Ghostbusters 2021 weekend Nov 19-21: Afterlife $44M OW | E: $10.8m | RD: $8.1m

[Cmasterclay]

2 hours ago, wildphantom said:

yep. And plenty of them would have come out to see it if it wasn’t on there. Nice one WB. Lol. 

I'm going to admit it....I am busy as hell (campaign life) and haven't had a chance to see King Richard yet, and with these numbers taking the time out in the middle of a busy day to see it theaters instead of HBO Max late at night when I'm free is just me trying to prove a failing, losing point more than anything. And if I feel that way as a pro-theaters militant, imagine how normies feel! It's so easy to watch!

[TinRoyce]

7 hours ago, thedast said:

People have been really forgiving of Dune because they NEED it to be seen as a huge success which is funny to me. It's already got a sequel (which will hopefully be more deserving of this energy) greenlighted it's fine. It's still yet another big budget IP-milking remake so why act like it's some underdog indie flick. I wish people were this gung ho about actual mid-budget smaller scale movies they say they need to stay in theatres. 

Is Dune any more of a remake than Lord of the Rings was in 2001 (given the existence of the 1970s animated films)? It's part of a wave of big budget adaptations of famous sci-fi "IP" but the first attempt to adapt Dune was a creative and commercial failure and almost no one watched it in the intervening years.  It's not Blade Runner 2049 (even if the former is why Dune is treated as some underdog indie flick)

[filmnerdjamie]

3 minutes ago, Maggie said:

Nostalgia sells these days, but it seems critics and Film twitter are against it

They went scorched Earth on Afterlife as retaliation for how Answer the Call was received.

 

Ironic how selective their feminism is since this is a kids adventure film with a little girl as the lead. Alas that doesn't fit their narrative.

[Merkel]

2 minutes ago, TinRoyce said:

Is Dune any more of a remake than Lord of the Rings was in 2001 (given the existence of the 1970s animated films)? It's part of a wave of big budget adaptations of famous sci-fi "IP" but the first attempt to adapt Dune was a creative and commercial failure and almost no one watched it in the intervening years.  It's not Blade Runner 2049 (even if the former is why Dune is treated as some underdog indie flick)

 

 

Indeed. There's no way to claim that this version of Dune relied on the existence of the 1984 film to gain any sort of exposure or brand recognition. It is not a remake. It's a re-adaptation

[filmlover]

The franchise consistency is definitely nothing but good news (though I guess it remains to be seen if Sony is happy with an IP that clearly has a ceiling as to how high it can go). This seems certain to end up with a total similar to the $128M of the '16 movie at least since two out of its next three weekends should result in good-ish drops due to holidays/little competition (post-Thanksgiving weekend always results in large decreases) before the cavalcade of Christmas releases starting with Spider-Man obliterate everything from November due to screen space. 

[wildphantom]

2 minutes ago, Cmasterclay said:

I'm going to admit it....I am busy as hell (campaign life) and haven't had a chance to see King Richard yet, and with these numbers taking the time out in the middle of a busy day to see it theaters instead of HBO Max late at night when I'm free is just me trying to prove a failing, losing point more than anything. And if I feel that way as a pro-theaters militant, imagine how normies feel! It's so easy to watch!

I get it! It’s their own fault. 
fortunately the day and date HBO Max is coming to an end, but the question marks around adult dramas are largely because of the confusion it’s caused. 
The message that new studio movies are only in cinemas is loud and clear internationally, but US audiences are understandably bewildered. 
 

it’ll all settle down. I’m hopeful Gucci breaks out a bit. 
 

I saw Richard on Friday in cinemas in the U.K.  If it had been on a service I pay for, I might not have gone. Or at least I wouldn’t have felt it as being essential as the studio clearly wasn’t bothered. That subconscious reaction must be everywhere with US cinemagoers for day and date movies. 
 

I think HBO Max has had a massive impact on other adult skewered movies that aren’t day and date too. People need a consistent message right through how these things are distributed. 

[John Marston]

Can No Time to Die crawl to 160m?

[Starphanluke]

That Eternals number feels no bueno.

[Eric is Quiet]

 

[Flopped]

LOL ... the fights in the replies 

 

 

[Krissykins]

5 minutes ago, filmlover said:

The franchise consistency is definitely nothing but good news (though I guess it remains to be seen if Sony is happy with an IP that clearly has a ceiling as to how high it can go). This seems certain to end up with a total similar to the $128M of the '16 movie.

Yeh I agree. I think it’s impressive that this film maintained a big chunk of the last films audience (think the GB2016 was around $49m adjusted). And having another $40m+ is good for box office in general. 
 

I don’t think the 2016 film did the damage some people like to think it done. Especially not to kids and general audiences. That’s pretty clear now. 
 

This new one isn’t as big in scale (budget is almost half). So maybe Sony will greenlight a direct sequel at a slightly bigger budget so they can film in New York again. 

[filmlover]

3 minutes ago, wildphantom said:

I think HBO Max has had a massive impact on other adult skewered movies that aren’t day and date too. People need a consistent message right through how these things are distributed. 

