or Connect
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › CHUD NUMBERS: Box Office Discussion Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

CHUD NUMBERS: Box Office Discussion Thread - Page 204

post #10151 of 23261

I saw Sherlock 2 yesterday and i wouldn't mind getting another sequel to that.

 

The Muppets turned out to be really frontloaded in its first week. It'll still make a profit though since its budget is only 45 mil.

post #10152 of 23261

$150 seems high for Sherlock. It will probably go up a little next weekend, but post next weekend all numbers should drop heavy.

post #10153 of 23261

Like to share this anecdote.

 

I was at my local Movie Theatre looking at the Posters (The Hunger Games got a good reaction), when i noticed two middle aged guys getting a first look of The Phantom Menace 3D Poster.

 

"WHAT IS THIS SHIT??"

 

Then they turned around and were flabbergasted when they saw a Titanic 3D poster right behind them.

 

There was a JOHN CARTER standee in the Theatre as well. I thought it looked kinda dull. It was just a shot of Taylor Kitsch pulling two Doglike monsters in Chains.

 

post #10154 of 23261
Quote:
Originally Posted by felix View Post

 

The Muppets turned out to be really frontloaded in its first week. It'll still make a profit though since its budget is only 45 mil.


Also, it's practically guaranteed a long future on home video.

post #10155 of 23261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammerhead View Post


Also, it's practically guaranteed a long future on home video.



If there's one thing that Disney is good at, it's pimping home media releases.

post #10156 of 23261

$46m 4-day for Mission Impossible 4.  Should do $30m next weekend.  Could do $200m domestically at this pace.

post #10157 of 23261
Quote:
Originally Posted by felix View Post

Like to share this anecdote.

 

I was at my local Movie Theatre looking at the Posters (The Hunger Games got a good reaction), when i noticed two middle aged guys getting a first look of The Phantom Menace 3D Poster.

 

"WHAT IS THIS SHIT??"

 

Then they turned around and were flabbergasted when they saw a Titanic 3D poster right behind them.

 

There was a JOHN CARTER standee in the Theatre as well. I thought it looked kinda dull. It was just a shot of Taylor Kitsch pulling two Doglike monsters in Chains.

 



 

It is my hope that PHANTOM MENACE 3D flops and flips hard. Lucas could be wounded psychologically, and the inane practice of "post converting" a 2D image into a 3D one (an impossibility) will be dealt a fatal blow

post #10158 of 23261

Damn you, Kate.  You WASTED your prognostication on AVATAR when you could have guaranteed the failure of PHANTOM MENACE 3D!!!????!?!?!?!

 

I'll never forgive you.

post #10159 of 23261
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

Damn you, Kate.  You WASTED your prognostication on AVATAR when you could have guaranteed the failure of PHANTOM MENACE 3D!!!????!?!?!?!

 

I'll never forgive you.



 

There would be no PHANTOM MENACE 3D without AVATAR, so it's not really something I could have prevented :  P

post #10160 of 23261

Silence!

 

I'm gonna bop you on your NOSEstradamus!!!

post #10161 of 23261
Quote:
Originally Posted by felix View Post

Like to share this anecdote.

 

I was at my local Movie Theatre looking at the Posters (The Hunger Games got a good reaction), when i noticed two middle aged guys getting a first look of The Phantom Menace 3D Poster.

 

"WHAT IS THIS SHIT??"

 

Then they turned around and were flabbergasted when they saw a Titanic 3D poster right behind them.

 

There was a JOHN CARTER standee in the Theatre as well. I thought it looked kinda dull. It was just a shot of Taylor Kitsch pulling two Doglike monsters in Chains.

 


 

Although my 13 year old self was obsessed with Titanic, I have no interest in sitting through that film again.  Much more interested in the Beauty and the Beast re-release.

post #10162 of 23261

I haven't seen Beauty and the Beast yet. So i might catch that when it re-releases.

 

I have to say that they are really promoting the shit out of The Amazing Spider Man here. I am a regular weekly movie-goer and my Cinema chain is replaying the Amazing Spider Man teaser in every one of its films.

 

The reaction so far seems to be a little muted and reserved based on the audience expression.

