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

[AMC Theaters Enjoyer]

25 minutes ago, ringedmortality said:

 

what about Equalizer

Last two movies both just passed 100M DOM, and people love Denzel kicking ass so I can see it. If not maybe 80-90M DOM.

[ListenHunnyUrOver]

19 hours ago, The GOAT said:

 

Grace is right. Gerwig and Nolan should post a picture of them out to lunch or something to keep the momentum going. 

[Mojoguy]

12 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

Bouncing back to Barbie, I am surprised there’s not much of any hoopla over how it’s doing this without being an IMAX or 3D film on top of it. When is the last juggernaut blockbuster where that was the case? Iron Man 1? And yeah it has PLF, but that’s not the same thing as 3D and IMAX inflation. 

Barbie doesn't require IMAX, bigger screens aren't a must unlike say TGM. Barbie's target female audience will get to it when they get to it, which should mean great legs.

 

It does have an advantage over Mario because Mario ATP was much lower, lots and lots of cheaper child tickets sold for that one.

[abracadabra1998]

The other type of online discussion I engage in is around basketball, and I swear “people went to old movies for AC” has the exact same energy as “Wilt wasn’t that good he played against plumbers and milkmen”

 

Like come on

[MovieMan89]

1 minute ago, Mojoguy said:

Barbie doesn't require IMAX, bigger screens aren't a must unlike say TGM. Barbie's target female audience will get to it when they get to it, which should mean great legs.

 

It does have an advantage over Mario because Mario ATP was much lower, lots and lots of cheaper child tickets sold for that one.

Yeah, but that’s what I mean. When do we ever get a juggernaut that is not an IMAX or 3D thing anymore ever since TDK and Avatar completely changed the industry with that 15 years ago? 

[dudalb]

Big budget what we would call BLaockbuster movies were handled in a totally different way before the 1970's then they were today.

For one thing, the rollout was much slower, films were expected to turn for months in theaters. 

Your really big films were almost always road showed, something impossible today. They would open in one thater in a city...no matter how bit the city was..with a ticket price three of four times average admission.There would be reserved seats, and generally they would show once a day, except for weekends and Wendesdays where there would  be matinees. They were intended to  play in that theateer for months, evenutally, (depneding on how well the film did) going to the neighborhood theaters at regular ticket prices.

And, since most of you really big movies tended to be long movies, there were almost always intermissions in road show attractions.

what yis intersting is that James Cameron has spoken very fondly of seeing road show movies when he was a kid....how going to one was an real event, and how he would sort of like to bring that back. I don't even think Cameron could pull that off though.

[redfirebird2008]

19 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

355 would be crazy. It would almost beat Spidey and GotG even DOM besides WW

 

Probably not gonna happen. If you blend all of Nolan's previous July movies together, average legs for Oppy would end up around $315M. If you throw out Batman and only focus on the average of Inception & Dunkirk legs the rest of the way, it ends up at $340M. Who knows, maybe it lands in between 315 and 340 domestic.

 

Anything over $300M is amazing. At the moment I am just looking forward to when Oppy passes the inflation-adjusted numbers for Dunkirk at $220M domestic and Interstellar at $240M domestic. Those targets are coming up pretty soon, lol

[MovieMan89]

3 minutes ago, ListenHunnyUrOver said:

Grace is right. Gerwig and Nolan should post a picture of them out to lunch or something to keep the momentum going. 

I still get the feeling Nolan low key hates the connection and Barbenheimer thing, even as it’s proven that it helped his movie immensely. It seems very him to scoff at something like that and think it’s the stupidest thing ever. 

[abracadabra1998]

1 minute ago, dudalb said:

Big budget what we would call BLaockbuster movies were handled in a totally different way before the 1970's then they were today.

For one thing, the rollout was much slower, films were expected to turn for months in theaters. 

Your really big films were almost always road showed, something impossible today. They would open in one thater in a city...no matter how bit the city was..with a ticket price three of four times average admission.There would be reserved seats, and generally they would show once a day, except for weekends and Wendesdays where there would  be matinees. They were intended to  play in that theateer for months, evenutally, (depneding on how well the film did) going to the neighborhood theaters at regular ticket prices.

And, since most of you really big movies tended to be long movies, there were almost always intermissions in road show attractions.

what yis intersting is that James Cameron has spoken very fondly of seeing road show movies when he was a kid....how going to one was an real event, and how he would sort of like to bring that back. I don't even think Cameron could pull that off though.

I get seriously nostalgic for times that I wasn’t even alive in when I see movies portraying movie theaters in the olden times (like Babylon, for example). The amount of cheering and laughing and ooing from the crowd. I would love to experience that at least once 

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

1 hour ago, Bob Train said:

Titanic, Avatar have much more impressive box office runs than Gone with the wind, Ten commandments, or whatever. Back then people would go to theaters for air conditioning. Also theaters as a medium of entertainment had no competition, and their box office "runs" lasted for many decades. 