The fact every single Oscar contender last year ended up a glorified streaming release likely resulted in a shift in viewing patterns for that audience that wasn't easily reverting back to normal overnight. We're probably gonna have to wait a while to see if there really is no closing that Pandora's box, especially when studios like WB have already been on record as stating that they don't believe dramas or comedies can survive at the multiplex right now and are shifting the majority of those projects to streaming.

[Krissykins]

1 hour ago, von Kenni said:

Perfectly okay to say that premature and we'll get much better numbers after the weekend but where I'm basing the numbers and my "hopefully enlightened" guesses are things like:

 

The UK opening is considerably stronger than G2016. Based on that and the knowing that it most likely has good to great legs in UK as in the US it's heading to at least 50% higher run than the G2016. Since we're just beginning, this can change but I think as an early estimate it's a valid argument to make. I'll expect Nordics delivering the same way.

 

The "bombing" of Germany is still around 30% higher OW than G2016 and with the legs it'll probably get to that 50% higher overall again. In Italy it looks like the same based on Fri & Sat.

 

Based on these early OW results, the legs comparison, Stranger Things global phenomenality, and the demos that it is already reaching in the US, we can see the signs that it can reach at least 50% higher OS than G2016 which would be $150m but room for getting much higher if the legs are there + having broader demo appeal potentials. I think especially Europe is strong for this.

Your $160-200m international gross guess will be tough with a $16m start from 31 territories with more than a third coming from a 4 day UK weekend:

 

 

Edited November 21, 2021 by Krissykins

[Ryan Reynolds]

44m is pretty great for Ghostbusters , i wonder if Top Gun 2 could have done 50m

[Cmasterclay]

4 minutes ago, Ryan Reynolds said:

44m is pretty great for Ghostbusters , i wonder if Top Gun 2 could have done 50m

Easily. People continue to wildly underestimate it. Top Gun is different than most other nostalgia reboots, which usually have to deal with being a "spiritual sequel" or psuedo-reboot, or a bunch of shitty sequels, or an aging star, or bad reviews. Top Gun's star is still somehow the biggest action star on Earth, it is a direct sequel with no gimmick, and I have read from several very reliable people that the movie is very good. 60m+ 3-day over Memorial Day.

[filmlover]

4 minutes ago, Ryan Reynolds said:

44m is pretty great for Ghostbusters , i wonder if Top Gun 2 could have done 50m

Top Gun 2 should manage a 4-day opening similar to No Time to Die's 3-day with its gimmicky Memorial Day release date, at least.

[charlie Jatinder]

39 minutes ago, Maggie said:

Good number for G:A. I'm more confident it will post a good total, 130M maybe?

I can see it do 150M easily.

[wildphantom]

10 minutes ago, filmlover said:

The fact every single Oscar contender last year ended up a glorified streaming release likely resulted in a shift in viewing patterns for that audience that wasn't easily reverting back to normal overnight. We're probably gonna have to wait a while to see if there really is no closing that Pandora's box, especially when studios like WB have already been on record as stating that they don't believe dramas or comedies can survive at the multiplex right now and are shifting the majority of those projects to streaming.

agree to an extent. 
It’s still my firm belief that if people want to see the movies and their only option is to actually leave the house - well, they’ll come out. 
 

people underestimate the size of audiences that go to see prestige films and be part of the conversation. Just because it’s not blockbuster sized numbers, that doesn’t mean it’s not a significant crowd. 
 

I don’t believe they’ll all of a sudden just not see those movies because they’re not on tv day one.  
 

The hit they’ve taken is not so dramatic that we’re talking tens of millions of people either.  I’d wager the chunk of willing ticket buyers who would have shown up this weekend for KR would have made it a decent opening with room to grow. 

[Maggie]

Just now, Cmasterclay said:

Easily. People continue to wildly underestimate it. Top Gun is different than most other nostalgia reboots, which usually have to deal with being a "spiritual sequel" or psuedo-reboot, or a bunch of shitty sequels, or an aging star, or bad reviews. Top Gun's star is still somehow the biggest action star on Earth, it is a direct sequel with no gimmick, and I have read from several very reliable people that the movie is very good. 60m+ 3-day over Memorial Day.

Actually, from what i've heard it's using the nostalgia at the maximum. The first 13 minuted that already screened are exactly the same as the first movie. Then we have, playing sports on the beach, singing in the bar....etc. Critics hate this type of nostalgia these days (just look how they destroyed G:A). Movie will be torn to shreds by critics. I don't know how the audience will react tho..

[wildphantom]

4 minutes ago, Cmasterclay said:

Easily. People continue to wildly underestimate it. Top Gun is different than most other nostalgia reboots, which usually have to deal with being a "spiritual sequel" or psuedo-reboot, or a bunch of shitty sequels, or an aging star, or bad reviews. Top Gun's star is still somehow the biggest action star on Earth, it is a direct sequel with no gimmick, and I have read from several very reliable people that the movie is very good. 60m+ 3-day over Memorial Day.

This. 
 

Top Gun Maverick is in the Mission: Impossible wheelhouse as far as audiences are concerned. They know it’s Tom doing crazy things on an enormous scale. Most of the Impossible crowd will be there.