CHUD NUMBERS: Box Office Discussion Thread - Page 311

BlueLouBoyle, I do not want you to...Drive Angry in...3D, but...The Expendables is the film series that makes most others...EXPENDABLE!

I'm am okay with my entire species being summed up by a Nic Cage movie.

What's the ceiling for Zero Dark Thirty this weekend? Buzz is crazy good. 30 million plus?

Just my gut feeling, but I doubt anyone's gonna go see it, buzz be damned. Hurt Locker won best picture and made like 12 million.

Just a gut feeling, but i think horror is going to do pretty well this year. The Evil Dead especially.

 

Not sure if they'll end it at Paranormal Activity 5 though.

 

I wonder if people are going to feel tricked that there's not more action in it.

 

 

I dunno, people actively avoided movies about Iraq or the Afghan conflict, but now that we're more or less out of or leaving both countries, and we killed Osama real good, people might go to see this as a kind of virtual Victory Dance.

Box Office Mojo points out that Life Of Pi is raking it in overseas, and may finish up somewhere in the region of $500m worldwide.

 

I wonder if that's some small sign of where things are going. Everyone's been talking about how important overseas money has become in recent years, but this is a pretty striking example of Hollywood putting out a big budget movie that you could argue has more inherent appeal outside the US than within.

 

When you look at it: the main characters are Indian, it has exactly one white American cast member who has about five minutes of screentime, it features plenty of peans to non-western religions, and the rare occasion the movie features the American continent it's only for Canada and Mexico! And even though it's only done modestly well in the US it seems to have paid off.

 

I wonder if we'll ever reach the stage where Hollywood finds itself quite deliberately making movies with limited US appeal when they know they can rake it in worldwide.

We're there. Tintin.

Ah, good call.

 

Which actually sort of disappointed overseas.  That thing was supposed to make way more than $300m outside the U.S.

Not holding my breath on that sequel.

Blah, double post

True enough, but I'm sure overseas was the logic on that film.

If there's another Pirates, same deal.

I bet once Peter Jackson finishes his Hobbit trilogy filming, Tintin 2 will be officially announced. He said it's shooting this year (after Hobbit) for a tentative release in 2015.

 

They didn't book Irrfan Khan for nothing. I bet you his casting in Amazing Spider-Man was strategic as well.

Edited by Hammerhead - 1/11/13 at 8:44pm

Skyfall is only $700,000 away from hitting $300m domestically.

 

 

Apparently 45% of the movie's ticket sales can be attributed to this one guy:

 

 

Nobody knows who he is but when a journalist tried to catch up with him in New York, he climbed up a building and used parkour to escape.

The Hobbit should make $7-8m over MLK. Can't see it making <$14m after.

JACK REACHER "unlikely" to get sequel.

 

Solid numbers. But they need $250 Million worldwide for a sequel to be considered.

There are four movies opening in over 2,500 screens this weekend. After bleeding screens come Friday you expect it to have a less than 20% drop on a minor holiday? OK.

 

One thing's for sure: it's not catching Two Towers, or Fellowship.

 

Well the Asians, they love the Cruise.

It's nice to see that Life of Pi is doing really well overseas. 350 mil and counting.

The Asians love Cruise, but enough to squeeze out another 100 mil from Jack Reacher? I hope so but I don't see it passing 200. Which should warrant a sequel since that would be breaking its budget 3 times and than some.

I don't understand why Hollywood would only accept giant profits. Are slim profits not still profits? Who would turn down money in the bank?

Sequels happen for pretty much one reason: when a film connects with its audience in an unexpected way and/or to an unexpected degree. In a business where "nobody knows anything," exploiting a property with a unique, proven appeal is a safer bet than most-- even though sequels historically deliver diminishing returns.

I'm fine with there not being another Jack Reacher simply because I'm sick of every article about the film having a reach-around (huh-huh) pun in it. We get it. Thank you. I can go my whole life without seeing this headline: "Tom Cruise to Get Another Reacher Round!"

Why so much interest in a Jack Reacher sequel? Is there anything intrinsically Reacher-ish to its flavor? Anything that couldn't reasonably be captured in whatever cop/spy movie Cruise appears in come 2014?

Seriously, the title of that movie might as well have been Tom Cruise.

Most people are lucky to have even one franchise Mr. Cruise. Be thankful you have Mission Impossible and call it a day.

