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 218

post #10851 of 23516
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

Is he really a thing though?  It's a completely manufactured appeal to sell the movie.  If he actually becomes a thing, it'll be after the movie comes out.


Hey, he's one of the stars of Journey 2, so give him a break. Yes, I am aware of the phrase, 'damning with faint praise', why do you ask?

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by User_32 View Post


Thor's brother and a midget.

 

the-hunger-games-jennifer-lawrence-josh-hutcherson-liam-hemsworth-600x342.jpg

 


That's no way to talk to Nathan Lane's love child.

 

post #10852 of 23516

Hutcherson's character in THE HUNGER GAMES is very Pete Campbell in Mad Men. He's a little bitch, so I think they get that. Dude was a child actor, but he's kept working. THG will probably be his best role.

post #10853 of 23516
Quote:
Originally Posted by User_32 View Post


Thor's brother and a midget.

 

the-hunger-games-jennifer-lawrence-josh-hutcherson-liam-hemsworth-600x342.jpg

 



Oh my God, that picture.  One, she looks much better as a brunette, but most women do.  Two, Thor's brother looks like a mash-up of Jim from The Office and Chris Evans.  Three, Hutch looks like someone photoshopped him to look small as a goof.   And he is NOT a thing.  Not at all.  

post #10854 of 23516
Wow. It sounds like The Hunger Games is a really big thing over in the United States. It'll certainly be interesting to see if it makes as much money has been predicted in this thread.
post #10855 of 23516
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarleyQuinn22 View Post



 Two, Thor's brother looks like a mash-up of Jim from The Office and Chris Evans.


Remember when Krasinski was one of the potentials for Captain America?

 

post #10856 of 23516

I know it won't be released on enough screens to...Starve the...Hunger Games, but I do plan to open a can of...THE RAID, this upcoming weekend March 23rd!

post #10857 of 23516

35 M for 21 Jump Street. Hearing the stellar reviews and positive audience reaction I'm surprised that its cinemascore is only a B. Guess we'll see how it holds up next weekend.

 

John Carter dropped 55%. Not terrible for a film of its genre but it's not going to make it past 100 M domestically.

post #10858 of 23516

Maybe now Stanton will do a smaller live action film like he should have done in the first place before tackling a film of Carter's size.  

 

Live action and animation are two very different production mediums, and going from one to the other is a pretty big learning curve.  If you MUST do a big film, follow Brad Bird's example.  He picked an already well established, successful franchise with a big lead, where the entire fate of the series wasn't resting on his shoulders, and relatively low in cost compared to something as massive as John Carter.

 

You can't act like Stanley Kubrick when you're spending $300k PER DAY.  Kubrick could endlessly tinker because his budgets were low.  As good of a storyteller as Stanton is, he was way out of league on such a huge live action machine.

post #10859 of 23516
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSaxon View Post

Wow. It sounds like The Hunger Games is a really big thing over in the United States. 


The term "big" is subjective.  It is not nearly on the level of Harry Potter or Twatlight in terms of books sold or awareness of the title before the film was announced.  Harry Potter was a bonafide phenom before the first film was ever shot.  I still remember how all hell broke loose in my circle of friends the day after the press conference where we first saw Dan, Rupert, and Emma.  EVERYONE was talking about it.  Hunger Games had a solid following, but the books didn't start moving crazy units until after that first trailer debuted.  I didn't hear about schools putting it on reading lists for students until after that first trailer debuted.  The fact that you sound so surprised that THG is "big" here tells me that it's really not that big, at least compared to those two book series.

post #10860 of 23516

Frame of reference: 11 years ago Potter opened to $90 Million and made $318 during a holiday season. It is possible that THG is a bit more manufactured, but you're also about twelve years older than when that video hit. And if your interests are the same...

 

I don't know how saturated this is and I can say that I didn't read Twilight, The Da Vinci Code or The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, all of which became pop culture book phenomenons, all of which are poorly written from all evidence. Only one didn't really perform to expectations (though those expectations were muted for TGWTDT). At the same time, I don't doubt that this is going to be a super huge film, and from all evidence it will be. That may say more about you or pop culture than "big."

post #10861 of 23516

I bought my tickets for HUNGER GAMES more than a week in advance. I am therefor confident in declaring it a cultural phenomenon.

