It | Sept. 8, 2017 | Warner Brothers | Andy Muschietti directing. Trailer on Page 12 NO SPOILER DISCUSSION. Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes

[Harley]

It'll do better than 300m depending on reviews of coarse.

[Valonqar]

9 minutes ago, Harley said:

It'll do better than 300m depending on reviews of coarse.

Exactly. Tomato Law will make sure of it. It's gonna make 400M like War for the Planet of the Apes. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[baumer]

3 hours ago, Harley said:

It'll do better than 300m depending on reviews of coarse.

 

It would be the first horror movie to do so.  I'd love to see it happen but that seems really tough.

[75Live]

36 minutes ago, Stutterng baumer Denbrough said:

 

It would be the first horror movie to do so.  I'd love to see it happen but that seems really tough.

 

yeah for me, if this hits $50-60 for the OW and anywhere near $140-$150 total, I would be happy.  Anything over that would be gravy.

[Cochofles]

I would love for a modern horror film to gross 300 million, but come on...not happening.

Although, if it does happen, expect an IT extended announcement (or Stephen King EU?) soon after the film's run is over.  

[Harley]

I think this will tap into the nostalgia factor for older viewers and then add young horror fans. It should appeal to a broad range of viewers.

[FantasticBeasts]

I agree that $300m will be extremely difficult (almost impossible) but If there is a horror that can potentially do it, I do not see another candidate than IT.

Edited August 2, 2017 by FantasticBeasts

[John Marston]

while I think this will do very well, trailer views don't mean much. 

 

 

Power Rangers would be one of the top grossing movies of the year if they did

[Zakiyyah6]

It's not just about trailer views, I mean The Mummy had great trailer views. It's about it being based on beloved material and having good trailers. And presumably the marketing that should start right about now is going to be solid.

[Boxofficerules]

Tv spot 2. Need to change my soiled underwear.

 

[DAJK]

The event film of the fall, and WB knows it. I have a feeling marketing is going to skyrocket over the next 4 weeks.

 

Would be surprised at anything under 60M OW at this point, unless of course reviews are in the sewers

 

 

[Rman823]

25 minutes ago, DAJK said:

The event film of the fall, and WB knows it. I have a feeling marketing is going to skyrocket over the next 4 weeks.

 

Would be surprised at anything under 60M OW at this point, unless of course reviews are in the sewers

 

 

I'm trying to stay cautiously optimistic at 45M OW which while great (and would have been seen as overperforming before the trailer record) would still have some seeing it as a disappointment. 

[filmnerdjamie]

I mean... yeah $300M is a big, ass stretch given the front-loaded nature of horror. But... there are always exceptions to the rule (in any genre - take... True Grit as a random example) and I honestly can not think of a time when that applied to an out and out horror movie. Long overdue.

[somebody85]

On 8/1/2017 at 8:22 PM, Boxofficerules said:

The nightmares! The nightmares!

 

Alright, finally get to hear his voice but 2 TV spots are enough for me. Trying to avoid them now and probably going to unlike the Facebook page because I saw them and it was too tempting.

He does sound a bit like Tim Curry and I'm glad it's not completely sinister. Looks like the marketing blitz has begun.

[somebody85]

13 hours ago, Boxofficerules said:

One thing that makes me a tad concerned is Warner doesn't seem to be having any advanced screenings of It, they've been showing Annabelle: Creation for months now, why not It?

No reviews allowed but there's been advanced screenings since January. And wow at the runtime. That's a lot longer then I expected for a horror movie (even though I know the length of the book). Ton of time for character development.

Remember the embargo for Wonder Woman didn't drop until the week of that either. I'd like to see some reviews of this early though.

[Zakiyyah6]

For all I know IT could suck but not because it doesn't have super early reviews like Annabelle 2. Annabelle 2 needed those good early reviews because it was coming off of a lackluster first installment.

[somebody85]

5 minutes ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

For all I know IT could suck but not because it doesn't have super early reviews like Annabelle 2. Annabelle 2 needed those good early reviews because it was coming off of a lackluster first installment.

That would be a shame. I really don't want this to be like Suicide Squad (where the trailers hyped everyone up and the movie was awful) and everything from the actors, to the score, to the cinematography, to the tone, to the runtume all feels right.

I'm crossing my fingers but I really think they have it and that's why WB isn't showing that much in the trailers.

Edited August 3, 2017 by somebody85

[Jonwo]

I'm not too worried about It, I think WB must be confident it'll be a success so they don't need super early reviews to be released yet 

 

I imagine most reviewers will see it in the last two weeks of August and WB will drop the embargo on the Tuesday after Labor Day or the Wednesday 

[DlAMONDZ]

12 hours ago, Stutterng baumer Denbrough said:

 

Let's not get carried away.  It's not coming anywhere near 300 and that is the lowest it looks like any of the superhero movies will do.

It's beating Logan it it's good

[baumer]

3 hours ago, DlAMONDZ said:

It's beating Logan it it's good

 

And I hope it does.  I really do.  But horror movies don't have that kind of track record.