Weekend Thread 7/28-7/30 - Barbenheimer Week 2; Barbie 93M/Oppy 46.2M - Haunted Mansion & Talk to Me OW; Mansion 24.2M, Talk 10M

[Borobudur]

6 hours ago, CJohn said:

Did anyone else watch Cobweb here? Like, the final 15-20 minutes had me in the edge of my seat like nothing else in a long time (I was alone in the theater and I had to turn the light on of my phone for a few seconds because of how scared and nervous I was), but the abrupt ending left a soar taste in my mouth. I wanted to know if I was the only one.

 

Edit: tagging @Krissykins and @baumer because you guys usually watch most horror releaaes.

Was not had a limited release in US during Barbieheimer week? How come Lionsgate is not reporting any numbers ? 

[Krissykins]

1 hour ago, BoxOfficeFangrl said:

Barbie had ONE HUNDRED brand deals?! And I thought the James Bond movies overdid it with the marketing/product placement...

 

 

Thankfully there are very few product placements in the actual film. Chevrolet is the only one that springs to mind, as Barbie’s car is one. 
 

One hundred promotional partners/brand deals isn’t out of the norm. See Man of Steel (98 - worth $170m), Dark Knight Rises (worth $150m), No Time To Die (worth $150m), Avengers Endgame (worth $200m). 

The Little Mermaid’s were worth $85m. The most for a Disney Live action film. 

Thankfully it doesn’t mean the products will appear in the film, just that the companies get to use the film and will promote it pre-release with tie-ins. 
 

This money doesn’t cost the studio. 

Edited July 31, 2023 by Krissykins

[IronJimbo & Sheldon's Son]

It's easy to dismiss the "outrage" from Japanese people as them going overboard if you've seen Oppenheimer but I think it's important to realise that pretty much nobody in Japan has seen Oppenheimer yet, spoilers ahead but

 

Spoiler

We know that it only shows the Trinity Test, so the nuclear explosion in all the promo material is not the one that killed tens of thousands of civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. However before Oppenheimer came out I remember lots of people thinking Nolan would actually depict those bombings, and I'm sure a lot of people in Japan are wondering that too. So for Barbie's official twitter account to come out and endorse things like Barbie with mushroom cloud hair and replying "it's gonna be a summer to remember" to a poster of Barbie smiling in front of the nukes (which they think is of Hiroshima/Nagasaki) can easily come across as distasteful.

 

[vale9001]

7 hours ago, G Doss said:

European elections have seen conservative candidates do quite well in recent elections. Not sure why people are writing off Sound of Freedom there. Why would a similar grassroots campaign not work there given the current political zeitgeist?

 

I don't know how to explain it but yes conservatives and religious people are everywhere but such a level cultism is really an american thing, both in politics than in religion.

People going to watch from nothing a movie cause proves something (still didn' understand what too 😅)...just not happening. 

And why spanish and italian conservatives should also prove a point watching a "casual" american movie...seems a very cultural imperialist point of a view. They should be nationalists after all 🤣 (especially after russia war situation right extremists in my country are btw really anti american). 

In conclusion: no one care about this movie  with a c-list tv actor. 

 

Edited July 31, 2023 by vale9001

[Jonwo]

46 minutes ago, Krissykins said:

Thankfully there are very few product placements in the actual film. Chevrolet is the only one that springs to mind, as Barbie’s car is one. 
 

One hundred promotional partners/brand deals isn’t out of the norm. See Man of Steel (98 - worth $170m), Dark Knight Rises (worth $150m), No Time To Die (worth $150m), Avengers Endgame (worth $200m). 

The Little Mermaid’s were worth $85m. The most for a Disney Live action film. 

Thankfully it doesn’t mean the products will appear in the film, just that the companies get to use the film and will promote it pre-release with tie-ins. 
 

This money doesn’t cost the studio. 

Chanel was the other one but I thought that one worked.

 

I assume a lot of Barbie merch was tie ins with Mattel rather than WB, Primark in the UK as well as ASOS have been able to sell various clothing.

 

Product Placement and tie ins are a necessary evil and indeed some films are built around it, Bond and Mission Impossible are filled with PP.

 

[DTP]

5 hours ago, Borobudur said:

Unpopular take: I rate HM above Barbie.

Haven't seen Barbie and probably won't in theaters, but that is an interesting take. 

 

Plan on watching Talk to Me next weekend.

[vale9001]

Nolan wouldn't never make a musical 😅

He doesn't have the intelligence, the range and the culture to make it. It's not Spielberg. 

 

Edited July 31, 2023 by vale9001

[reddevil19]

6 minutes ago, vale9001 said:

Nolan wouldn't never make a musical 😅

He doesn't have the intelligence, the range and the culture to make it. It's not Spielberg. 

 

I don't think it's something he'd like to do and maybe he'd suck at it, but your comment lacks the intelligence you seem to think he's missing...

[Redolent]

18 minutes ago, vale9001 said:

Nolan wouldn't never make a musical 😅

He doesn't have the intelligence, the range and the culture to make it. It's not Spielberg. 

 

Remove ‘intelligence, culture and range’.

 

Insert ‘predilection’.