 

Seriously though, it'll play out much like the TWILIGHT phenomenon; first movie will be big, interest in the books will grow and the next films will be even bigger. The good news is that HUNGER GAMES doesn't suck like TWILIGHT and with the impeding success of this and PROMETHEUS we may see more original dystopic sci fi films.

post #10862 of 23516

Hugo was one of the best movies I've seen in a while. It was cute and fun, and I really enjoyed the music!

 

Here's a list of the soundtrack and review:

http://thecelebritycafe.com/reviews/2012/03/howard-shores-hugo-score-review

post #10863 of 23516

Troll alert.

post #10864 of 23516
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarleyQuinn22 View Post

Troll alert.



Kate's not around?

post #10865 of 23516

Kate quit. This one creep kept harassing her.

post #10866 of 23516
Give that creep a medal.

Back to haggling about Hunger Games' imminent world takeover.
post #10867 of 23516

Give it to him yourself the next time he creates a new profile and posts misogynistic rants.

 

Re: Hunger Games, yup it's going to be big. As I remarked some time ago (regarding Twilight I think), once a majority of us here have teenage daughters these phenomena will become much easier to handicap.

post #10868 of 23516

Disney just released a statement on JOHN CARTER.

 

Quote:

“In light of the theatrical performance of John Carter ($184 million global box office), we expect the film to generate an operating loss of approximately $200 million during our second fiscal quarter ending March 31. As a result, our current expectation is that the Studio segment will have an operating loss of between $80 and $120 million for the second quarter. As we look forward to the second half of the year, we are excited about the upcoming releases of The Avengers and Brave, which we believe have tremendous potential to drive value for the Studio and the rest of the company.”

 

post #10869 of 23516
Quote:
Originally Posted by felix View Post

Disney just released a statement on JOHN CARTER.

 

 


Ouch.  So do heads roll now, or are they waiting until after THE AVENGERS fails to make $400 million?

 

post #10870 of 23516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratty View Post


Ouch.  So do heads roll now, or are they waiting until after THE AVENGERS fails to make $400 million?

 



You Shut Your Whore Mouth!

post #10871 of 23516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cylon Baby View Post

You Shut Your Whore Mouth!


 

alfredo.gif

post #10872 of 23516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratty View Post


Ouch.  So do heads roll now, or are they waiting until after THE AVENGERS fails to make $400 million?

 


Heads have already rolled.  Dick Cook (the head of the studio who greenlit JC) was fired long ago...so was the useless specimen in charge of marketing Carter...that person had never even done marketing for a feature film before!  Not sure if the person who decided to hire her has been fired too.

 

post #10873 of 23516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post


Heads have already rolled.  Dick Cook (the head of the studio who greenlit JC) was fired long ago...so was the useless specimen in charge of marketing Carter...that person had never even done marketing for a feature film before!  Not sure if the person who decided to hire her has been fired too.

 



Here's the thing: even someone who's never marketed a movie before, if they are in marketing at all, they should be able to put together the basics: an interesting poster, interesting ads..sure they may not have all the nuances down (like when and where to run the ads to be most effective), but then, they have staff, right? People who have worked on other Disney movies? It's hard to believe this is anything other than some weird corporate intrigue by middle managers, or maybe even upper managers pissed at the previous regime.

post #10874 of 23516



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratty View Post


Ouch.  So do heads roll now, or are they waiting until after THE AVENGERS fails to make $400 million?

 



I have very little interest in The Avengers, but unless it's a complete and utter clusterfuck pie, there's no way it doesn't hit at least that. Oh, and good God, no one knew how to charm lady filmgoers like Sam Peckinah.

post #10875 of 23516

There's been articles that basically said that Stanton was adamant about marketing it the way it was and that he was given the control to do it this way.


