclusive results.

[snarkmachine]

i’m sure someone like AO scott has legitimate reasons for disliking aladdin, but rt let’s too many randoms with a wordpress blog become rt critics. those are the ones who are most susceptible to following buzz and wanting to feel like they’re part of the ‘in’ crowd by joining in on bashing something that seems to be universally reviled.

[cdsacken]

1 hour ago, ZackM said:

This is certainly conclusive.  Thank you for doing this extensive research.

In all fairness while it's not perfect there are plenty of reasons booksmart didn't break out besides misogyny and Disney.