Fake Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 (edited) It's pretty sad when you have to resort to giving Chemistry lessons to support your boxoffice predictions. It's pretty sad that I have to explain at all since some people are just too dumb to miss the obvious points. Edited March 30, 2012 by Fake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 His lack of faith is disturbing.What is disturbing is the lack of brains on this board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B J Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 (edited) What is disturbing is the lack of brains on this board.All my predictions were/are backed by non-sequel historical data, if thats a brainless basis than I will have to disagree. Edited March 30, 2012 by B J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cozmeesah Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Whenever I click on that "View it anyway" link on a post, I'm reminded as to why I ignored someone to begin with. Geesh, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggestgeekever Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 (edited) Things are getting feisty in here. After all the bickering yesterday, let's all just calm down and enjoy the ride. Edited March 30, 2012 by Biggestgeekever 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 All my predictions were/are backed by non-sequel historical data, if thats a brainless basis than I will have to disagree.Not talking about you B J.Your points were totally valid, but you didn't account for IMAX loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Whenever I click on that "View it anyway" link on a post, I'm reminded as to why I ignored someone to begin with. Geesh, lol.Couldn't prove my point better. It is pretty sad really when logic becomes annoying. (assuming you are talking about me, since I seem to be the only one here without THG avatar). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olive Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Friday number should be 18 to 20M . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Shorts Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 IMAX loss is minimal imo, HG is not TDK or TF where watching in IMAX was way better than watching in regular screens. The movie is not so effects driven that people interested in watching the movie can have the same enjoyment in any type or size theater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Excellent. 65m+ 2nd weekend here we come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackspider Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 It's pretty sad that I have to explain at all since some people are just too dumb to miss the obvious points. What are the obvious points? Oh yeah, it's you're right about everything and we're wrong about everything. How stupid of me to not realize this earlier. It won't happen again, I promise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggestgeekever Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 IMAX loss is minimal imo, HG is not TDK or TF where watching in IMAX was way better than watching in regular screens. The movie is not so effects driven that people interested in watching the movie can have the same enjoyment in any type or size theater.I agree with this. The way it's filmed (shaky cam) doesn't make it a good fit for the IMAX format either. The loss will have an effect, of course, but I don't think to the effect some are thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 IMAX loss is minimal imo, HG is not TDK or TF where watching in IMAX was way better than watching in regular screens. The movie is not so effects driven that people interested in watching the movie can have the same enjoyment in any type or size theater.Even if all the people who would have seen it in IMAX this weekend will see it in regular theaters, it can dilute the Friday jump by upto 15%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cozmeesah Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Wait... "too dumb to miss the obvious points" ? I'm confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Without the IMAX loss, I would have expected....Fri: 19M (+138%)IMAX share: ~2MWith the IMAX loss, that 2M will become 1M if all the people see it in regular theaters.So new predict: 18M (+125%) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BK007 Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Fake is having a Mattrek-esque reputation implosion.It's just a damn film. Don't get so worked up. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJohn Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 1M midnights for WotT. Doesn't sound good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hiccup Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 19M Friday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hiccup Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 1M midnights for WotT. Doesn't sound good.It is double John Carter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Wait... "too dumb to miss the obvious points" ? I'm confused. The post explains itself. Actually I was trying to deduce a trend between age factor and Friday jumps (we all know that more kid-friendly films have higher jumps, I was just trying to get a quantitative measure) with data ranging from Lorax and JC. But then people say that the films are not similar. I mean, WHAT? Where the hell did I say that those are similar. When you are talking about trends, you take the first and last reference to be exactly dissimilar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