The Hunger Games Trailer is working like gangbusters though. Everyone i know who's seen it was visibly impressed.

post #10163 of 23261
Quote:
Originally Posted by felix View Post

I haven't seen Beauty and the Beast yet. 



WHAT?!

post #10164 of 23261

Oh yes. A mistake i intend to rectify when it re-releases next year.

post #10165 of 23261
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarleyQuinn22 View Post



WHAT?!


Um .... neither have I *runs away very fast*.

 

post #10166 of 23261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shan View Post


Um .... neither have I *runs away very fast*.

 



WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT?! 

 

WHO ELSE HASN'T SEEN IT, HUH?!  OUT YOURSELVES AND BE SHAMED, GODDAMN YOU!

post #10167 of 23261

Not only have I seen it, but I've diagnosed that it had such an impression on my six-year-old self's mind that Belle is my mental image of a perfect woman.  Hello, issues.

post #10168 of 23261

I really miss the front page article, by the way. Dre or Renn's version. 

post #10169 of 23261

Not terribly impressed by american audiences at the moment - a lot of (by most accounts) pretty decent movies flopping, or at least doing underwhelming business.

post #10170 of 23261
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Shape View Post

Not only have I seen it, but I've diagnosed that it had such an impression on my six-year-old self's mind that Belle is my mental image of a perfect woman.  Hello, issues.



I have a similar problem, except it's alternatively either Jasmine or Jessica Rabbit.

post #10171 of 23261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul C View Post

Not terribly impressed by american audiences at the moment - a lot of (by most accounts) pretty decent movies flopping, or at least doing underwhelming business.



At least they didn't help Pirates of the Caribbean 4 become the second top grossing overseas film of the year.

post #10172 of 23261
Quote:
Originally Posted by User_32 View Post



At least they didn't help Pirates of the Caribbean 4 become the second top grossing overseas film of the year.



And American audiences have shown a remarkable skepticism to 3D, which the rest of the world could stand to emulate.

 

post #10173 of 23261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Clark View Post



I have a similar problem, except it's alternatively either Jasmine or Jessica Rabbit.



I thought the go-to answer here was the Little Mermaid.

post #10174 of 23261

The go-to answer is ALL OF THEM!

 

hot_disney_princesses_09.jpg

post #10175 of 23261

I suspect Sherlock 2 will do well overseas when it hits in January (in most places), but what about Dragon Tattoo?  And when exactly is it rolling out elsewhere in the world?

post #10176 of 23261


While I liked the Dragon Tat trailer, I never got the sense that the film was as hotly anticipated as the marketing wanted me to believe it was.  Not entirely shocked at how it's doing so far. 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by User_32 View Post

The go-to answer is ALL OF THEM!

 

hot_disney_princesses_09.jpg



Aurora's a narcoleptic. Snow White hangs out with too many dudes. Cinderella whines about cooking and cleaning.  Jasmine's a poor little rich girl.  Belle's got Stockholm Syndrome.  Ariel's pussy smells like fish.  Tinkerbell's a moody little cunt.  None of these women are prizes.

post #10177 of 23261

You're kidding, right?  Stockholm Syndrome may as well be a bullseye.

post #10178 of 23261

MI:4 goes over $300 million global

 

Now can someone let Josh Holloway headline his own film? 

post #10179 of 23261

War Horse and Tintin look like pretty much unqualified flops domestically. That surprises and disappoints me, to be honest, since I really liked both and would like to see them at least reach $100, which seemed at least possible before now. Spielberg's name certainly seems to have lost its value.

post #10180 of 23261

Tintin doesn't surprise me whatsoever.

 

War Horse, on the other hand, I thought would catch on.

post #10181 of 23261
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmNerdJamie View Post

Tintin doesn't surprise me whatsoever.

 

War Horse, on the other hand, I thought would catch on.



Told you, babe.  It looked too sugary for the adults and it's too grown-up for the kids.

post #10182 of 23261

TinTin was always a tough sell, and hell, when it even took the internet till two weeks before release to wake up and stop harping on it, there was never a huge potential for it to break out.  The film is meant for international audiences, and the studio knew that--that's why it opened everywhere else in October. 

 

War Horse, though? It's been not even a week yet, it's probably going to pass TinTin by midweek next week, and if it starts getting awards, it could play a long game. It was far cheaper than TinTin  (only $70 million), in any case, so calling it a surefire flop when it could still get to 90-100 million seems a bit harsh.

