CHUD NUMBERS: Box Office Discussion Thread - Page 234

I think they're going to fuck it up too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Art Decade 

 

...and how they'll clumsily fuck it up.

I wouldn't be that hard to reboot Batman.  Bale wasn't the ideal Batman, and their still is high profile Villains not used in Nolan's world.  

I think there's probably less call for a Justice League movie. No, seriously. I think at this point we're in the same place that the comics were in the 70s or early 80s, where DC is seen as the uncool company and Marvel is where it's at. (And given the quality of the films, I can't really blame them...) To an extent this never went away--a lot of people with taste tend to say things like "well Marvel comics are clearly cooler..." and they're more or less right. Marvel has the more obviously satisfying dramatic weight to its characters, whereas DC comes from a place of being square and old fashioned. Which means that lesser writers tend to make desperate attempts to make them "edgy" that fail hilariously--see the New 52--and that just exacerbates the problem. As shown by much of their output in the 80s, though, DC comics can actually be really intelligent and challenging. And as the various DC animated programs have (mostly) shown, when they aim at a younger audience, they can be as popular as ever. (And DC has the advantage of much better girl characters. I still can't believe WB hasn't seen the appeal of a Wonder Woman movie to the little girl crowd. SHE IS A PRINCESS WHO IS A SUPERHERO.) DC characters work when you don't try too hard to be KEWL. Also, many of DC's best characters are the non-headliners.

So DC could make a Justice Leageu film tomorrow and it would make bank, but it wouldn't have the epic weight of the Avengers. Or they could spend another few years building up these properties again. They're in a jam, though--unless they get Christian Bale, it's all going to be about characters without proven hits under their belts. Even if you consider Thor and Captain America to be disappointments, Marvel had at least one major headliner in Iron Man/Robert Downey Jr., plus an all-star lineup. Without Christian Bale, a Justice League movie just isn't going to succeed in the same way. (And this is why it sucks that the Green Lantern movie used Hal Jordan and not Jon Stewart. If they had used Stewart, they would have had the name recognition of the cartoon, plus more diversity.) Maybe if MoS turns out to be a big hit and they can get a Wonder Woman project off the ground (is it possible Hunger Games might get some movement on that?) they might have something.
 

$69.7m on Saturday?  $50.1m on Sunday?

Jesus Christ.

Quote:

Originally Posted by User_32 

Nah. Battleship will bomb hard in the States but I don't see that for Men in Black. Will Smith in a proven sci-fi comedy I wouldn't beat against. Even Wild Wild West made 175 M adjusted for inflation.

It won't bomb, but the bloom is off both Will Smith and the MiB franchise.

At this point, I'm thinking Avengers has two more weeks at the top of the BO. Dark Shadows isn't going to make a dent, though it might gain an audience. It sounds like Battleship is sputtering. MiB might dethrone Avengers just because it's far enough out, but I dunno. I think this is kind of a repeat of summer 1999, when lots of movies will do well, but they'll do well in the shadow of this one insanely anticipated gotta-see movie. Except people actually like Avengers and aren't just trying to convince themselves they like it. That's the X factor here.

And yeah, at this point, I'm calling it: Avengers will end up with more money than TDKR.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bailey 

So will this be seen as more of a successful crossover, or a successful culmination of universe-building?

I'd say the later. I doubt this would've made 200 M without at least the Iron Man movies before it and Robert Downey Jr.

Well, Joss Whedon had said that if WB let him have free reign unlike before he would go back to do the Wonder Woman movie in a heartbeat so... maybe they'll be calling him after this weekend.

I was so worried Avengers wouldn't be a success, and am incredibly relived to be completely, utterly, wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by User_32 

Well, Joss Whedon had said that if WB let him have free reign unlike before he would go back to do the Wonder Woman movie in a heartbeat so... maybe they'll be calling him after this weekend.

I'd never been interested in a Wonder Woman movie (I detest mewling quims!!!!!!!), but seeing what Whedon did with The Avengers and with audiences clearly primed to dig fun/colorful superheroics... I really hope this happens.

Quote:

Originally Posted by User_32 

Well, Joss Whedon had said that if WB let him have free reign unlike before he would go back to do the Wonder Woman movie in a heartbeat so... maybe they'll be calling him after this weekend.