 

Job done.

[vale9001]

30 minutes ago, reddevil19 said:

I don't think it's something he'd like to do and maybe he'd suck at it, but your comment lacks the intelligence you seem to think he's missing...

 

why?

 

2001 is on the list of the best movies of all time cause it is. Interstellar can be in the top 15 of the best movies of all time only on film bros imbd, not in a critic list, cause just isn't. 

He's a very commercial director so as for every commercial director I can just say I'm not his main target without too much analysis. 

 

 

Edited July 31, 2023 by vale9001

[Ipickthiswhiterose]

Wow.

 

I watched Oppenheimer at last and....I already knew I wasn't a Nolan guy relative to others but I still love Insomnia and The Prestige and enjoy Memento, Inception and BatBegins....but THIS is what all this has been about? 

 

Yes, acting wheelies were being popped all over the place and lots of the production design and aesthetics were nice but some of the narrative scene selection is simply bizarre, to me the film never earned the justification for any of its wraparound and indeed anything other than a 90 minute straight line story from university to bomb test, and ultimately the movie just wasn't *about* anything other than maybe the inherent tensions that could have been conveyed on the development site. I just personally didn't feel a shred of tension or stakes (beyond those that the historical importance itself evokes) throughout the whole film. I was bored. Bored to the extent I was going to watch Talk to Me after Oppenheimer and instead called it off because I was in such a catatonic state. Sorry.

 

If anything the man seems less interesting having watched the film than he was before. And why I was ever meant to care about he and his wife riding horses about...beyond me. I sincerely don't quite get what the people who've raved about this movie are seeing.

 

But all this serves to make it manifest even more strongly as to the name value of Nolan. Nobody else could have achieved this. And while I will never watch this movie again, I don't begrudge its extraordinary success one bit in the wider sense. The movie environment needs Nolans and him not being my jam is far less important than the existence of such figures and need for more of them. 

 

No doubt plenty of people feel about Barbie - which to me was about 10,000 times superior to Oppenheimer in just about every way - the way I do about Opp. 

 

I GENUINELY wish that having followed this amazing story that I could have loved both movies in the double bill but it wasn't to be. Nevertheless I've really enjoyed all of this whole story, from a box office perspective and everything else.

[JohnnyGossamer]

3 minutes ago, Ipickthiswhiterose said:

Wow.

 

I watched Oppenheimer at last and....I already knew I wasn't a Nolan guy relative to others but I still love Insomnia and The Prestige and enjoy Memento, Inception and BatBegins....but THIS is what all this has been about? 

 

Yes, acting wheelies were being popped all over the place and lots of the production design and aesthetics were nice but some of the narrative scene selection is simply bizarre, to me the film never earned the justification for any of its wraparound and indeed anything other than a 90 minute straight line story from university to bomb test, and ultimately the movie just wasn't *about* anything other than maybe the inherent tensions that could have been conveyed on the development site. I just personally didn't feel a shred of tension or stakes (beyond those that the historical importance itself evokes) throughout the whole film. I was bored. Bored to the extent I was going to watch Talk to Me after Oppenheimer and instead called it off because I was in such a catatonic state. Sorry.

 

If anything the man seems less interesting having watched the film than he was before. And why I was ever meant to care about he and his wife riding horses about...beyond me. I sincerely don't quite get what the people who've raved about this movie are seeing.

 

But all this serves to make it manifest even more strongly as to the name value of Nolan. Nobody else could have achieved this. And while I will never watch this movie again, I don't begrudge its extraordinary success one bit in the wider sense. The movie environment needs Nolans and him not being my jam is far less important than the existence of such figures and need for more of them. 

 

No doubt plenty of people feel about Barbie - which to me was about 10,000 times superior to Oppenheimer in just about every way - the way I do about Opp. 

 

I GENUINELY wish that having followed this amazing story that I could have loved both movies in the double bill but it wasn't to be. Nevertheless I've really enjoyed all of this whole story, from a box office perspective and everything else.

I thought both were fine but didn't love either.

 

That said, I do love the life they each injected into the box office. I did like that each felt very true to the filmmaker in each case. It happens. I didn't really love Avatar 2 either. And, while I liked Top Gun 2, I much prefer the Mission films 4 through 7 over it. But, I was very happy others loved those as well to make them each box office juggernauts too.

[abracadabra1998]

11 minutes ago, Ipickthiswhiterose said:

Yes, acting wheelies were being popped all over the place and lots of the production design and aesthetics were nice but some of the narrative scene selection is simply bizarre, to me the film never earned the justification for any of its wraparound and indeed anything other than a 90 minute straight line story from university to bomb test, and ultimately the movie just wasn't *about* anything other than maybe the inherent tensions that could have been conveyed on the development site. I just personally didn't feel a shred of tension or stakes (beyond those that the historical importance itself evokes) throughout the whole film. I was bored. Bored to the extent I was going to watch Talk to Me after Oppenheimer and instead called it off because I was in such a catatonic state. Sorry.

