CHUD NUMBERS: Box Office Discussion Thread - Page 304

Gabe T, No, I have no interest in Django.  Les Miserables is one of my...Favorite Broadway Shows.  I have been to...numerous broadway plays, as my mom, sister, and aunt...Love them.  I only liked a few.

Les Miserables

The Magic Show with Doug Henning

Satillite Express

Ok, Anne Hathaway went...Butch.  Still Russell Crowe...aka...Jor-El aka...Gladiator is the...EEEEEEEEEEEEvil Inspector Javert!  He was obsessed about Hugh "The Wolverine" Jackman's Jean ValJean whom stole some bread, which made the inspector think there was alot of...DOUGH stolen as well!

If I remember correctly, the original Lord Of The Rings movies (or, at least the second one) had a trailer for the next movie after the final scene. Is that also true of The Hobbit? I'm guessing it isn't otherwise I would have heard about it on the internet by now.

The Rings films did not have a trailer for the next film.  Late in Fellowship's run -- something like March 2002 -- they added a Two Towers preview, but that's about it.

It was The Matrix Reloaded that had a trailer for Revolutions after the credits.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dark Shape 

The Rings films did not have a trailer for the next film.  Late in Fellowship's run -- something like March 2002 -- they added a Two Towers preview, but that's about it.

Really? I guess my mind must be thinking of the preview, then.

Also, Breakin' had a trailer for Breakin' Part II at the end.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrSaxon 

Really? I guess my mind must be thinking of the preview, then.

I think you're thinking of Back to the Future Part II.

Are we sure TTT didn't have a short ROTK tease after the end of it? I seem to remember something of the sort (nothing after FOTR though). We will probably get a tease of part 3 of The Hobbit after part 2 though, since there is only 6 months between the 2 this time.

Nope. Worked at a multiplex for all three films, the only post-credit preview was for Two Towers, added at the tail-end of Fellowship just before the Oscars in 2002.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dw1977 

Are we sure TTT didn't have a short ROTK tease after the end of it? I seem to remember something of the sort (nothing after FOTR though). We will probably get a tease of part 3 of The Hobbit after part 2 though, since there is only 6 months between the 2 this time.

Return of the King literally had one trailer, released in late September 2003. At that point, all they needed to do was remind people when it was coming out.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Barg 

Nope. Worked at a multiplex for all three films, the only post-credit preview was for Two Towers, added at the tail-end of Fellowship just before the Oscars in 2002.

Aha, I bet this is actually what I'm remembering. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by WendellEverett 

Also, Breakin' had a trailer for Breakin' 2: Electric Boogaloo at the end.
 

Originally Posted by Judas Booth 

Fixed.

I just checked - the trailer refers to the movie as "And Coming Soon: Electric Boogaloo - The Dance Sensation of Tomorrow!"

I am really hoping this is 40 bombs, so Apatow stops shoving his shrill wife in our faces. Evidently there was footage of Apatow giving her notes leaked to the public.

The Hobbit got an "A" Cinemascore with it going up to "A+" for 18 and under. The word of mouth is good. It will have legs. 300 million US with another 500 to 600 international seems to be about the low end.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stelios 

The Hobbit got an "A" Cinemascore with it going up to "A+" for 18 and under. The word of mouth is good. It will have legs. 300 million US with another 500 to 600 international seems to be about the low end.

Because there's NO WAY that the A grade is the result of the LOTR superfans loading up theaters on opening weekend. NO WAY.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gabe T 

Because there's NO WAY that the A grade is the result of the LOTR superfans loading up theaters on opening weekend. NO WAY.

It's the LOTR superfans who seem to be the ones hating it.

We'll see next weekend!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by User_32 

 

It's the LOTR superfans who seem to be the ones hating it.

 

We'll see next weekend!!