Whedon can write his own fucking ticket right now. He could march right into Fox HQ and pitch Firefly Season 2 and they would pick it up in a heartbeat. I can see it now:

From Joss Whedon

The Visionary Director of Marvel's The Avengers

Comes The Most Anticipated Television Event of All Time

20th Century Fox Presents

Firefly: Season 2

The weekend isn't even over and people are calling for Serenity II and... ugh.  Stop trying to make Nathan Fillion happen.  He's never going to happen!

Let's leave Firefly alone now.  It's been too long.

Of course, I would totally watch it.

But at this point, I would rather have another Firefly movie.

I like Firefly but please no. Let's keep this train moving forward.

Tho I would like to see a show of Joss's Buffy spinoff FRAY.

No, goddammit, I want my Serenity 2 -- even if Mal is now a wee bit chubby.

Fanboy director, who finds major success doing a Marvel film.  Only to return to his roots, and do a semi-sequel to one of his most beloved, yet niche, properties.

Sounds familiar, and Raimi can still write his own ticket even now... right?  RIGHT? 

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Prankster 

 

And yeah, at this point, I'm calling it: Avengers will end up with more money than TDKR.

Water is wet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monster Pete 

Fanboy director, who finds major success doing a Marvel film.  Only to return to his roots, and do a semi-sequel to one of his most beloved, yet niche, properties.

 

Sounds familiar, and Raimi can still write his own ticket even now... right?  RIGHT? 

Drag Me To Hell

Budget $30 million

Box office  $90,842,646

Quote:

Originally Posted by Art Decade 

Quote:

 

Drag Me To Hell

 

Budget $30 million

 

Box office  $90,842,646

Domestic Gross, 42 million.  Opening Weekend, 15 million.

While not a bomb, not what the studios were expecting.  But then again, we've gotten so many Raimi works afterwards....

That's only because Raimi got tied up with the Spider-Man 4 debacle and Oz's troubled development.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sebastian OB 

That's only because Raimi got tied up with the Spider-Man 4 debacle and Oz's troubled development.

Spider-Man 4 seems to prove the point, that the directors just can't "cash their own ticket".  Raimi had an idea, Sony declined and moved on.  They can cash their ticket, after a board of suits analyze said ticket.  

Remind Whedon not to ever mention the word "vulture" in his meetings with studios.

Yup. Odd as it sounds, this doesn't hand Whedon the metaphorical Infinity Gauntlet. On the other hand, he does have a fanbase, and he could do what Nolan did, bounce back and forth between personal projects and huge franchises.

A Wonder Woman movie, why the hell not? We're presumably several years off from Avengers 2, so it could make sense as a blockbuster lifeline for Whedon. And yes, Serenity II please. Make it on a modest budget and why the hell not?

I just don't want Whedon to be all-franchise, all the time from here on out. But considering his insane productivity and his tendency to bang out quirky little projects during his downtime, like Dr. Horrible or this upcoming Shakespeare thing, I'm not TOO worried.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike's Pants 

 

I think you're right. But what can they do? Get Ryan Reynolds to cameo? They can't use Batman until they figure how to reboot it (and they will have no choice but to reboot it.

 

I will be fascinating to see what WB do with this.

I think they will do excactly what they've been doing for the last decade and more. Nothing at all beyond chasing their collective tail. As for trying to get Whedon over to their side of the street, I think Marvel would be wise to button him up with a long term juicy contract now. Either that, or choloroform him and tuck him into the freezer tube next to Walt and bring him out every year or so to make a new movie.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dark Shape 

No, goddammit, I want my Serenity 2 -- even if Mal is now a wee bit chubby.

Captain Splitpants.

Whedon loves strong female characters and he's said that Wonder Woman is the most popular female superhero in the world so I could see it being very tempting to him to return if WB makes it worth his while. It could also be the FIRST successful female superhero movie at the box office after the debacle that was Catwoman and Elektra.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cccc 

 

I wouldn't be that hard to reboot Batman.  Bale wasn't the ideal Batman, and their still is high profile Villains not used in Nolan's world.  

They'll reboot Batman and use Joker as the villain.  Obviously.  Next Superman reboot after Zack's attempt will probably have Lex.  And on and on and on.

WB isn't worried or changing strategies.  

$160+ was always a lock for Avengers OW, WB knew that...$40 million more isn't so earth shattering as to make them change anything.  200 is huge but it's not surprising.  WB has stated months ago they're planning a JLA movie to release in the next several years after the Batman reboot (which will be more team friendly).  I wouldn't be surprised if they reboot Green Lantern, make a Wonder Woman flick along side Bats and hope Snyder doesn't fuck up Superman.

