TOM CRUISE LOVES HIS POPCORN. MOVIES. POPCORN: THE WEEKEND THREAD | We are just waiting for Barbenheimer here

[John Marston]

Mi2 is weird. Most of the film is really dull but starting from the injection scene to the end it is pretty fun so I can see why people left the theater satisfied at the time. Fun fact, the first films was heavily criticized for having a confusing plot so the sequel was purposefully simplified to address that

 

 

also love how Hans Zimmer brought in the same vocalist from his Gladiator score (which came out three weeks earlier) and tried to create something similar sounding here

 

 

[John Marston]

12 minutes ago, LegionWrex said:

In retrospect I blame the shifting public perception of Tom Cruise at the time (particularly during the mid-2000s) and M:I2's somewhat "eh" reception among critics and audiences. M:I2 has a cult following nowadays but it's easy to forget that people were mostly just kind of it not really for it when it first came out, it was mostly a huge hit cause it was at the height of Cruise's star power and the first film's success.

 

Also another fun fact about M:I2 is that while it was the big winner of 2000 in terms of WW box office, domestically it was beaten by How the Grinch Stole Christmas, of all things.

 

 

in terms of tickets sold this ain't sniffing the first two. Hell it might not beat Cocktail adjusted

[lab276]

14 minutes ago, interiorgatordecorator said:

so pretty much the exact same 5-day as MI2

wonder what 79 million in 2000 is today, too lazy to do that math, but I assume DR is selling half as many tickets as 2 did

maybe in another world mission impossible is a 400-million-dollar franchise (instead of the usual 200), that of course would have required 2 and 3 to have been better and for tom cruise to have had a more normal early 2000's

 

It would be like almost 170m.

[WorkingonaName]

13 minutes ago, LegionWrex said:

 

Also another fun fact about M:I2 is that while it was the big winner of 2000 in terms of WW box office, domestically it was beaten by How the Grinch Stole Christmas, of all things.

This is the first time I side with the Americans, the Grinch top 5 Christmas movie. 

[ThomasNicole]

Ok i know the opening itself is kinda bad but the trend has been good and the SAT jump is excellent from a 14-ish FRI, this shows there are a reasonable argument to make that the movie won’t collapse because of competition. 
 

Weekdays can be strong due to IMAX final days, then it will be hit hard but i think it will just course correct after next weekend.
 

Just like the OW ended up being similar to how MI usually performs, i think the full run won’t be much different as well.
 

Still thinking 210M finish

Edited July 16, 2023 by ThomasNicole

[lab276]

If 2023 had the same ticket sales as 2000, the box office would be over 16b.

[LegionWrex]

6 minutes ago, John Marston said:

also love how Hans Zimmer brought in the same vocalist from his Gladiator score (which came out three weeks earlier) and tried to create something similar sounding here

 

 

I'm not huge on M:I2 - I think for all of it's cool moments in the back 20 minutes it's oddly dull for John Woo and also has some strange editing choices that makes it feel chopped up - but Hans Zimmer's score is excellent. I have it tied with Giacchino's work on the 4th as my favourite in the series, it's just such a grand, epic score that elevates the entire film. The first 2 minutes of Bare Island is insane.

[TalismanRing]

47 minutes ago, M37 said:

That Saturday number, if it holds, would be just a hair below Fallout’s opening Saturday. Also not sure why anyone would project a -15% Sun, both Fallout and RN had a -20%

 

Just throwing this out there, given the “we hear”: I wonder if Anthony’s source knows the Friday number is inflated by ~$2M in leftover EA, and isn’t mistakenly projecting a +28% from the reported $16.5M rather than theTFri of ~$14.5M

 

No reason to just go up 28% minus previews just like no reason not to have Friday jump of 75%.  It's behaving like a 2nd w/e with so much early demand used up from Monday to Thur.

 

[JustLurking]

6 minutes ago, ThomasNicole said:

Ok i know the opening itself is bad but the trend has been good and the SAT jump is excellent from a 14-ish FRI, this shows there are a reasonable argument to make that the movie won’t collapse because of competition. 
 

Weekdays can be strong due to IMAX final days, then it will be hit hard but i think it will just course correct after next weekend.
 

Just like the OW ended up being similar to how MI usually performs, i think the full run won’t be much different as well.
 

Still thinking 210M finish

Is the opening bad though? This is what I don't really get, even before seeing the big saturday jump it was going to be at worst down like 10% from fallout's 5-day total, now it'll probably be on par or slightly ahead. People acted like it was a disastrous opening, wtf.

 

Obviously legs won't be as good as Fallout's but that has nothing to do with the OW, they just picked a bad date.

 

Only actual disastrous performance for this film was China.

Edited July 16, 2023 by JustLurking

[TalismanRing]

9 minutes ago, WorkingonaName said:

This is the first time I side with the Americans, the Grinch top 5 Christmas movie. 

 

The movie is dreadful (though not as horrific as Meyer's Cat In The Hat) .  The TV animated 30 minutes is a masterpiece.

 

 

Edited July 16, 2023 by TalismanRing

[Gavin Feng]

11 minutes ago, Ryan Reynolds said:

after seeing the film, under Rogue Nation seems about right

 

I agree. This one is not so ingenious like MI5/MI6 and more like Jack Reacher. Plots and actions are not integrated with each other well like MI6 (more actions) or MI1 (more plots). I do really think it's kind of like Matrix 2.

 

[The GOAT]

8 minutes ago, lab276 said:

If 2023 had the same ticket sales as 2000, the box office would be over 16b.

Difference between a $5 ticket and a $15 one.

