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

[WorkingonaName]

2 minutes ago, kayumanggi said:

 

I agree with this. I don't think we would see a similar number if this were from another director. Nolan is the brand.

 

Who are the other two directors, btw? Cameron and?

Tarintino if were speaking globally, 

[excel1]

28 minutes ago, YM! said:

It’s wild how bad Zaslav is at maintaining/retaining talent. Nolan may have gone to Universal due to Killar’s fault but Gerwig is doing her next two movies at Netflix.

 

 

Yeah WB is probably going to intervene there lol

[Ledmonkey96]

Just now, Deathlife said:

I'm just happy to see Barbie blow up.

 

A gloriously woke, feminist production dominating the box office. It's telling that the highest grossing movies of the summer domestic don't feature traditional white male leads. Just Across the Spider-Verse, the producers shoved a lot of "woke stuff" into Barbie (again, everyone is focused on Disney while other studios are even getting MORE transgressive with their movies).

 

To be clear, I don't have anything against white, male leads (Oppenheimer for example is a triumph)?but it puts the bed this stupid notion of "wokeness killing cinema".  This part or the world is getting increasingly diverse and folks just have to accept this. The numbers simply don't lie and I'm ready for a Hollywood that isn't afraid to present point of views that were hitherto unpopular before.

It's important to remember that being woke just means you do something like that badly. Otherwise no one really cares (aside from the usual suspects like shapiro. 

[CoolioD1]

I do think Flower Moon can be a hit*. I got the trailer before Mission Impossible and Oppenheimer and it plays!

 

*relatively a hit I mean. I know there's going to be a lot of "but the budget!!" when it comes out and doesn't make 500 million dollars but didn't Apple foot the bill anyway?

[Xavier]

Since my first stan, MI7, is pretty much dead at this point, I just want HP8 to retain the title of biggest WB opening. IS THAT TOO MUCH TO ASK??

[M37]

2 minutes ago, reddevil19 said:

I disagree. The PLF experience is the key here BECAUSE it's Nolan and he's synonymous with IMAX. Pretty much any other director just banking on the PLF gimmick will certainly not be able to deliver audiences the same way.

Previously, both Dune and TGM rode the “gotta see it in IMAX” wave, along with Avatar 2. Yeah, maybe you have to some kind of IP/brand to get enough people in the door for that WOM to catch on, but there a whole lot of people who probably don’t care much for Nolan or Oppenheimer who are still paying up to go watch 

[Jonwo]

Just now, CoolioD1 said:

I do think Flower Moon can be a hit*. I got the trailer before Mission Impossible and Oppenheimer and it plays!

 

*relatively a hit I mean. I know there's going to be a lot of "but the budget!!" when it comes out and doesn't make 500 million dollars but didn't Apple foot the bill anyway?

Apple funded most if all of Killers of the Flower Moon and Napoleon with Paramount and Sony distributing both. They'll lose money but Apple have oodles of cash, the iPhone 15 profits alone will cover it.

[Day and Date The Best]

9 minutes ago, M37 said:

Let’s be clear: Oppenheimer is not a typical “adult drama” 

 

The draw is as much the PLF/big screen experience, and while a director like Nolan (or Peele) can bring their own cache to the project, it’s not necessary to have them to get the GA interested. If the film has the goods, audiences will show up 

First Cameron then Nolan and Peele are Mainstream and General Audience, their fanbase is too big that is mainstream itself, they are The Taylor Swift, Blackpink, BTS of movie directors. 

Edited July 22, 2023 by Day and Date The Best

[swearwords]

[CoolioD1]

1 minute ago, Jonwo said:

Apple funded most if all of Killers of the Flower Moon and Napoleon with Paramount and Sony distributing both. They'll lose money but Apple have oodles of cash, the iPhone 15 profits alone will cover it.

Yeah that's what I mean for apple it's more about marketing their streaming service with buzzy titles more than anything it does at the BO.

[Mango]

Oppenheimer taking a stab at Inception adjusted is wild

[reddevil19]

1 minute ago, M37 said:

Previously, both Dune and TGM rode the “gotta see it in IMAX” wave, along with Avatar 2. Yeah, maybe you have to some kind of IP/brand to get enough people in the door for that WOM to catch on, but there a whole lot of people who probably don’t care much for Nolan or Oppenheimer who are still paying up to go watch 

None of the ones you mentioned are adult dramas. They were sold as anything BUT adult dramas. There's possibly something to be said about Oppenheimer being sold as a thriller, but nothing about it was on any level whatsoever to the movies you mentioned in terms of "action on the big screen". Sorry, but I'm not buying your argument whatsoever.

If KOTFM opens to 70 million and does 200+ DOM, 500+WW, I'll be more inclined to accept your point (though it would still be sold by Leo and Marty in IMAX, and not the PLF by itself).

[ringedmortality]

3 minutes ago, swearwords said:

New Mexico ftw

[coldpurry]

19 minutes ago, Issac Newton said:

WAY TOO EARLY TOP 5

 

1. BARBIE ($165M)

2. OPPENHEIMER ($80M)

3. MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE ($21M)

4. SOUND OF FREEDOM ($19M)

5. INDY 5 ($7M)

I have Insidious at 5

I think SAT numbers will rise

[redfirebird2008]

11 minutes ago, M37 said:

Let’s be clear: Oppenheimer is not a typical “adult drama” 

 

The draw is as much the PLF/big screen experience, and while a director like Nolan (or Peele) can bring their own cache to the project, it’s not necessary to have them to get the GA interested. If the film has the goods, audiences will show up 

Oppenheimer would not even exist without Nolan’s completely random interest in making the movie. The last time Hollywood tried a movie on this subject in 1989, it was a gigantic flop to the point that it would be viewed as box office poison if anyone in future decades wanted to do this type of project. But Nolan had strong enough influence with studio bosses to get approval for $100 million in production budget, plus a legit marketing campaign. 

[WorkingonaName]

5 minutes ago, swearwords said:

Misasippi keeping it real. 

[wildphantom]

I thought Flower Moon was coming to Apple TV+ very soon after its theatrical release. Or is the window now much longer? If it’s a matter of weeks I can’t see it putting up anything close to $150 million 

[harrisonisdead]

Quote

Warners wound up securing the AMC Dolby Vision screens in all spots where an Imax screen also exists, which I’m told was a smart move here since the movie is overperforming. PLFs, largely Dolby Vision, are greasing 10% of ticket sales and less than 700 auditoriums are generating that. The AMC Burbank is Barbie‘s top hub in the nation with $194K so far, including previews. Oppenheimer‘s Imax screens and a chunk of PLFs (non Dolby Vision) rep close to half of this weekend’s gross (yowza).

For those who were wondering about the PLF allocation for Barbie.

[TomThomas]

15 minutes ago, kayumanggi said:

 

I agree with this. I don't think we would see a similar number if this were from another director. Nolan is the brand.

 

Who are the other two directors, btw? Cameron and?

Cameron and Tarantino.

[BoxOfficeZ]

6 minutes ago, swearwords said:

 

So NM is where @MrPinklives