I don't know which LOTR superfans you are referring to, but all of them I know are positively GUSHING about The Hobbit. It kind of reminds me of the Star Wars superfans right after Phantom Menace came out....like if they talk about it positively enough, it will change the film to being a better one (I was one of those Star Wars fans).  Now, I'm a pretty big LOTR fan (not as big as Star Wars though), and I didn't love The Hobbit. Didn't hate it either - just kind of 'meh' about it.  But check out the fan reviews on TheOneRing.net...I'm definitely in the minority with my 3.5/5 review...http://www.theonering.net/reviews/

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gabe T

Because there's NO WAY that the A grade is the result of the LOTR superfans loading up theaters on opening weekend. NO WAY.

So lots of 18-and-unders are LOTR superfans?  They gave it an A+.

This is 40 (It's Also The Domestic Ceiling For This Movie)

THE HOBBIT is getting a good cinemascore because it is familiar, unchallenging and fantastical. It's a warm nostalgia blanket and that's probably what a lot of people want during the holidays and especially right now. Is it a great movie? No. But it's a decent one, and that's enough. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd 

I never feel awesome about assigning character defects, especially nebulous ones like self deception, to large swaths of people I disagree with.

All I mean, basically, is that love clouds vision.  3.5/5 is a good score for this film, I don't think any of us would disagree. And yet, superfans jumped on me for that score & my, very fair, review (along with jumping on all the critics who "just didn't 'get' it" - man, I hate that crap). Yeah, there's a bit of self-deception going on...and as time passes, I think it will be re-assessed by super-fans, in hindsight. (Although, there are plenty of Star Wars fans out there who still claim that Phantom Menace is a great movie, so who knows.) Love is a powerful thing - and they LOVE (love, love) their PJ. It's a nice thing, but it's also a *bit* of a shame because it  gives him a free pass to get a little lazy with his cutting and editing.

There's a difference between your own personal opinion that you love the film (TOTALLY fine), and professing that it's a well-crafted, great film and arguing with people when they point out its obvious flaws (for instance, I love freakin' "A Knight's Tale," but I know it's a crappy cheese-fest...there is no self-deception going on there; I just like it - I am well aware of all its flaws and will not argue).

And I think, at some level, they already realize it a little, or else there would be more "HOBBIT FOR ALL THE OSCARS" posts. I would be right there with them if it was a well-crafted piece of art! (Hell, I've already stuck out my neck on that about Avengers - I do believe that if that particular film was about anything other than superheroes it would be nominated for a lot of stuff - director, screenplay & film, for sure - it's a well-crafted, well-told, well-paced ensemble story that just happens to be about a "silly" subject. Hobbit has a "silly" subject, but none of the other things...well, except ensemble.)

Me? I'm just a bit sad for what could have been. I still hold out hope that there will be a *true* Hobbit film made one day. Guillermo would be perfect for it.

But anyway, none of that has to do with money (I get a little carried away with my fandoms sometimes) ...so yeah - piles of money to be had!!!!

OK, but from another perspective, you're pretty sure everyone couldn't possibly like the movie more than you, so they're all lying to themselves.

There's plenty of people with a vested interest in the "Hobbit = TPM in all ways" narrative for some reason, maybe just because once bitten, twice shy. And I expect there's enough gas in the tank to keep the debate going for the next insufferable decade. But so far, Hobbit is playing very well with the fans, and I find it distasteful to try and take it away from them, just to be on the right side of history, I guess. Just a drag for me, personally.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd 

OK, but from another perspective, you're pretty sure everyone couldn't possibly like the movie more than you, so they're all lying to themselves.

 

There's plenty of people with a vested interest in the "Hobbit = TPM in all ways" narrative for some reason, maybe just because once bitten, twice shy. And I expect there's enough gas in the tank to keep the debate going for the next insufferable decade. But so far, Hobbit is playing very well with the fans, and I find it distasteful to try and take it away from them, just to be on the right side of history, I guess. Just a drag for me, personally.

Fair enough. I guess for me, it's not about trying to take anything away from anyone, or about other people liking the movie more than me - OF COURSE people are gonna like some movies more than me, just like I'm going to like some movies more than them - that's the nature of the beast!

