ddddeeee Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 As ShawnMR said, Nolan. And Lucas. And Spielberg. And Chris Columbus. And, well, David Yates. Ew at Yates. I was about to say that Raimi was about to enter fairly prestigious company but I guess not. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4815162342 Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 So Peter Jackson, Michael Bay and soon Sam Raimi will be the only directors with four $200M+ grossing movies? George Lucas 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 (edited) I would also argue that the Oscar SLP leak cost the movie around 20m in bo receits.The movie could have done 150m dom.Huh? If you're talking about piracy then that's not a tangible detractor to its gross, at least not any more than any other film. No need to make excuses for SLP's run, it performed very well. Edited March 10, 2013 by Gopher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowhite Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Ew at Yates. I was about to say that Raimi was about to enter fairly prestigious company but I guess not. Eh, I think prestigious went out the window when Michael Bay joined the ranks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddddeeee Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Eh, I think prestigious went out the window when Michael Bay joined the ranks. I don't like Bay's movies at all but he's managed continued success and deserves his place. Yates, however, just lived off the success of the Potter brand and will soon return to BBC. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 How about Lee Unkrich? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wileECoyote Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Why would Disney invest hundreds of millions for a mediocre Oz franchise when that money would be better spent looking for the next POTC or Toy Story?The home runs and grand slams are where the real money is. Not the base hits.It's a better investment to find the next billion dollar franchise.Good analogy. Oz isn't an HR by any means. I'd probably use baseball contracts. For instance JC, to me would be the equivalent of the Yankees last contract A-Rod. Marvel Franchises are like Jeter. Oz would probably fall in between. And in the end a new Oz will be a new better known quantity, rather than another huge financial gamble. An Oz sequel will most likely make more WW. Anyway I'm gonna wait and see what Disney does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowhite Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 How about Lee Unkrich? Ha, co-director. Wasn't sure if that should count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Nevada Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 I don't like Bay's movies at all but he's managed continued success and deserves his place. Yates, however, just lived off the success of the Potter brand and will soon return to BBC. I also see Tom Hooper crawling back to BBC after the embarrassment of Les Mis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newknicksfan Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 (edited) The director of I am Legend will be joining that list when Hunger Games finishes up. Tim Burton and Bob Zemeckis gotta be close to that mark. Gore verbinski will make the list if The Lone Ranger hits 200 which i think it has a good shot at doing, even if im in the minority on that one. Edited March 10, 2013 by newknicksfan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 So Peter Jackson, Michael Bay and soon Sam Raimi will be the only directors with four $200M+ grossing movies?Steven Spielberg has 14 movies over $200m DOM adjusted for inflation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowhite Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 I don't like Bay's movies at all but he's managed continued success and deserves his place. Yates, however, just lived off the success of the Potter brand and will soon return to BBC. Oh yeah, he deserves his place. I don't have anything against Yates though, I think his Potter films were very good. Granted, from a box office perspective, it's hard to really give him direct credit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Founder / Operator Shawn Robbins Posted March 10, 2013 Author Founder / Operator Share Posted March 10, 2013 Well, I was predicting $85 million. BOOOOOMBBBBBB 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Zemeckis has 3. Maybe if POLAR EXPRESS gets a few more re-releases, he'll get there. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 Really, with the multi-film franchise boom that's happening these days, it's getting much much easier to do this than it once was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Founder / Operator Shawn Robbins Posted March 10, 2013 Author Founder / Operator Share Posted March 10, 2013 (edited) Does that intl' number confirm that 3D is not the draw it use to be? All it confirms is that international audiences weren't excited for Oz. To say that 3D isn't a draw anymore, we'd have to see a trend of films under-performing in the format. Edited March 10, 2013 by ShawnMR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Marston Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 since the 3D in OZ looked so good it does give credence to the idea that 3D is no longer a big draw overseas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddddeeee Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 (edited) Yates and Lucas are the only ones to do it only with the one franchise yes? EDIT: Forgot King Kong... Edited March 10, 2013 by Floppit Floppeeeddd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 OK fine.It's a global disappointment and sequel killer.better? No. What did you guys expect it to make? I didn't think and I don't think the studios thought this was going to be another Alice. You can't just take one film and compare it to Oz and think that it should have made what that film made. This should do a minimum of 500 million WW. This is the first film, people are discovering it and if they like it, then they will come back for more the second time around. I see this as nothing but a success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dementeleus Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 (edited) Jackson, Yates and Lucas are the only ones to do it only with the one franchise yes?KING KONG rules out Jackson.edit: unless you mean he was able to do it with only one franchise. Edited March 10, 2013 by Telemachos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
copy2.thumb.jpg.344d957d147bdc91dbc557bf24ccbfbb.jpg)
