Weekend Estimates (WB $19.5M, SLP $8.1M, BTTH $4.5M, SUG $1.5M)

[Tower]

Saying that is outrageous. The last one made $134.5 million. I'd expect $110-120 million for Die Hard 5.

 

There have been far bigger drops than that, so it's hardly outrageous (Clash of The Titans, Sex And The City).

[GodIsCool]

That's why Arnold should have done either a really interesting project (he did have a decade to find a one after all) or another Terminator film; not something that, regardless if it's good or not, looks as if it is straight-to-DVD fare. 

 

Looking like a TV show didn't stop The Avengers from grossing $600m.

[GodIsCool]

Bullet to the Head is a huge bomb. 

 

Obviously it's going to lose money but it's we're not exactly talking JOHN CARTER or even HUGO here as the movie only cost $45 million to make.

[Kvikk Lunsj]

Obviously it's going to lose money but it's we're not exactly talking JOHN CARTER or even HUGO here as the movie only cost $45 million to make.

 

Should make around 12m DOM or less and like 13m OS. 

[GodIsCool]

Should make around 12m DOM or less and like 13m OS. 

 

Still the maximum they are going to lose is $45 million, which I wouldn't consider being a huge flop. 

 

WB didn't have anything riding on this film.  If it was a hit, great.  If it didn't make money, whatever.

[kowhite]

Looking like a TV show didn't stop The Avengers from grossing $600m.

That's because barely anybody actually shares this opinion with you.

[GodIsCool]

That's because barely anybody actually shares this opinion with you.

 

That's my point.

 

The general masses wouldn't know good cinematograhpy and mise-en-scene if it hit them in the face - so what difference does it make that BIIT and TLS (supposedly) look like DTV movies?

Edited February 2, 2013 by GodIsCool

[dashrendar44]

 

That's my point.

 

The general masses wouldn't know good cinematograhpy and mise-en-scene if it hit them in the face - so what difference does it make that BIIT and TLS (supposedly) look like DTV movies?

 

I think people are not saying TLS or BTTH are bombing because it looks like a TV show or straight to DVD on the sole basis of their cinematography but what those movies presented in terms of story, characters, settings, fights, look like straight to DVD fare.

 

What Avengers presented and its scale, the novelty of seeing superheroes banding together, I doubt you could see that in any straight to DVD flick, TV show cinematography or not. That's the difference.

Edited February 2, 2013 by dashrendar44

[kowhite]

I think people are not saying TLS or BTTH are bombing because it looks like a TV show or straight to DVD on the sole basis of their cinematography but what those movies presented in terms of story, characters, settings, fights, look like straight to DVD fare.

 

What Avengers presented and its scale, the novelty of seeing superheroes banding together, I doubt you could see that in any straight to DVD flick, TV show cinematography or not. That's the difference.

Yeah, this isn't even really about cinematography.  Last Stand and Bullet to the Head are small in scope action films.  People are saying these things because they don't distinguish themselves from the other stuff out there.  You would be insane to pretend that applies to The Avengers also.  There's more to what a film looks like than how it was shot...it also matter of WHAT is being shot.  Well, who am I kidding...the latter is FAR more important than the former in explaining why these things succeed or not.

 

And the problem with these two flicks is the real hook here was supposed to be its stars...and it's quite obvious...Arnold and Sly are not the draws they once were.  At least not with this smaller scale type material.  Like most stars today though, drawing power tends to need to also involve the right pairing of material.

 

Of course, Bullet to the Head apparently is a crappy movie so there's that too.

Edited February 2, 2013 by kowhite

[RichWS]

WOM on SLP is crazy good, yo.

[GodIsCool]

There's more to what a film looks like than how it was shot...it also matter of WHAT is being shot.

 

No.  What makes a film is no the subject matter or content but the execution.

 

THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION is typical TV-movie-of-the-week stuff, but you'd have to be insane to say it isn't a cinematic film, for example

Edited February 2, 2013 by GodIsCool

[kitik]

No.  What makes a film is no the subject matter or content but the execution.

 

 

You must be a huge fan of Michael Bay then, because there's no one better at making a movie look like it belongs on the big screen.

[GodIsCool]

You must be a huge fan of Michael Bay then, because there's no one better at making a movie look like it belongs on the big screen.

 

No.  I'd say there's no one better at making a film look like a TV commerical.

[kowhite]

No.  What makes a film is no the subject matter or content but the execution.

 

THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION is typical TV-movie-of-the-week stuff, but you'd have to be insane to say it isn't a cinematic film, for example

No?  Are you really trying to argue that the content of a film is irrelevant to a film's success?

 

Execution is most certainly important, you are correct there, but no on what it's about?  That's absurd...even your example evidences that...Shawshank didn't make crap when it first came out, probably because on its surface the content just didn't appeal.  It's a film where execution has made it a classic...but we're talking box office, and WHAT is being shot is very important to selling the product.  I cannot even fathom trying to pretend it's not.

 

We are still talking about box office and how products are received by audiences, right?

Edited February 2, 2013 by kowhite

[Alpha]

There have been far bigger drops than that, so it's hardly outrageous (Clash of The Titans, Sex And The City).

Those dropped because the last installment was polarizing. Die Hard 4 was not.

[Cmasterclay]

Warm Bodies was 95 percent full when I saw it tonight, and the crowd (myself included) absolutely ate it up. Mix of college students, older adults, and middle schoolers.  Odd crowd. Really glad to see it's a hit though

[vc2002]

The Last Stand and Bullet to the Head told us why now they have to do Expendables.

[MovieGuyKyle17]

No Nikki jokes

[wboxoffice]

Everyone has flops.  Let's not forget The Rum Diary starring Johnny Depp who's supposedly the highest paid actor in history.  Just because Johnny Depp gets paid about 50 million for the Pirates of the Carribean, doesn't mean that everything he does translates into success.  I think Arnie and Sly should get a break.

[chasmmi]

Am I the only person who thinks its kind of commendable that Arnie chose a lower budget project with an up and coming director for his comeback as opposed to trying to rely on franchises?

 

Yes, it looks like the move has failed miserably (although I kind of expect TLS to have a good DVD and TV run over the years), but I like that he at least tried to establish himself as a leading guy again instead of relying on Terminator and Conan to do it for him.