THE BATMAN WEEKEND THREAD | 134M OW DOM, 258.2M WW | Biggest WB opening since BvS. First non Disney-affiliated 100M OW since 2018

[El Gato]

So DC’s recent films (from MOS up until TSS) have an average of 2.86 when it comes to legs at the box office, though that may be inflated because Wonder Woman, Aquaman and Joker all had tremendous legs (above 3.40) but still something to consider since The Batman seems well received and has March to itself.

 

130(2.86) gets us 371.8M domestically. I thinks that’s a good guess to where it’ll end up, but it could overperform (ala Joker, Aquaman, Wonder Woman) or underperform (ala BVS, JL, MOS, TSS). Guess we’ll see with actuals. 

[Menor the Destroyer]

28 minutes ago, JediJones said:

I don't think special effects have been all that impressive lately compared to 2000-2009. The new Star Wars movies look incredibly dull next to Lucas' prequels. Jackson's 2005 King Kong had a much better Kong and battle scenes than the current 'Monster-verse' stuff. Heck, Universal recently posted videos of the dinosaur fight from that movie on YouTube and racked up 100s of millions of hits in a couple years. Far more hits than people who actually saw the movie in theaters in 2005. While the sheer number of superhero movies has produced some with impressive effects, most of them aren't that visually exciting. Remember that cool shot from Captain Marvel? Me neither. Aquaman was one of the only superhero movies that ever had as many dazzling visual effects as Avatar. Dr. Strange is still recycling effects concepts from Inception, a 12-year-old movie. The Pirates and Transformers movies had some of the coolest effects starting in the 2000s, but those series died out due to story issues. So I have COMPLETE confidence that Avatar 2 is going to have truly dazzling, jaw-dropping effects that look much better than almost anything else we've seen since Avatar 1.

Yep. Visual imagination in 2010s blockbusters was almost nothing compared to the previous decade. Much easier landscape for Avatar 2 to stand out, I think.

[WorkingonaName]

35 minutes ago, JediJones said:

Heck, Universal recently posted videos of the dinosaur fight from that movie on YouTube and racked up 100s of millions of hits in a couple years. F

 

The Kong vs Rex fight has more views on YouTube then most movies get admissions.

[ThomasNicole]

Yeah, VFX recently are mostly pretty bad 

 

Studios are making movies with so much CGI that it's basically an animated picture but they make it way faster than they should with a criminal short time to post production, what we get are movies that start to look cheap right after release.

 

The last example of this is NWH, that movie was ugly af, the entire climax looks completely bland and dark to hide bad effects, and i suspect VOD version will be better because despite being released in december, effects team was working on the movie until near February, the movie wasn't even completely done for theatrical release, it's ridiculous.

 

Movies that use more practical effects are being more praised recently exactly because the CGI looks uninpressive in most movies, technology is better than it was in the last decade for sure but way worse executed and rendered.

[EmpireCity]

$34m

[BruiseCruise]

4 minutes ago, EmpireCity said:

$34m

No Way Home 🤝 The Batman

 

Overperforming OW estimate by 7 mil

[BestPicturePlutoNash]

4 minutes ago, EmpireCity said:

$34m

This would be huge. BOM is projecting 28m Sunday. Would get it to 134, right?

 

Higher than BVS opening Sunday which was 33.7 on Easter

[EmpireCity]

Might end up closer to $33m, but unlike yesterday when $46m was super early and some of the data was fucked from the day before, feel a lot more confident on this.  

 

It's going way over the projected $28m and will finish well above $130m for the weekend.  

[grim22]

Next weekend will obviously tell us more but it feels like there was a calibration of movie expectation on Friday. The word of mouth was good but it was more useful to set the expectation to not look for a typical CBM here. Saturday and Sunday might just be the result of that. Might play to older audiences on the weekdays and everyone else on the weekends.

[Porthos]

8 minutes ago, EmpireCity said:

$34m

 

I think I originally pegged this as landing in the 135m - 160m zone, while hoping for $150m.

 

Quote

Fair enuf.