I'm hugely in favour of a Wonder Woman movie because I honestly think there's a need for it in a way there isn't most other superheroes. Even putting aside the fact that there really ought to be a major female superhero with her own franchise, there's a lot of interesting stuff in WW's backstory that can be explored; she's not just another superhero, she's got a lot of fascinating subtext. Grant Morrison's apparently working on a WW graphic novel that sounds like it's going to tap into the sexual politics of the character in an interesting way. I don't expect a WW movie to be Morrison-esque but if they can tackle her the way Morrison did All-Star Superman, you can get a sense of how great the character can be. If Whedon'll do it, I'd be all for it, because (Avengers aside) he always tries to say something with his pop-culture creations; it wouldn't just be another "superhero punches bad guy until the movie is over" movie.

And yeah, sure. Gina Carrano. Whedon's been aces at getting great performances out of somewhat stiff actors in the past, so that's another argument for him.
 

Gina Carrano. Yes. Get outta my brain.

Throughout the entire running time of Haywire, all I was thinking was "Yup, that's Wonder Woman".

I was weighing the pros and cons of being choked to death by her thighs... which is sort of similar, I guess.

Quote:

Originally Posted by User_32 

I'd say the later. I doubt this would've made 200 M without at least the Iron Man movies before it and Robert Downey Jr.

 

 

There would be no Avengers without Iron Man being so successful.   Period!

Am I the only one who thinks Dark Knight Rises is gonna be somewhat of a disappointment? I'm sure it will do fine, but without the hype surrounding Ledger and the Joker, an obscure main villain, and a seemingly more morose tone than the first two, I'm thinking it won't have the strong opening or legs to make it one of the top 3 or so movies of the year. 

I think DKR will have a slow crawl to $200m. Along with the lack of Heath-hype, I think people are pretty much done with Nolan's Batman.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Art Decade 

I think people are pretty much done with Nolan's Batman.

I know I am...I'm probably not even going to see it on release.  Blu rental.  

Clarence Boddicker, I have to say, seeing Batman train as a...Ninja, I was hoping that Ra's Al Ghul had full squads of...Ninja, along with his other henchmen.  In that way I am disappointed there was not more of...Those...Men In Black!  Also...Bane?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Art Decade 

I think DKR will have a slow crawl to $200m.

I can see thinking it's going to hit way lower than The Dark Knight, but the opening weekend alone should all but guarantee 200 million.  I'd be surprised if it does less than 350.

If by "opening weekend" you mean the first two weeks of it's release, then yes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Art Decade 

I think DKR will have a slow crawl to $200m. Along with the lack of Heath-hype, I think people are pretty much done with Nolan's Batman.

Couldn't disagree more.

This reeks of knee-jerk Avengers hugeness reaction a la after Iron Man exploded four years ago and you started hearing a lot of "Is Batman too dark for little kids?" arguments being made online. Turns out...little kids and families went to Dark Knight in droves. History appears to be repeating itself.

   Problem for TDK, is that Avengers can just play and play. The slow first 30 minutes aside, that is one entertaining movie and hella fun to see with an audience. It really comes down to what the media does with it. Do we get breathless reporting in the local news of packed houses screaming in joy? Or does the media hype the next big thing?  Avengers is a crazy hit already, but it is entertaining enough to become a phenomenon the way Avatar, Titanic, Star Wars did.

   TDK will open big and should hit 400B, most people loved Dark Knight, Inception gave Nolan his own brand. The success will depend on the movie itself. If it is good/great, then it can own the second half of the summer. But we really wont know until we see the film. I think predictions of a Dark Knight 'failure' are misguided. Nolan has delivered so far, no reason to think he wont do so here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Art Decade 

I think DKR will have a slow crawl to $200m. Along with the lack of Heath-hype, I think people are pretty much done with Nolan's Batman.

Yeah, okay. That's not going to happen. Will it beat The Avengers OW? Probably not, but then again, The Avengers OW is somewhat padded with 3D revenue (not negating this rather significant accomplishment, just stating a fact). You *think* people are tired of Nolan's Batman because you don't like Nolan's Batman. It's hardly the same thing.

Wow... when the TDK honeymoon period wears off on some of you guys, it wears off HARD. 

PEH-TEE.

TAI-NEE...

