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 304

post #15151 of 23423

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.

post #15152 of 23423
Quote:
Originally Posted by dw1977 View Post

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.

post #15153 of 23423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Barg View Post

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. 

post #15154 of 23423
Quote:
Originally Posted by WendellEverett View Post

Also, Breakin' had a trailer for Breakin' 2: Electric Boogaloo at the end.
 
Originally Posted by Judas Booth View Post
Fixed.

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

post #15155 of 23423

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.

 

orsonclapping.gif

post #15156 of 23423

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.

post #15157 of 23423
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelios View Post

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.

post #15158 of 23423
You think the majority of ticket buyers were hardcore fans? Umm, no. Millions of normal folk - who may have just liked LOTR- saw the movie. And lots of them were interviewed by Cinemascore.
post #15159 of 23423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe T View Post

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!!

post #15160 of 23423
Quote:
Originally Posted by User_32 View Post

 

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/

post #15161 of 23423
I never feel awesome about assigning character defects, especially nebulous ones like self deception, to large swaths of people I disagree with.
post #15162 of 23423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe T View Post

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+.

post #15163 of 23423
True Grit made over 100 million in America off of like a 30 million budget if I remember correctly. Django will be fine. No one seems to give two shits about Jack Reacher, and This is 40, though I guess Les Mis could do really well, but I want that movie to fail. But it won't.
post #15164 of 23423

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

post #15165 of 23423

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. 

post #15166 of 23423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd View Post

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.

post #15167 of 23423

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!!!!

post #15168 of 23423

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.

post #15169 of 23423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd View Post

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.

post #15170 of 23423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd View Post

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.

post #15171 of 23423

How's the Tracking for JACK REACHER so far?

post #15172 of 23423
Around $15m for the weekend.
post #15173 of 23423

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

post #15174 of 23423

Low 30s for The Hobbit this weekend. DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMN.

post #15175 of 23423

$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.

post #15176 of 23423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul C View Post

$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.

post #15177 of 23423

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.

post #15178 of 23423

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

post #15179 of 23423

Could see Jack Reacher hold like a champ.

post #15180 of 23423

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

post #15181 of 23423

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...
 

post #15182 of 23423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe T View Post

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).

post #15183 of 23423

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

post #15184 of 23423

Lincoln is more like 2.5 hours.

post #15185 of 23423

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

post #15186 of 23423
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Prankster View Post

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.

post #15187 of 23423
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Shape View Post

 

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. 

post #15188 of 23423

It needed a better title.

post #15189 of 23423
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.
post #15190 of 23423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Harford View Post

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! ".

post #15191 of 23423

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

 

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

post #15192 of 23423

It's my understanding that Rise of the Guardians did shit business overseas. Not many silver linings to that one.

post #15193 of 23423

I've asked this before, but... where do people get tracking info from? It's like this mysterious dark art that only some secret cabal is able to draw from.

post #15194 of 23423

You just answered your own question...

post #15195 of 23423

Ha, fair enough. Guess I need to join the Stonecutters or something.

post #15196 of 23423

My sister said today that "The only movie I want to see that's out/coming out is Les Mis".  It came pretty much out of nowhere.  Statements like this from non-Chud types are usually good indicators that a movie is going to be huge.  Last time I heard stuff like this was from "Hunger Games", which I said would do close to a billion, then all the experts on here yelled at me, and then it did 700.

 

Anyways, Les Mis will prob push $100, but I'll be conservative and say $75 first week.  Then it will (ug) be nominated for Best Picture and might win.  Unlike "Hunger Games", I could give a shit though, cause I'm never going to see Les Mis.

post #15197 of 23423

I could see Les Mis hit as high as $170-$200M.

post #15198 of 23423

In American dollars?

post #15199 of 23423

Yes, Sir.

post #15200 of 23423
Quote:
Originally Posted by FilmNerdJamie View Post

I could see Les Mis hit as high as $170-$200M.

 

Me as well.  Think it'll do around $20m on Christmas Day alone.

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