[Webslinger]

15 minutes ago, LegionWrex said:

In retrospect I blame the shifting public perception of Tom Cruise at the time (particularly during the mid-2000s) and M:I2's somewhat "eh" reception among critics and audiences. M:I2 has a cult following nowadays but it's easy to forget that people were mostly just kind of it not really for it when it first came out, it was mostly a huge hit cause it was at the height of Cruise's star power and the first film's success.

 

Also another fun fact about M:I2 is that while it was the big winner of 2000 in terms of WW box office, domestically it was beaten by How the Grinch Stole Christmas, of all things.

13-year-old me, who vibed hard with M:I-2 on DVD in the summer of 2004 for whatever reason, feels vindicated that enough people have come around on seeing it for the cheesy fun it is. I think it's handily the weakest entry in the franchise, but I still have a lot of fun whenever I revisit it for franchise rewatches. Definitely makes me wish that John Woo had gotten better projects to work with afterward, since his style still comes through despite obvious post-production interference.

 

2000 is a really wacky box office year in general. There are so many stats on #1s, repeat #1s, $100 million grossers, all-time opening charts of the time, massive breakouts, and... well... basically everything about The Grinch's run that feel like they needed several footnotes to fully explain their context even just a few years later. In many ways, it felt like the last hurrah of the box office trends of the '90s before opening weekends and emphasis on franchises and IP began to absolutely explode in '01.

[WorkingonaName]

7 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

 

The movie is dreadful (though not as horrific as Meyer's Cat In The Hat) .  The TV animated 30 minutes is a masterpiece.

 

 

I do not tolerate Cat in the Hat slander. 

[LegionWrex]

1 minute ago, Webslinger said:

13-year-old me, who vibed hard with M:I-2 on DVD in the summer of 2004 for whatever reason, feels vindicated that enough people have come around on seeing it for the cheesy fun it is. I think it's handily the weakest entry in the franchise, but I still have a lot of fun whenever I revisit it for franchise rewatches. Definitely makes me wish that John Woo had gotten better projects to work with afterward, since his style still comes through despite obvious post-production interference.

 

2000 is a really wacky box office year in general. There are so many stats on #1s, repeat #1s, $100 million grossers, all-time opening charts of the time, massive breakouts, and... well... basically everything about The Grinch's run that feel like they needed several footnotes to fully explain their context even just a few years later. In many ways, it felt like the last hurrah of the box office trends of the '90s before opening weekends and emphasis on franchises and IP began to absolutely explode in '01.

Agreed. That year is a blast to go back to look to cause it's a really weird year in general. Gladiator being as big of a hit as it was despite being pegged as a bomb, rom-coms like What Women Want still dominating the box office. It feels like the 90s snuck in.

 

And then suddenly 2001 happens and LOTR and HP both killed everything else in their path that year to the point where it was kind of ridiculous. The jump from third place (Monsters Inc. at $529M) to Fellowship ($884M) is actually absurd.

[ThomasNicole]

10 minutes ago, JustLurking said:

Is the opening bad though? This is what I don't really get, even before seeing the big saturday jump it was going to be at worst down like 10% from fallout's 5-day total, now it'll probably be on par or slightly ahead. People acted like it was a disastrous opening, wtf.

 

Obviously legs won't be as good as Fallout's but that has nothing to do with the OW, they just picked a bad date.

 

Only actual disastrous performance for this film was China.

Numbers itself aren’t bad but the initial performance is for sure, very hard to no see it as sour disappointment.
 

Not necessarily because of Top Gun arguments or anything like it but because is coming from likely the best action movie of the last decade (along with Fury Road) and it’s being just as praised so it’s bad that it ended up doing under the low-end projection. 
 

But like i said i’m not expecting a bad finish, it’ll be decent i’m confident. The only thing strongly against it really is the budget but we know why it’s so big so nothing that should be criticized. 

[TalismanRing]

22 minutes ago, WorkingonaName said:

I do not tolerate Cat in the Hat slander. 

 

Written it would be libel but truth is a defense to either. 

[emoviefan]

55 minutes ago, Webslinger said:

I was thinking about this while rewatching the entire franchise in the run-up to seeing Dead Reckoning today, but it is kinda weird to think how the first two Mission: Impossible films both posted the third biggest opening weekend ever at their respective times of release, while none of the subsequent sequels sniffed anywhere near those relative heights.

 

During said rewatches, I also remembered how badly M:I-III underperformed at the box office and was glad that the whole franchise wasn't just canceled right then and there. I'll never forget my jaw literally dropping when I got back home from a weekend trip with no internet access (because 2006, LOL) and saw that film's $48 million weekend estimate, which then dropped even further with actuals. Between that and the general backlash to Tom Cruise over his public antics around that time, it really seemed like the franchise was dead in the water. To see it still getting a $290 million budgeted Part One 17 years later feels absolutely bonkers in the best way.

Yep I remember what a depressing weekend that was. 

[emoviefan]

22 minutes ago, ThomasNicole said:

Numbers itself aren’t bad but the initial performance is for sure, very hard to no see it as sour disappointment.
 

Not necessarily because of Top Gun arguments or anything like it but because is coming from likely the best action movie of the last decade (along with Fury Road) and it’s being just as praised so it’s bad that it ended up doing under the low-end projection. 
 

But like i said i’m not expecting a bad finish, it’ll be decent i’m confident. The only thing strongly against it really is the budget but we know why it’s so big so nothing that should be criticized. 

Imagine if Paramount had actually you know ran a decent marketing campaign and scheduled it better, . Maybe it would not have to rely on WOM keeping it afloat and not get slaughtered next weelend and recover. 

[WorkingonaName]

9 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

 

Written it would be libel but truth is a defense to either.