There were literally over 40 other movies released the same month as Gone with the Wind's debut in December 1939:

 

 

The weekly release schedules for all the major studios are on Wikipedia, going back to the 1910s for Universal and Paramount. it's easy to see that the release schedules in the 1930s were quite packed, far more than today.

 

People have the idea that because there weren't always multiplexes, that every city just had like one theater that only ever played Gone with the Wind or the Sound of Music. Maybe in the smallest towns, but in bigger cities it was basically like a mini-version of how Broadway works now, but with movies instead of stage shows. Lots of one-screen movie theaters in big cities, each showing different titles.

 

Every era had its hits and flops, advantages and disadvantages at the box office. People used to go the movies twice a week before TV was popular, but the US population was much smaller 80 years ago. In theory there are more potential customers for a movie now, but home viewing options have cut into the audience.

 

Older movies can benefit from re-releases but the movie had to be liked enough to get put back into theaters again and again. I mean, Men In Black and Liar Liar were popular in 1997 but they haven't gotten re-released the way Titanic has. It's really not that different for movies on the all-time lists, they all appealed a little more to audiences than most other movies that came out the same year.

Edited July 31, 2023 by BoxOfficeFangrl

[Cheddar Please]

any Monday numbers yet?

[dudalb]

5 minutes ago, abracadabra1998 said:

The other type of online discussion I engage in is around basketball, and I swear “people went to old movies for AC” has the exact same energy as “Wilt wasn’t that good he played against plumbers and milkmen”

 

Like come on

As someone who has read a lot about the history of movies, the idea that people went to the movies primarily for the AC is simply false. 

Also ignores that most of the big movies were released around the Holiday season.. big summer releases did not happen until the 1970's.

[Deep Wang]

8 minutes ago, ListenHunnyUrOver said:

Grace is right.

 

literally the first time anyone has said that

[Marathon]

5 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

Even that’s a very optimistic way to see it. AM3 was nearly a 30+ film franchise low, Elemental is not breaking even from box office that’s for sure, Indy joins their John Carter/Mars Needs Moms/Lone Ranger special Disney only club of biggest money losers ever, and yeah THM massive flop too. GotG3 saved by the WOM, so even that could have been disastrous for them. TLM only saved by DOM, so once again, could have been a disaster for them. An absolutely horrific year for them really. No one would have thought this was remotely possible pre pandemic. 

 

Oops, I forgot about TLM's existence. 😅 On the other hand, no wonder, it had probably one of the most anonymous box office runs of the year.

[Jonwo]

9 minutes ago, baumer said:

No one thought sound of freedom would do 30 million let alone 150 million which is where it's at now. I have no idea what it's going to make overseas. I do know there's a lot of interest in the film and now it has free marketing because of what it's done in the North American region. So I don't think 200  is out of reach.

Interest is one thing, sustaining is another. If it was being released by local distributors then maybe it would have a chance to do well but I think they missed an opportunity by not releasing it a lot sooner. 

 

It wouldn't be the first time a film hugely successful in the States goes under the radar elsewhere.

[Mojoguy]

1 minute ago, MovieMan89 said:

I still get the feeling Nolan low key hates the connection and Barbenheimer thing, even as it’s proven that it helped his movie immensely. It seems very him to scoff at something like that and think it’s the stupidest thing ever. 

Yeah, Nolan secretly hates Barbenheimer but he won't say anything about it. He is smart enough to know if he trashes Barbie, social media backlash would be huge.

[dudalb]

4 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

I still get the feeling Nolan low key hates the connection and Barbenheimer thing, even as it’s proven that it helped his movie immensely. It seems very him to scoff at something like that and think it’s the stupidest thing ever. 

I think there is gong to be..in fact I already see it in early stages..a huge geek backlash against both Barbie and Oppenhiemer becuase they are not "geek/nerd" movies..ie not big budget sci fi/action franchise movies, and skew to an older audience...all of which will be seen as threatenting the dominaion of the box office by "geek/nerd" friently films.

I don't know how big a threat they will pose, but if they will help give us more film going choices then we currently have, just another reason to cheer them on.

[MovieMan89]

If Wish and Marvels round out Disneys parade of failures this year, it will officially signal that they are no long one of the top tier studios presently. More like back to early 00s days where they played second fiddle to most of the other big 6. 

[dudalb]

2 minutes ago, Mojoguy said:

Yeah, Nolan secretly hates Barbenheimer but he won't say anything about it. He is smart enough to know if he trashes Barbie, social media backlash would be huge.

 

I think Nolan can appreciate something that is well made, even if it is something he would probably never do.

 

[redfirebird2008]

10 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

I still get the feeling Nolan low key hates the connection and Barbenheimer thing, even as it’s proven that it helped his movie immensely. It seems very him to scoff at something like that and think it’s the stupidest thing ever. 

 

I'm sure he has mixed feelings on it. I certainly do myself. The movie is benefiting financially, but it's also been pushed onto smaller screens for the most part (other than IMAX). Nolan wants people to watch his movies on the biggest screens, and Oppy is getting much worse treatment in that regard than movies such as Dunkirk & Interstellar. That's a bummer IMHO.