 

I'm still perplexed at the lack of enthusiasm both films received in the months leading up to release, both in the marketing push and in movie buff's sites. But hey, now we're assured yet another Alvin movie, and probably another Sherlock movie full of diminishing returns. Will this hurt Spielberg? I sincerely doubt it. 

post #10183 of 23261

Yeah this doesn't effect Spielberg's brand-name in the slightest. He's still the biggest name filmmaker in the world.

post #10184 of 23261

Not Cameron?

post #10185 of 23261

In terms of box office, Cameron's bigger, sure. Spielberg does have the distinction of topping the high-grossing film ever chart three times to Cameron's two, though.  Cameron's only averaging one film a decade at this point, and Spielberg's more than earned his spot at the top--just based on cultural awareness, he's the most prolific American director since John Ford. Even in the ads for Avatar, Cameron still got listed as "From the Director of Titanic, Aliens, and The Terminator". Spielberg gets advertised as being Spielberg, and that's all that's needed.

post #10186 of 23261

Couldn't have said it better myself, Greg.

post #10187 of 23261

Agree that the lack of interest for Tintin and War Horse on Boards like this one is baffling. (I know the War Horse thread is 3 pages, but Tintin is barely one!).

 

There's been talk (on CHUD and elsewhere) that it's the International Box Office that matters now. Looks like Spielberg was ahead of the curve on that one.

post #10188 of 23261
post #10189 of 23261

I honestly can't say I'm hugely disappointed by Tintin's sputtering at the box office; it's not about the movie's quality, it's that we were almost away from Hollywood believing that fully mo-cap CG movies are a good idea, and this movie threatened to pull us back in like Michael Corleone. Granted, the success of overseas is a thing, but hopefully people will write it off as the brand name and otherwise kill mo-cap as a technique.

 

As for the box office returns, this was a bit of a lackluster year from a blockbuster franchise perspective--even Harry Potter Part 7 Part 2 had a bit of a pall over it based on what a snooze Part 7 Part 1 was--and there was a lack of exciting new word-of-mouth movies, which is always a major factor in the box office that Hollywood is increasingly ignoring. (Bridesmaids proves that it's still important, however.) There's also the lousy economy. As I've said before, you have to look at the box office for a given year or season holistically, not on a movie-by-movie basis. 1999 was a huge summer for box office because people were excited about Phantom Menace, but there were some other interesting offerings, and people were generally excited about going to the movies. This past year was the opposite--there was nothing for people in general to get excited about. There are fans of various franchises who went out to see Transformers and Twilight, but those tend to reach an established audience and leave everyone else behind. You need at least one breakthrough blockbuster to elevate everything around it, and that didn't happen this past year.

 

I think there'll be a big bounce-back in 2012, though. There are some potential new franchises like The Hunger Games, the Avengers feels like something new and special, and the franchises that are returning--The Hobbit, Skyfall, Prometheus, The Dark Knight Rises, possibly even Men in Black 3--actually feel *big* and important instead of "well, here's another Harry Potter movie."

post #10190 of 23261
If TINTIN is an example of a mo-cap full CG movie done right then I want a hundred more like it. It was amazing.

And WAR HORSE was up 21% yesterday. Still too early to tell if it's a flop or a slow burn hit.
post #10191 of 23261

But if they'd made Tintin with conventional animation or non-mocapped CGI, with stylized characters that didn't half-pretend to be "real" and thereby fall straight into the uncanny valley, would that have hurt the film? I find it hard to believe it would. I'm sure Tintin is good, but I don't think the mo-cap/"realistic CGI characters" aspect adds anything, and it's an ugly and graceless style of animation that I want to see buried. Audiences generally seem to agree with me, too.

post #10192 of 23261
Talk about jumping the gun on poor War Horse. Not only did it rise the most in the top 10 this weekend but its per screen average was second only to Mission Impossible. Looks like it's showing some legs. If it gets some big Oscar noms, it might have a chance at 100M.
post #10193 of 23261


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Prankster View Post

But if they'd made Tintin with conventional animation or non-mocapped CGI, with stylized characters that didn't half-pretend to be "real" and thereby fall straight into the uncanny valley, would that have hurt the film? I find it hard to believe it would. I'm sure Tintin is good, but I don't think the mo-cap/"realistic CGI characters" aspect adds anything, and it's an ugly and graceless style of animation that I want to see buried. Audiences generally seem to agree with me, too.