 

Ironically, I think because this has nothing to do with the last two movies the character of Batman was in, then the popularity of the brand itself can take center stage.  As mentioned in previous threads, my range was in the 135-160 ish range*.  Probably should bump up the range a bit, but my inherent caution is holding me back from going too high.  Probs in the 140-165 range right now.

 

* Yes, I know I IN'd grim's club.  Shaddup. 

 

Dunno.  Just feels like a wave is building, ya' know?  If things start to go south/new variant emerges/everything that can go wrong does go wrong, 130-ish wouldn't surprise me.  But much lower than that?

 

Well, Joker did 96m+ and that was an R-rated non-action film that had a fair amount of controversy/backlash in the domestic market at release, while this is a PG-13  film with literally zero controversy.  Now this is longer, sure, but we have ticket inflation coming in again.  Just seems to me that 120m is kinda the floor, if only coz of all of the flippin' hype.

 

 

 

...

 

...

 

...

 

 

Spoiler

ignore all of my other commentary + me joining grim's club.

 

...

 

I blame Morbius moving, ftr.

 

[AdrianL]

That would be not that below true Friday (35.5). Wow.

 

And if that holds... above Suicide Squad's OW.

[AnDr3s]

13 minutes ago, BestPicturePlutoNash said:

Higher than BVS opening Sunday which was 33.7 on Easter

already outgrossing BvS daily gross lol

[charlie Jatinder]

Some March movies Sunday to full run multiples

The Hunger Games - 7.34x
300: Rise of Empire - 5.35x
Logan - 5.72x
Kong Skull Island - 6.35x
Captain Marvel - 6.61x



6.6x get it to $335M. With SUN hold of just 23% drop, I think this can do 7x surely. On top of that lack of competition, won't be surprised with 7.5x as well. That would be $384M. My pick would close to latter.

[Liiviig 1998]

Wonder how the runtime will affect weekday numbers?

Signs of legs are starting to show.

 

Will go with Deadpool numbers.

[Porthos]

Interesting to see some of the entries into @grim22's club before the superhype took over too greatly:

 

On 12/27/2021 at 10:55 PM, Porthos said:

Ooof.  Right now I'm at +/- 150m OW, with 165m probably my current ceiling.  But that's too close for me to say 'out' but ain't an 'in' yet either.

 

On 12/28/2021 at 9:10 AM, PenguinXXR said:

OUT but I wouldn’t be surprised if it happens. Right now I’m thinking right around $145-155M so over performing my expectations a bit wouldn’t be that shocking.

 

On 12/29/2021 at 2:37 AM, CJohn said:

130-140M OW. Out.

 

On 12/29/2021 at 2:37 PM, Menor Reborn said:

OUT. ~140m. 

 

On 12/29/2021 at 2:41 PM, Darth Lehnsherr said:

OUT $140M

 

 

On 12/30/2021 at 1:20 PM, Fox20 said:

Out 140-145M top.

 

On 12/30/2021 at 6:56 PM, datpepper said:

I don't think this will quite be on the level of TDKR or BvS OW with a new cast, even if there's buzz around R Patz. Could see a sequel to this hitting up there, though. Agreeing with $120-140m range. OUT for now.

 

On 1/4/2022 at 6:21 PM, Villain Legion said:

Out 120ish

 

On 1/5/2022 at 1:09 AM, SchumacherFTW said:

120m feels like a top end for this to me

 

On 1/5/2022 at 10:44 PM, Nero said:

On 1/5/2022 at 1:09 AM, SchumacherFTW said:

120m feels like a top end for this to me

 

Same. Out

 

On 1/12/2022 at 10:48 AM, Asyulus said:

Out

 

$130M

 

On 1/15/2022 at 8:02 PM, 21C said:

I see a path for it but I'm out for now. I think it's gonna do 150 million OW but have really good legs.

 

On 1/18/2022 at 9:33 PM, Kalo said:

Out, it will open will but it is a reboot not very long after the last one that wasn't very well liked. $140-$150m opening. it's not impossible but I'm not counting on it. 