So, maybe there were a lot of marketing people saying that it should be done a different way, but simply weren't allowed to execute a better plan.

post #10876 of 23516

Yeah, it has pretty much been confirmed that Stanton was calling the shots on marketing until January,when a new team was brough in .It is no coincidence that the marketing improved,but by then the damage had been done.

It pains me to say this since I am a huge fan of Stanton's work at Pixar, but apparently his ego went out of control with John Carter. You have to wonder if John Lassiter at Pixar had to spend a great deal of time keeping Stanton under control.

And those BBC interviews that Statnon gave the week the film opened.....He came off like a conceited jerk. His remark,when asked about the budget "I don't care about figures when I am making a movie" will come back to haunt him now.

Hopefully he will learn from this fiasco. He is hugely talented, but apparently he needs somebody like Lassiter to ride herd on him to keep him from self destructing. Shades of Michael Cimano.

post #10877 of 23516

The New Yorker piece on Stanton paints a picture a bit different from the fun-factory Pixar image that tends to surround the people that work there.  Not that it's anything sinister, but it just paints a picture of a human being very passionate about his art.

post #10878 of 23516

That is probably a heritage of Steve Jobs's perfectionism. Brad Bird is said to be very similar.

post #10879 of 23516

From what I've read and listened to over the years, Bird's passion has always been more overt and well-known. 

 

Stanton's was kept a little more below the surface.  Probably because he has always been at Pixar, while Bird was brought on by Lasseter to shake things up (as the story goes).

post #10880 of 23516
Quote:
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post

Yeah, it has pretty much been confirmed that Stanton was calling the shots on marketing until January,when a new team was brough in .It is no coincidence that the marketing improved,but by then the damage had been done.

It pains me to say this since I am a huge fan of Stanton's work at Pixar, but apparently his ego went out of control with John Carter. You have to wonder if John Lassiter at Pixar had to spend a great deal of time keeping Stanton under control.

And those BBC interviews that Statnon gave the week the film opened.....He came off like a conceited jerk. His remark,when asked about the budget "I don't care about figures when I am making a movie" will come back to haunt him now.

Hopefully he will learn from this fiasco. He is hugely talented, but apparently he needs somebody like Lassiter to ride herd on him to keep him from self destructing. Shades of Michael Cimano.


There's no way he's ever going to get another shot at making a big movie again. Two hundred million in red ink puts him deep in Alan Smithee's Director's Hell. He might do something again at PIXAR, but their movies seem to be done more by committee than a typical live action film.  The only live action film's he's going to be making soon is his kids' home movies.

 

post #10881 of 23516

Having your first feature bomb so spectacularly and affect the studio's bottom line is definitely not a good thing.  But even Cimino directed again, albeit with much smaller budgets.  I hate to see a good filmmaker fail, but I like seeing people get what they deserve for acting so irresponsibly.  I have very little sympathy for Stanton.

post #10882 of 23516

The guy has a permanent place at Pixar.  He needs no sympathy.  Hehehe. 

 

Unless of course, a lifetime at Pixar is now hell for him.  Who knows?

 

Nothing but Cars sequels from here on in!

 

STANTON: NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

post #10883 of 23516
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny View Post

I have very little interest in The Avengers, but unless it's a complete and utter clusterfuck pie, there's no way it doesn't hit at least that.


Why would Avengers significantly increase from Iron Man?  The same people who saw Thor and Captain America were the ones who saw Iron Man and Iron Man 2.  It's not like you can just combine all of their numbers.  You'll get some 3D boost, but that's about it.

post #10884 of 23516
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Shape View Post


Why would Avengers significantly increase from Iron Man?  The same people who saw Thor and Captain America were the ones who saw Iron Man and Iron Man 2.  It's not like you can just combine all of their numbers.  You'll get some 3D boost, but that's about it.



