C’MON BARBIE LET'S GO PARTY...AT LOS ALAMOS | BARBENHEIMER WEEKEND THREAD | We’re Thriving in our Plastic Fantastic Era | Mother Mothered with 162M | Daddy Exploded with 82.4M

[titanic2187]

If you make the whole cinema hall PLF, you will wash away the premium element in the PLF. It will be just like a standard screen since they are all the same now. 

[Ororo Munroe]

11 minutes ago, JustLurking said:

Japan didn't embrace TLM...it's one of the worst performing disney live actions in the market. It just didn't completely bomb there is all.

Embraced it compared to its competition and vs. other markets. Didn't claim it was a big hit but 20M is good in my book, given all it was up against.  

[budice]

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few...Or the one. 

[Firepower]

7 minutes ago, ZattMurdock said:

Top Gun Maverick worked because of Top Gun, not because of Tom Cruise, but the character he plays on that franchise, jingoistic America fuck yeah and all.

Cruise was incredibly vital in Maverick's success. If you remove him, it wouldn't do anything near those numbers.

[vale9001]

according to 2 of our trackers insane sunday for both (low teens drops) which should lead to a big big monday for both too

 

hoping for 161-162 final for Barbie and 83-84 for OP. 

[Grebacio]

2 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

If you make the whole cinema hall PLF, you will wash away the premium element in the PLF. It will be just like a standard screen since they are all the same now. 

[keysersoze123]

18 minutes ago, The Dark Alfred said:

Smaller, intimate screens are a better business model in the long run. What needs to change is vultures like Disney not charging crazy money crippling exhibitors and putting their content into streaming. I'm advocate to have more PLF screens, but need a right balance. If all cinemas have PLF the industry would collapse, it is crystal clear to see.

Not if their picture and sound quality is way worse than what you have in our home. But I am with you on Disney squeezing the exhibitors. 

[Water Bottle]

4 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

If you make the whole cinema hall PLF, you will wash away the premium element in the PLF. It will be just like a standard screen since they are all the same now. 

 

oh no every screen will have better visual and audio

[Kalo]

13 minutes ago, Krissykins said:

That’s actually the only X-Men film I haven’t seen. Will need to watch it at some point. 
 

 

Incredible for Barbie. $337m opening weekend. That UK number is insane. 

 

You haven't seen the best X-Men film?? watch it right away!

[vale9001]

6 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

If you make the whole cinema hall PLF, you will wash away the premium element in the PLF. It will be just like a standard screen since they are all the same now. 

 

Yeah from a market prospective you sell a premium cause people know there is something worst 😅.

 

the reality is in the future everything will be what is premium now and the new premium will have some confort and new tecnology, but you're right, making a difference is important for the market, it's with the non premium you give value to the premium.

Edited July 23, 2023 by vale9001

[ringedmortality]

I feel like I've heard "TV's are getting better and you can have the cinema experience at home for cheap" for like a decade now

[Kalo]

Bought my tickets for Barbie and watch Oppenheimer after  

[kayumanggi]

 

[Ororo Munroe]

33 minutes ago, vale9001 said:

 

please it was absolutely risky when you make a 150M + marketing budget movie (must be 50-100M when a movie has that budget) not a 50M cheap barbie movie. It's particulary risky when you make a barbie movie seems a drunk tim burton from the 80s.

 

And please not again "the actors are white" ....so? history of cinema has 1900000 bombs with white leads. 

Dune is famous too but it's not easy to make a successfull movie from that, Lynch knows it.

 

WB as always is the best when it's about taking different projects from what is around and make them the zeitgeist.

 

Kudos to them to be risky and for THIS Barbie movie. 

Uhh, the budget, including marketing, only further confirms that WB had confidence in the movie and didn't see it at as risky. Sorry, you'll never convince me that casting popular white actors in a well-known property is worth praising as risky. 

[Water Bottle]

3 minutes ago, ringedmortality said:

I feel like I've heard "TV's are getting better and you can have the cinema experience at home for cheap" for like a decade now

 

And it's worked for a lot of people. Lots of people prefer staying home and not going to the theater because their TV gives them a good enough experience for them.