 

On 1/26/2022 at 6:40 PM, DAJK said:

Out. 120M or so

 

On 1/26/2022 at 6:40 PM, DAJK said:

Out. 120M or so

 

On 1/27/2022 at 1:19 AM, peludo said:

I am out. Thinking in 120-130. But I wish this club succeeds

 

[Cut off at Feb 1st]

 

No, I didn't post some of the higher guesses, never mind the INs (including mine which was more a hope than anything else).  But I was struck at how many people were in the 120-140/145 range, and it looks to be coming in at around 133m +/-.

 

Not too bad for that far out.

 

(and also maybe a sign that not all of this board was predicting mega numbers even before pre-sales started which PERHAPS says something about our collective expectations back in Jan)

((and, yes, this wouldn't include any updated numbers from @PenguinXXR's contest or from Derby entries))

[JediJones]

43 minutes ago, ThomasNicole said:

The last example of this is NWH, that movie was ugly af, the entire climax looks completely bland and dark to hide bad effects, and i suspect VOD version will be better because despite being released in december, effects team was working on the movie until near February, the movie wasn't even completely done for theatrical release, it's ridiculous.

Yeah, other than the bridge fight, the action itself in NWH wasn't dynamically directed at all. And they didn't think of anything new or original for the villains to do that would require any creative applications of effects.

 

Even if the effects work is passable in modern movies, it's not usually giving us the kinds of breakthroughs that defined an effects blockbuster back in the day. That can come from merging the right concept with the right emerging effects technology. Star Wars and Jurassic Park gave us more dynamic and realistic spaceship and dinosaur scenes than we had ever seen before. Superman invented flying technology during production to take the old "Peter Pan-style" flying to a new, more realistic level. Who Framed Roger Rabbit made breakthroughs on merging animation and live-action. Terminator 2 was a case where a brand new idea for a movie villain (albeit inspired by the comic book Sandman) dovetailed with a very new effects technology.

 

In current movies, how can Spider-Man swinging around and fighting Doc Ock look any more impressive than it did in 2004? How can an X-Wing swooping through a Death Star trench look better than it did in the Special Editions or Prequels? The lack of bringing original ideas, or at least the right kind of revisited ideas to match to improved effects, can be just as much of a drag on a special effects movie as flawed effects work.

 

New advancements may be more subtle now, and harder to explain to audiences, than they were when CGI came on the scene. But the kinds of camera advancements that made the first Star Wars possible still had a major impact in what kind of scenes that movie could create. I think we know the facial capture tech in Avatar made the Na'vi more relatable, and prevented them from looking like cartoons or uncanny valley characters. That meant we could buy into his fantasy world in a bigger way, and get more immersed in the story, just as we were able to in Star Wars and Jurassic Park. He could shoot the characters in close-up, and get more emotion across in their performances.

 

I don't know exactly what the purpose of the technology Cameron is cooking up for Avatar 2 really is, nor understand how it will specifically make the movie look better. But based on his track record, I have a feeling it will help bring his story to life in a vivid and convincing way. I imagine it will give him the freedom to attempt scenes that are different in some way from anything we've seen before.

Edited March 7, 2022 by JediJones

[BestPicturePlutoNash]

Yeah, NWH visually doesn’t compare to what Raimi did in 2004. Hopefully Dr Strange has that same visual flair 

[JediJones]

The Dr. Strange trailers have a lot of cool shots in them. I'm pretty confident that might be the best-looking superhero movie since Aquaman. At the same time, pure fantasy effects don't quite have the same impact that believable, lifelike ones do. Looking at his face divide up like sliced cheese, isn't something I can relate to in the real world. So I don't really know how realistic or not realistic that looks.

[Eric Lasagna]

 

[AnDr3s]

19 minutes ago, BestPicturePlutoNash said:

Yeah, NWH visually doesn’t compare to what Raimi did in 2004. Hopefully Dr Strange has that same visual flair 

NWH looks similar to spider man 3 and that movie is 15 years old

Edited March 7, 2022 by AnDr3s