Why are people still being willfully ignorant about this? It's a TEAM-UP movie. Team up movies always do better than their predecessors. It's been this way since Universal did it in the 40's. It worked with FREDDY VS. JASON. It worked with friggin' ALIEN VS. PREDATOR. People who didn't bother seeing THOR or CAP or even IRON MAN 2 are going to see this. The bump is going to go well beyond 3D, and will definitely outgross IRON MAN. Maybe it won't work again for AVENGERS 2, but AVENGERS is going to be huge for sheer novelty alone. People who don't give two shits about superhero films are talking about it. Believe.

post #10885 of 23516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebastian OB View Post



Why are people still being willfully ignorant about this? It's a TEAM-UP movie. Team up movies always do better than their predecessors. It's been this way since Universal did it in the 40's. It worked with FREDDY VS. JASON. It worked with friggin' ALIEN VS. PREDATOR. People who didn't bother seeing THOR or CAP or even IRON MAN 2 are going to see this. The bump is going to go well beyond 3D, and will definitely outgross IRON MAN. Maybe it won't work again for AVENGERS 2, but AVENGERS is going to be huge for sheer novelty alone. People who don't give two shits about superhero films are talking about it. Believe.


Freddy vs. Jason sold roughly the same number of tickets as Nightmare 4.  Alien vs. Predator sold the same amount of tickets as Alien 3 (and less than Alien, Aliens, and Predator).  Team-up movies do well, but they've never, ever massively jumped in terms of sales.  FVJ came out fifteen years after Freddy's prime, so the same number of tickets plus inflation resulted in a much bigger gross.  Avengers is hitting two years after Iron Man 2.  The boost will come from 3D, not audience.

 

But you know me, being all 'willfully ignorant' by using trends and box office history to predict the future.

post #10886 of 23516

Yeah, but those franchises were franchises in decline or moribund. The Marvel brand has been gathering steam for years, leading up to this specific event. Plus it's combining 4 major characters. There are other x factors here you aren't considering.

 

There are only 2 movies likely to outgross THE AVENGERS this year, and that's THE DARK KNIGHT RISES and the final fucking TWILIGHT.

post #10887 of 23516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebastian OB View Post

Yeah, but those franchises were franchises in decline or moribund. The Marvel brand has been gathering steam for years, leading up to this specific event. Plus it's combining 4 major characters. There are other x factors here you aren't considering.


No, there aren't.  You see franchises in decline, I see franchises that had room to bounce back up.  Marvel's films have already essentially peaked.  If they were going to get a boost, it would have come with Iron Man 2.  People who skipped Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, Iron Man 2, Thor, and Captain America aren't going to care about The Avengers.  The same audience who came out for those is going to come out for this, plus 3D premium.

 

Freddy vs. Jason and Alien vs. Predator were films geeks had talked about for years, but nobody knew if they would really happen.  The Avengers has been a sure thing since, when, Incredible Hulk?  Iron Man 2?  It doesn't have the, "Wow, they actually fucking made that?" factor that the other two did.

 

But hey, I'm willing to wait it out.  My gut's generally been right with tent poles over the past decade.

post #10888 of 23516

I think something like 350 is more realistic for THE AVENGERS. And I think Disney would be happy with that.

Getting to 400 in the US is hard. Most years you'll either get one movie that reaches 400 or none.

post #10889 of 23516

Avengers will probably do Spider-Man business.  350 US, 450 foreign.

post #10890 of 23516

I'm saying 350 domestic for AVENGERS is a lock. TDKR will definitely cross 400.

post #10891 of 23516

A hundred opening weekend is likely, maybe more with no FAST FIVE spoilers opening a week before. Should weather Dark Shadows and The Dictator with standard 50% drop. Battleship hits it in home turf, as does MIBIII. $300 and change is likely, as TDS said, said audience as the other Marvel pictures. I don't know if this has attracted more outside interest. The question then is if acts more like a sequel and drops even heavier second weekend. Don't be surprised if THE HUNGER GAMES - which has less direct competition - outgrosses it. It has more of a possibility of extended play.

post #10892 of 23516

Highest I see Avengers hitting is $330 million. A huge sum, but I'm with The Dark Shape. Its being overestimated by many when the fanbase hasn't grown (box-office wise) since Iron Man in 08. Thor and Captain America couldn't hit $200 million and Iron Man 2 actually made less domestically (albeit by a hair but still surprising) than the first. And The Incredible Hulk... yeaaaaah.