Hehehehe

Quote:

Originally Posted by Art Decade 

I think DKR will have a slow crawl to $200m. Along with the lack of Heath-hype, I think people are pretty much done with Nolan's Batman.

I don't think so at all.  It'll hit 200M in no time at all, it depends how good it is beyond opening weekend.  I think having Bane as the main villain hurts the movie because nobody knows who the hell he is.

I do recall Beaks (when he was here) stating that TDK had no shot at $300 million. "Nobody knows nothing". Nolan's Batman films are divisive because they're different and not out to please everyone. The Avengers is, thusfar, nowhere near as divisive because it's simple, big, fun and not interested in being about anything except what's in front of you. It's very inclusive that way, and thus, very successful.

Caught The Avengers this eve and I'm not sure what upper limit I'd dare put on how well it will do - it's practically the definitive 00's popcorn blockbuster. After the first act it's just a densely packed string of payoffs and money shots that never really puts a foot wrong. I know I'm supposed to sneer at Avatar but that was the last blockbuster I saw that hit its crowdpleasing targets so effectively*. Not sure it's something that will linger long in the memory but as pure, disposable entertainment it's hard to beat. It could get really big.

Also caught the new Dark Knight trailer and I thought it was drab, barely comprehensible and lacking much in the way of a hook. I think it will be big, if only on the back of Dark Knight goodwill, but unless the buzz is that its amazing I suspect Avengers may have stolen the zeitgeist from it.

*thinking about it, it's a bit rich that everyone slated that one for being unoriginal, while The Avengers is being hailed to the heavens by the geek world despite basically being a mashup of elements from existing movies hung on story beats that could hardly be more tried and tested.

I know I'm severely late on this but who suggested Downey, Jr. for Tony Stark in the first place? Free hookers and blow for life funded by Marvel for that guy.

It's being hailed to the heavens by nerds or geeks or whatever the fuck because it's unbridled superhero comic book fancy, and it largely works. I do think people like Art Decade for example, feel it to be a validation that the innards of a superhero film need not be toned down (X-Men, Batman, Superman, etc.) from the source for the material to play and play big, and in this instance, they're correct. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by PMR 

I know I'm severely late on this but who suggested Downey, Jr. for Tony Stark in the first place? Free hookers and blow for life funded by Marvel for that guy.

Jon Favreau. I'm sure he's way ahead of you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PMR 

I know I'm severely late on this but who suggested Downey, Jr. for Tony Stark in the first place? Free hookers and blow for life funded by Marvel for that guy.

Jon Favreau was hell bent on getting the studio to let RDJ play Tony Stark.  Studio was totally against it and RDJ had to audition and try out for the role.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul C 

Caught The Avengers this eve and I'm not sure what upper limit I'd dare put on how well it will do - it's practically the definitive 00's popcorn blockbuster. After the first act it's just a densely packed string of payoffs and money shots that never really puts a foot wrong. I know I'm supposed to sneer at Avatar but that was the last blockbuster I saw that hit its crowdpleasing targets so effectively*. Not sure it's something that will linger long in the memory but as pure, disposable entertainment it's hard to beat. It could get really big.

 

Also caught the new Dark Knight trailer and I thought it was drab, barely comprehensible and lacking much in the way of a hook. I think it will be big, if only on the back of Dark Knight goodwill, but unless the buzz is that its amazing I suspect Avengers may have stolen the zeitgeist from it.

 

*thinking about it, it's a bit rich that everyone slated that one for being unoriginal, while The Avengers is being hailed to the heavens by the geek world despite basically being a mashup of elements from existing movies hung on story beats that could hardly be more tried and tested.

I said the same thing about Avatar and got blasted for it.  "Avatar sucks" and what not.  I loved it and it's one of those rare movie theater experiences that the crowd was into the entire movie.  Just like people can't see anyone not liking The Avengers I feel the same about Avatar.  The movie had everything you could ask for.  It's not surprising it grossed 2.7B world wide.   But let's get back to the subject of the Avengers and how over blown people are getting about Whedon.  It's like the guy invented the super hero movie.  I for one hope that Brad Bird gets a crack at Avengers 2.  

Well...Avatar does suck.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FilmNerdJamie 

Couldn't disagree more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny 

Yeah, okay. That's not going to happen.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by cccc 

I don't think so at all.

"I'm not arguing that with you! If I said that I was wrong! Maybe, maybe... I'm not arguing that with you!"