Weekend Numbers | actuals | 27.75M THE FALL GUY | 8.72M SW: EP I - TPM | 7.59M CHALLENGERS | 6.50M TAROT

[JohnnyGossamer]

30 minutes ago, excel1 said:

PIXAR was the IP for their original content, they're obviously unique. 

Nolan is essentially an IP because he's built up such a faithful following. He's THE director that makes blockbusters. Oppenheimer was so good it was even more successful than expected. But, similarly to a Pixar film in 2015, not a huge risk. Now, if Nolan made the same Oppenheimer movie and released it when Prestige came out, sure.

Edited May 4 by JohnnyGossamer

[excel1]

1 minute ago, JustLurking said:

Yeah ok. Next you'll tell me Deadpool and Wolverine is super creative and super risky.

Not in 2024 ofc

[cannastop]

Just now, excel1 said:

 

Oppenheimer success formula is pretty clear in hindsight.

 

Nolan-directed film on Oppenheimer = $30m base opening weekend

Decide to cast tons of big names = +15% = $34.5m

Make it Josh Hartnett comeback film = +25% = $43m

Make it Best Picture quality film = +15% = $50m 

Open against a film of dolls coming to life and make their audience want to feel smart afterward = + 60% = $80m opening 

Are you just trying to be ridiculous?

[Napoleon]

21 hours ago, Krissykins said:

I remember the forums when Kingdom of Heaven bombed that big.

 

But it wasn’t even the talking point of the weekend lol, House of Wax only doing $12m was, because it was tracking in some places as a $20-30m opener. 
 

Love House of Wax. 

House of Wax is my favorite slasher film, it deserves more appreciation. 

[excel1]

2 minutes ago, Napoleon said:

House of Wax is my favorite slasher film, it deserves more appreciation. 

 

I remember seeing this trailer in theaters and people openly laughing when it showed Paris Hilton's name as she screamed. 

Edited May 4 by excel1

[redfirebird2008]

3 minutes ago, JohnnyGossamer said:

Nolan essentially an IP because he's built up such a faithful following. He's THE director that makes blockbusters. Oppenheimer was so good it was even more successful than expected. But, similarly to a Pixar film in 2015, not a huge risk. Now, if Nolan made the same Oppenheimer movie abd released it when Prestige came out, sure.

 

I would say Cameron is at the top of the list. But he hasn't been very active the last 20 years. And now he decided to just do a massive cash grab for the rest of his career with the Avatar sequels. I'm sure they will all be well-made, just like the first two movies were well-made. But it feels like a waste of his incredible talent. But it's hard to blame him for taking the massive payday on these sequels. I guess he can pump some of that money into his ocean exploration projects, which is the only thing he truly cares about these days. 

[TwoMisfits]

10 minutes ago, Maggie said:

It worked for Mission Impossible. That was first  a series from the 60s i believe

 

We have established Ryan Gosling is no Tom Cruise when it comes to being a draw (or even being his own personal stuntman)...

 

And for someone saying "will movies now adapt TJ Hooker?" - if Fall Guy had hit, they surely would have...but now that idea will go back in the box.

Edited May 4 by TwoMisfits

[lorddemaxus]

Missing Yi Yi on 35 mm this weekend because I have a job interview the next day (and I have to leave for it the night before) 😒.

[AniNate]

4 minutes ago, redfirebird2008 said:

I'm sure they will all be well-made, just like the first two movies were well-made. But it feels like a waste of his incredible talent. But it's hard to blame him for taking the massive payday on these sequels. I guess he can pump some of that money into his ocean exploration projects, which is the only thing he truly cares about these days. 

 

As someone who hated Avatar 2, I still wouldn't say he didn't care about it and was only doing it for the paycheck. It's totally his thing and his passion, with all the good and bad that entails. 

 

I think there is a lot of potential still in that vision which is why I still hold onto a glimmer of hope that I like part 3 a lot more

[JohnnyGossamer]

6 minutes ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

I would say Cameron is at the top of the list. But he hasn't been very active the last 20 years. And now he decided to just do a massive cash grab for the rest of his career with the Avatar sequels. I'm sure they will all be well-made, just like the first two movies were well-made. But it feels like a waste of his incredible talent. But it's hard to blame him for taking the massive payday on these sequels. I guess he can pump some of that money into his ocean exploration projects, which is the only thing he truly cares about these days. 

Most definitely. Tarantino as well but on different but still impressive plane.

[JustLurking]

7 minutes ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

I would say Cameron is at the top of the list. But he hasn't been very active the last 20 years. And now he decided to just do a massive cash grab for the rest of his career with the Avatar sequels. I'm sure they will all be well-made, just like the first two movies were well-made. But it feels like a waste of his incredible talent. But it's hard to blame him for taking the massive payday on these sequels. I guess he can pump some of that money into his ocean exploration projects, which is the only thing he truly cares about these days. 