Tintin isn't playing soft in the States because of how it was executed technically. It's because 90% of Americans don't know who Tintin is.

post #10194 of 23261
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Prankster View Post

But if they'd made Tintin with conventional animation or non-mocapped CGI, with stylized characters that didn't half-pretend to be "real" and thereby fall straight into the uncanny valley, would that have hurt the film? I find it hard to believe it would. I'm sure Tintin is good, but I don't think the mo-cap/"realistic CGI characters" aspect adds anything, and it's an ugly and graceless style of animation that I want to see buried. Audiences generally seem to agree with me, too.



I wasn't referring to Tintin specifically (though I do think the mo-cap is a factor--I mean, it's an accessible adventure movie otherwise, right? It's just that foreign audiences can get past it because they're excited to see a Tintin movie.) I was referring more to mo-cap's overall track record at the box office, with Mars Needs Moms and whatnot. I believe The Christmas Express did OK by pandering to undiscriminating kids, but otherwise, it's not a technique that makes people want to see movies. It's fine when combined with human characters, a la Avatar, but fully-mocapped movies seem to put people off, with good reason. 

post #10195 of 23261

Beyond the fact that I'll bet Tin Tin was basically key-frame animated in the end, what the mo-cap aspect of the film seemed to do was finally bring Spielberg into animation.  So there's that.

 

And I think Prankster was just saying that people generally seemed put off by mo-cap films as opposed to blaming it for Tin Tin's soft performance domestically.

 

EDIT:  Dammit, too late!

 

Though I do think Tin Tin really felt good to watch.  The mo-cap stuff rarely detracted.

post #10196 of 23261

What I meant to say was, Go see Tintin, Prankster. It's fun.

post #10197 of 23261

MI:4 looks like it'll end up there among Cruise's bigger hits - who would've thought? Does that mean he's officially 'back' now, or has he just postponed the inevitable?

 

I don't really buy the idea that Tintin is underperforming because Americans 'don't know who Tintin' is, otherwise no movie that isn't based on an existing property would ever be a success. That's what marketing is for. But there must be something about Tintin in general that stops it from working in the states. Just too fundamentally european or international or something? Worth noting that the movie itself hasn't been a megahit overseas either. It's done okay but hardly a sensation.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Prankster View Post

But if they'd made Tintin with conventional animation or non-mocapped CGI, with stylized characters that didn't half-pretend to be "real" and thereby fall straight into the uncanny valley, would that have hurt the film? I find it hard to believe it would. I'm sure Tintin is good, but I don't think the mo-cap/"realistic CGI characters" aspect adds anything, and it's an ugly and graceless style of animation that I want to see buried. Audiences generally seem to agree with me, too.


You're making some pretty specific and bile-filled attacks considering you don't appear to have seen the movie!

post #10198 of 23261

Paramount needs to greenlight M:I-5 immediately.  Ghost Protocol basically just gave the franchise a Fast Five.  The sequel will open really well.

post #10199 of 23261

MI4 has already done more business than MI3, so by that logic, there will be a MI5.

post #10200 of 23261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul C View Post

MI:4 looks like it'll end up there among Cruise's bigger hits - who would've thought? Does that mean he's officially 'back' now, or has he just postponed the inevitable?

 

I don't really buy the idea that Tintin is underperforming because Americans 'don't know who Tintin' is, otherwise no movie that isn't based on an existing property would ever be a success. That's what marketing is for. But there must be something about Tintin in general that stops it from working in the states. Just too fundamentally european or international or something? Worth noting that the movie itself hasn't been a megahit overseas either. It's done okay but hardly a sensation.

 


You're making some pretty specific and bile-filled attacks considering you don't appear to have seen the movie!



 

Speaking as someone who is very turned off by this Tin Tin movie but has no problem with Europe, I loath the design of the mocap characters, and the word "unicorn" in the title

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: CHUD.COM Main
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › CHUD NUMBERS: Box Office Discussion Thread