It's just about having some healthy perspective. I actually haven't tried to argue - THEY have argued with me. That right there always gives me pause. Loving it for what it is, flaws and all, is one thing. Not even admitting it has flaws is something else entirely.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd 

OK, but from another perspective, you're pretty sure everyone couldn't possibly like the movie more than you, so they're all lying to themselves.

 

There's plenty of people with a vested interest in the "Hobbit = TPM in all ways" narrative for some reason, maybe just because once bitten, twice shy. And I expect there's enough gas in the tank to keep the debate going for the next insufferable decade. But so far, Hobbit is playing very well with the fans, and I find it distasteful to try and take it away from them, just to be on the right side of history, I guess. Just a drag for me, personally.

The narrative being turned on both Jackson and the LOTR films was written on the wall ever since ROTK's sweep at the Oscars.

Now, I'm not saying that The Hobbit is as good as the LOTR films. Because it clearly isn't. But all this hullabaloo is bullshit. It's ad hoc criticism. It's actual negative elements of the movie being blown up to fit a pre-existing marrative.

How's the Tracking for JACK REACHER so far?

Is Monsters Inc. worth catching in 3D? I'm thinking the scene with all the doors could be mind-blowing.

Low 30s for The Hobbit this weekend. DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMN.

$300m looking increasingly unlikely at this point. Wonder how they're feeling about movies 2 and 3 at this point? Because it's difficult to imagine them doing better.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul C 

$300m looking increasingly unlikely at this point. Wonder how they're feeling about movies 2 and 3 at this point? Because it's difficult to imagine them doing better.

It's still tracking ahead of Fellowship, but Fellowship played until the following spring--The Hobbit's not going to do that. Fellowship also had to deal with Sorcerer's Stone coming out just a few weeks before, but otherwise had the Christmas to itself, whereas Hobbit's going to be fighting two big gun releases with Les Mis and Django in a few days. It all depends on how it plays over the next week, because that's one super steep drop--none of the Rings films had such a steep drop the weekend before/of Christmas. Even Kong had a lighter drop (not by much). This next week will be interesting.

Yesterday's box office was absolutely wretched for all holdovers.  When a 50% increase is one of the best in the top ten, something is very much up.

Cuts have to be made in the family budget when there are so many guns to buy up before the gummint takes them away!

Could see Jack Reacher hold like a champ.

Also, every movie this holiday season is ELEVENTY BILLION HOURS LONG.

I keep hearing people declaring Rise of the Guardians to be a flop, but, um, it's not doing THAT badly, is it? It seems to be holding well...
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gabe T 

Also, every movie this holiday season is ELEVENTY BILLION HOURS LONG.

YES! I want to see Hobbit and Lincoln but the 3 hour runs times are putting me off. SkyFall is 2.5 hours long but it has action and tension throughout (although I actually felt exhausted coming out of the theater).

Lincoln was 3 hours long??? Damn, it felt like 90 minutes.

Lincoln is more like 2.5 hours.

Lincoln was...Ok, but it was not a fast moving film.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Prankster 

I keep hearing people declaring Rise of the Guardians to be a flop, but, um, it's not doing THAT badly, is it? It seems to be holding well...
 

It's on pace to finish with around $115m domestically.  That's not very good.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Dark Shape 

 

It's on pace to finish with around $115m domestically.  That's not very good.

It's not great, but it's not a flop. It's like a smaller scale Polar Express, in that the individual weekends aren't impressive, and the final gross isn't earth-shattering, but the holiday theme is helping it play longer than it otherwise would. 

It needed a better title.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Harford 

I can't be the only person who thought it was a sequel to that owl movie based on that title. That may have hurt it's name recognition.

Haha, I've been calling that movie Rise Of The Guardians Of Ga'Hoole in my head for weeks now. It might as well be a sequel. "Hey, look everybody! It's an animated movie with a terrible title that's based on a book only 10 year-olds with a library card & no XBOX know exist! It'll be the Mars Needs Moms of 2012! ".

Curious how big Les Mis and Django debut. Both are tracking pretty strong.

Plus I wouldn't underestimate Parental Guidance. No really!