I think Cameron just likes and wants to keep using the canvas of Pandora for his stories - he can probably get big paychecks on anything anyway. The way he can control the visuals and do just about whatever he wants with it plus the possibility of bringing an enviromental message in each of them is probably hugely appealing for him, which is fair enough, even though even as a fan myself it's disappointing that the best guy to create huge original films is...not making original films, at a time where the theatrical landscape is in dire need of more of those.

[redfirebird2008]

2 minutes ago, JustLurking said:

I think Cameron just likes and wants to keep using the canvas of Pandora for his stories - he can probably get big paychecks on anything anyway. The way he can control the visuals and do just about whatever he wants with it plus the possibility of bringing an enviromental message in each of them is probably hugely appealing for him, which is fair enough, even though even as a fan myself it's disappointing that the best guy to create huge original films is...not making original films, at a time where the theatrical landscape is in dire need of more of those.

 

"He can get big paychecks on anything." Not to the same level of what he's getting with the Avatar franchise. It's gonna be the easiest phase of his career, hands down. Gigantic paydays from Avatar 2 to Avatar 5 with no risk of anything negative on his end of it. It's a great place to be for him. 

 

 

7 minutes ago, AniNate said:

 

As someone who hated Avatar 2, I still wouldn't say he didn't care about it and was only doing it for the paycheck. It's totally his thing and his passion, with all the good and bad that entails. 

 

I think there is a lot of potential still in that vision which is why I still hold onto a glimmer of hope that I like part 3 a lot more

 

I think he is way more passionate about the ocean exploration stuff. Pretty clear watching documentaries and interviews on that subject. It's understandable too. We still don't know 95% of what's happening in the ocean. Cameron enjoys going in there to see as much of it as he can, to learn as much as he can about it. And I suppose there is a major adrenaline rush from risking his life on that type of scientific exploration. 

[Firepower]

55 minutes ago, excel1 said:

revisionist history, go read the threads on this very board around the time it was being filmed 

People really thought it was risky? How? It's a bait, the entire premise is cameo and nostalgia fest about milking as much money as possible, there's no creative thought behind it, only business decisions. It's as risky as Deadpool vs Wolverine.

Edited May 4 by Firepower

[redfirebird2008]

1 hour ago, excel1 said:

 

X-Men had 3 different famous people playing the same character on the screen at the same time?

 

 

 

X-Men: Days of Future Past had Patrick Stewart & James McAvoy both playing Professor Xavier along with Ian McKellen & Michael Fassbender both playing Magneto. X:DOFP had a crazy multiverse type of plot. This type of multiverse stuff was all done in the comic books through the decades, so there is nothing original about what happened with Spidey: No Way Home. It's just aping on what had already been done in comics and other movies like X:DOFP or Avengers: Endgame and whatever else. 

[jimisawesome]

22 minutes ago, Firepower said:

People really thought it was risky? How? It's a bait, the entire premise is cameo and nostalgia fest about milking as much money as possible, there's no creative thought behind it, only business decisions. It's as risky as Deadpool vs Wolverine.

 

Everyone here thought the movie would do over 100 million OW even in Jan of 2001.  No one questioned it would do big numbers even after every other movie disappointed in 2001. 

[Starphanluke]

Wait a rerelease is going to do almost $10m? What the fuck? Did we expect this? I feel like all rereleases lately have made like a few hundred thousand. But I guess this is Star Wars we’re talking about.

[Flopped]

2 minutes ago, Starphanluke said:

Wait a rerelease is going to do almost $10m? What the fuck? Did we expect this? I feel like all rereleases lately have made like a few hundred thousand. But I guess this is Star Wars we’re talking about.

 

I know it was over a decade ago but The Lion King re-release doesn't get enough credit. 

 

This is wild: 

 

Weekend 1: $30,151,614 / $12,940 PTA

Weekend 2: $21,929,332 / $9,411 PTA

[AniNate]

That was the re-release that started a trend of them

[The Wild Eric]

Really hope they re-release Lion King again this year. I already saw it in theaters last year, but I will gladly watch it in any time I can in theaters. And with the 30th anniversary and the Mufasa movie coming, they really have no excuse not to put it back in theaters again

[MightyDargon]

I can't help but laugh about all the "superhero fatigue" "superheroes are dead" stuff given how badly a non-superhero summer opener has done. Whatever it is that's supposed to save cinema "action movie with romance and Taylor Swift score" ain't it.

 

Also seems pretty clear the "rave reviews from advance screenings" was likely an astroturf, albeit less sketchy than the Flash one.

Edited May 4 by MightyDargon