 

The Dark Knight Rises? Don't see how that doesn't break $400 million.

post #10893 of 23516

I see can see the Avengers making 400 million domestically. It will open to Iron Man 2 numbers, maybe a little more because of 3d, and the 3d will push it a bit. I think it'll sell easier because it's a bigger name than Thor or Captain America, which sounds a little weird to say.

 

I don't see Hunger Games being a phenomenon as much as I see it being marketed as a phenomenon. I've never seen tons and tons of people walking around with it like I have with LOTR, Twilight, Harry Potter, or Millennium Trilogy. I think it'll do 60-70 million with 130 finish. Something along those lines.

 

So theres a Clash of the Titans 2 coming out? I had no clue about this until I saw a commercial for it during American Dad. FLOP.

post #10894 of 23516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe T View Post

How did Josh Hutcherson become a thing? That kid's appeal vexes me.



 

I will be incredibly shallow and agree. He's got a lego shaped, head, poor boy.  Frankly, I think the casting of the three leads is a big old miss.

post #10895 of 23516
Quote:
Originally Posted by UrchineSLICE View Post

I don't see Hunger Games being a phenomenon as much as I see it being marketed as a phenomenon. I've never seen tons and tons of people walking around with it like I have with LOTR, Twilight, Harry Potter, or Millennium Trilogy. I think it'll do 60-70 million with 130 finish. Something along those lines.

 

So theres a Clash of the Titans 2 coming out? I had no clue about this until I saw a commercial for it during American Dad. FLOP.


For it to open to $70 million and level out at $130 million would take an epic Hulk-sized drop in the second weekend.

post #10896 of 23516
Any buzz at all on WRATH OF THE TITANS? the trailer for it elicited painful groans from everyone in my theater for JOHN CARTER. Even if it's decent (or at least better than the first one), I don't see it generating much business.
post #10897 of 23516

Really? Strangely enough WRATH is getting a fair bit of promotion here in Singapore.

 

THE HUNGER GAMES? Not so much. Tickets seem to be selling fairly well though.

post #10898 of 23516
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmNerdJamie View Post


For it to open to $70 million and level out at $130 million would take an epic Hulk-sized drop in the second weekend.



Might be the worst prediction this thread has yet seen.

post #10899 of 23516

I was probably a little steep with my opening week prediction but that's why I don't do this for a living lol. BUT I do kind of see a big drop off. Idk what it is but, this doesn't feel like the big event movie that the marketing suggests. There are 3 opening movies next weekend and although I don't see them doing big business, it's a lot of competition.

 

Wrath of the Titans, which came out of nowhere, is going to be like Ghost Rider 2. 3D won't help it this time around, due to how poorly recieved the first one was. My amazing box office prediction skills see it opening to less than 40 million and creating a black hole out of Worthingtons fading star.   Was Sam Worthington ever really considered a star?  

post #10900 of 23516

Arguing about the difference between $350 and $400 seems kind of weird, but I do tend to think it'll beat $350. There's a weird factor at play in prior Marvel movies--Iron Man 2, Thor and Cap all opened in months where they were basically the only thing worth seeing. I've long argued that when a movie opens in a movie season, summer particularly, the gross and general buzz of the other movies opening around it can play a major role in affecting the box office. This was most notable in 1999, with The Phantom Menace being a rising tide that lifted all the boats around it. On the flip side, I think last year was a pretty soggy summer, and that had a negative impact on Thor and Captain America. This factor isn't going to turn a flop into a hit or anything, and some years it doesn't matter, but it can give the box office that extra nudge. In the case of the Avengers, I think Hunger Games is going to prime the pump for summer something FIERCE, and there's other exciting movies coming down the pipeline later. In addition, the economy's improving, the feds are cracking down on piracy, and the weather's going to be scorching.I think this is a year where people are going to be eager to hit the theaters.

 

I also think trying to break it down to compare it to sequels and team-up movies isn't really going to work. This really does feel like something special. I can see the logic of arguing that the various Marvel movies all court the same audience, but by that logic, they should all do the same business, and they don't. This is the Ocean's Eleven of superhero movies. It actually fees like an event in a way summer movies haven't in a while.

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