 

Of course, TVs can't match the actual theatrical experience for most of us no matter how good the TV gets. We just don't have big enough homes.

 

Because in the end, it's the size of the screen that matters.

[SchumacherFTW]

Just now, Water Bottle said:

 

And it's worked for a lot of people. Lots of people prefer staying home and not going to the theater because their TV gives them a good enough experience for them.

 

Of course, TVs can't match the actual theatrical experience for most ous since no matter how good the TV gets. We just don't have big enough homes.

 

Because in the end, it's the size of the screen that matters.

I'd like the 8K push to end already, it's utterly pointless as no content will ever be made for it. 

[Arlborn]

2 hours ago, reddevil19 said:

The issue is it's WB. If the first few aren't hits, will they continue bankrolling the universe? And considering how low profile the movies outside Superman and Batman are...I'm not holding my breath.

Low profile? Man, have you seen how much freaking Aquaman did, the guy who talks to fish?! Not even gonna mention Wonder Woman’s numbers. The movies just need to be good fun.

Edited July 23, 2023 by Arlborn

[M37]

Just now, Jonwo said:

I wouldn't make every screen a PLF just because it's quite costly to have every screen be a PLF and some some cinemas simply can't do it due to size or location. In the UK, the boutique cinemas like Everyman have seen growth and their strategy is smaller cinemas that are a more premium experience and having been to one of their cinemas, it's pricey but worth it.

I think, in a backwards sort of way, the reduced foot traffic post-pandemic is gong to be a benefit to theaters in the long run (Studios? Maybe not so much). No longer having to make small margins on large volume, but rather working to improve the experience and generate higher revenue per a smaller number of customers. Quality over quantity, far lower ceiling, but much higher floor

 

Yeah, its going to be more pricey/upscale, push some of the GA out of the picture, and locations where the market won't support the more boutique version and relied on the volume may not survive. But seeing as its unlikely we get anywhere back to the admit level of even just a few years ago, I'm not sure there's another alternative. And studios will have to figure out how to make enough revenue post-theatrical to justify the blockbuster budgets, because the BO$ has a lower ceiling

[Joel M]

1 hour ago, Madhuvan said:

Okay just wanted to chime in

 

Without the clash Oppenheimer would have opened 30% lower and Barbie 10-20% higher

 

Oppenheimer really got that push because of Barbie 

 

I agree about Oppenheimer but don't necessarily agree about Barbie. I understand the thinking that if Barbie had IMAX and free reign over the weekend would simply gross 20m more but at the same time who knows if it would have the exact same excitiment if not for Barbenheimer hype. This wasn't something that was slapped last minute for Oppenheimer to piggyback on Barbie's hype. It's been slowly building for over a year from movie focus online circles to the rest of the internet to traditional media the last few weeks giving a ton of free coverage to both movies for every piece of marketing they dropped. 

 

I'm not arguing here that Barbie will suddenly drop to 100m OW without the double bill. But maybe losing the amount of people that went to see it because of said hype would negate whatever advantage the extra screens and PLFs would give it and open at exactly the same numbers or even slightly lower than what it's doing right now. 

[ZattMurdock]

2 minutes ago, Firepower said:

Cruise was incredibly vital in Maverick's success. If you remove him, it wouldn't do anything near those numbers.

And I agree wholeheartedly. Because Tom Cruise is, well, Top Gun. I don’t even know the name of his character really, I think it’s Goose and I just remember this name because in the MCU, the cute alien cat pet that Carol Danvers has is named after a Top Gun character, while in the comics the cat is called Chewie. I’d argue that this is a problem that Cruise has with his characters and maybe the curse of being one of the last movie stars: I almost never remember his characters names. All of them are Tom Cruise in my head.  Agree completely that you just can’t recast Cruise for Top Gun Maverick and get the kind of success that that film had. But if it wasn’t obvious one month ago, it’s obvious now that whatever boost people hoped TGM would give to M:I, it didn’t happen.