 

I respect your opinion of course, not everyone is gonna like the same stuff, but it's interesting that you say you would be more interested in a straight timeline kind of story. I thought the exact opposite, it really worked for me. For me, the movie's constant time switching did:

 

1. Enabled it to separate itself from other biopics (loser kid --> rise to stardom --> Peak --> Downfall; but this time instead of a band or artist make it a scientist)

 

2. Connected different scenes/sub-plots across similar themes in a very effective way. For example, Blunt's line about sinning or RDJ's speech about his ego. Those were often juxtaposed with scenes from other timelines that support or challenged those notions. It really worked for me because the movie uses time in a messy analysis of a man simultaneously struggling with his ego, his moral compass, his Jewish identity, and his duty to his country.

 

But again, to each their own  

[Ipickthiswhiterose]

31 minutes ago, JohnnyGossamer said:

I thought both were fine but didn't love either.

 

That said, I do love the life they each injected into the box office. I did like that each felt very true to the filmmaker in each case. It happens. I didn't really love Avatar 2 either. And, while I liked Top Gun 2, I much prefer the Mission films 4 through 7 over it. But, I was very happy others loved those as well to make them each box office juggernauts too.

 

Yes, I hope those thoughts were contained within my inference as well but I think you put them much better than I did.

 

My personal preferences are secondary in importance to the meaning to the industry, to the people who loved these films (or this film in my case), and the success wheeling back somewhat to the individual director who genuinely made what they wanted. I was just surprised in this case quite JUST how much I disliked and was bored by this film on a personal level. And conversely how much of an achievement it was to have something like this perceived and embraced as a mainstream hit. 

Edited July 31, 2023 by Ipickthiswhiterose

[Ipickthiswhiterose]

17 minutes ago, abracadabra1998 said:

 

I respect your opinion of course, not everyone is gonna like the same stuff, but it's interesting that you say you would be more interested in a straight timeline kind of story. I thought the exact opposite, it really worked for me. For me, the movie's constant time switching did:

 

1. Enabled it to separate itself from other biopics (loser kid --> rise to stardom --> Peak --> Downfall; but this time instead of a band or artist make it a scientist)

 

2. Connected different scenes/sub-plots across similar themes in a very effective way. For example, Blunt's line about sinning or RDJ's speech about his ego. Those were often juxtaposed with scenes from other timelines that support or challenged those notions. It really worked for me because the movie uses time in a messy analysis of a man simultaneously struggling with his ego, his moral compass, his Jewish identity, and his duty to his country.

 

But again, to each their own  

 

Thanks for this really even handed response.

 

Yeah I suppose the other factor is that I'm not a biopics guy either.

 

I'm not sure I'd be more *interested* in a straight line story so much as don't feel the film justified its own multi-layered structure. I thought the film's strongest sequences were the early University-set scenes and I would rather they had fostered the idea about his moral compass and ego (which I would have liked to have been more prominent as themes, but never really communicated to me) during those sequences. I also maybe was rubbed up the wrong way by the 'conveying genius by showing magical flaming dust' bit which I think is a little played out as a trope at this stage and was used to shorthand the science a little too much for my taste.

Edited July 31, 2023 by Ipickthiswhiterose

[M37]

With Weekend Estimates:

 

 

Yeah, TFA is going down, only a matter of time before it pulls ahead, and its just a question IMO of whether or not Barbenheimer can get to $1 BILLION Domestic

 

Barbie also looks to be on track to set a new record for most consecutive days over $10M - should at least match TFA's 17 by next Sunday, through day 19 is probably locked, and could run it all the way up through day 24

[IronJimbo & Sheldon's Son]

1 minute ago, M37 said:

With Weekend Estimates:

 

 

Yeah, TFA is going down, only a matter of time before it pulls ahead, and its just a question IMO of whether or not Barbenheimer can get to $1 BILLION Domestic

 

Barbie also looks to be on track to set a new record for most consecutive days over $10M - should at least match TFA's 17 by next Sunday, through day 19 is probably locked, and could run it all the way up through day 24

Insane, imagine how high it could be if they nuked all the holdovers and just gave 90% of screens to Barbenheimer like they did with Endgame

[M37]

6 minutes ago, IronJimbo & Sheldon's Son said:

Insane, imagine how high it could be if they nuked all the holdovers and just gave 90% of screens to Barbenheimer like they did with Endgame

In that scenario, probably get a bigger OW but faster drop-off. The limits on capacity IMO only pushed business later into the run, removes very few from the total, while also keeping the hype sustained in later weeks, helping to draw in more people overall 

 

I’ve always thought long legs > big OW (even though the industry is consistently focused on the latter). For all the money it made, by 5th weekend Endgame had fallen below both Avengers and Infinity War

[Kon]

5 hours ago, vale9001 said:

What do you mean with "i'm not the demo of Barbie jokes".

What specifically demo they have?. Most of them are just really smart jokes.

Many people think some jokes on Barbie will be more enjoyable for women than men. It isn't so weird "smart jokes" aren't so funny for an especific group of people.

 

To be fair, there is aspects of Barbie movie that seems to really connect with women.

[JohnnyGossamer]

Will Barbie/Oppenheimer surpass Last Jedi/Jumanji DOM? They didn't release on exactly the same day but close enough. Think they combined for 1.025B DOM.