Could it be that studios no longer want to let him make movies like Reacher unless there is franchise potential?

 

Actually, Rodriguez has yet to leave the Weinsteins behind completely.  He's already made Spy Kids 4 with them, Sin City 2 is shooting right now, and Spy Kids 5 is likely to be made sometime next year.  All are TWC projects.  As for Fox, he only came on board to produce Predators for them.  As a courtesy, they distributed Machete for him.  Barring another Predator flick being made with him producing, that is the extent of his relationship with them.  Shorts was a WB joint.  Open Road is releasing Machete Kills and RR doesn't seem too picky about who distributes his films now that he is making them via his own studio.  He'll go wherever he is welcome.

 

Also, I'm pretty sure at least two of his upcoming projects are set up for distribution with TWC company (Nervewrackers and Fire & Ice).  He has not abandoned Bob and Harvey, but obviously he doesn't feel a sense of duty anywhere near as strong as Quentin seems to.

 

 

The Weinsteins were blamed for Grindhouse.  I've never seen anyone point the finger at Rodriguez or Tarantino for it.

 

 

Doubtful.  He has at least half a dozen non-franchise projects (El Presidente, Nathan Decker, ATMOM, Our Name Is Adam, etc.) laying at his feet awaiting his signature, one of which is a big remake (Magnificent Seven).  He also has that Abraham Van Helsing project over at Universal that could be another franchise waiting to happen.

So The Last Stand is getting slaughtered apparently. Did anyone expect this to happen? I mean, I know audiances love horror movies regardless of how shitty they are (not saying Mama is shitty btw), but I was just expecting a 20 mill + opening for Schwarzennegar's first film back.

Friday #s are in. Mama makes 10 M! Guess January is the new horror hot spot. Broken City makes 3 M. And The Land Stand only gets 2 M. Poor Arnold. I assume this must be his worst opening (or close to it) in his career. Wonder if Stallone's Bullet to the Head will open bigger or even worse.

The poster prominently features Johnny Knoxville, who couldn't sell a buffet line to an Ethiopian, much less open a movie that ain't Jackass.

So Jessica Chastain is headlining (okay, maybe that's too strong... starring in, at least) the top two films at the box office this weekend, and is a best actress favorite?  I wonder what this is doing to her quote?

If Chastain takes home the Oscar, I'd say she's officially arrived on the A-list. It's kind of amazing how quickly her career went from zero to ubiquitous--thirteen movies in two years has to be some kind of record.

Eeeeeeeeh, let's slow our collective roll, okay? The movies that she appear in do well not specifically because of her. She didn't open Let's Kill Bin Laden. Bin Laden getting killed opened that movie. She didn't open The Help. She's great, don't get me wrong, but I doubt that most people on the street could tell you her name if you showed them her picture.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahhaha really?! Based on what?

I expected 12 to 15 million.

I thought that his recent bad press might have had something to do with the low opening but I don't think people really care. I just think his brawny leading action man persona is not what people identify with anymore in their action films (like they did in the 80s/early 90s). Our action heroes of today are back to the 70s like Steve McQueen and Clint Eastwood where size doesn't matter so much but great acting does ala Matt Damon/Daniel Craig type.

Double Post.

 

She didn't open those movies, no, but she's now got some serious exposure that will make her desirable. Jennifer Lawrence didn't open Hunger Games either, but that movie made her a star.

 

I think Ahnuld could still have a big hit in him, but it would have to be SF or fantasy. During his 80s heyday, action movies could just be ludicrously cartoonish no matter the setting, so Arnold fit right in. These days (and even in the fading days of his pre-political career) action movies are more grounded, or at least, their cartoonishness isn't the kind that jibes with Arnie. The days where he could play a regular Joe--which was always kind of ludicrous--are past, which is ironic since he's now old enough to be a little more sympathetic. From now on he has to be an unstoppable killing machine or some other fantastical piece of architecture for audiences to buy it.

 

She's referenced it in the past, as well as in her Globe speech, how long she's worked to get where she's at.  In terms of talent, she's no late-bloomer.  Given Hollywood's obsession with youth, I wonder what took them so long?  I mean, once the notoriety hit, she even was trying to fudge her real age for awhile there.

I remember when Kevin Spacey "broke out" in 1995 with Seven and The Usual Suspects, the media were proclaiming him an overnight success when he corrected them in saying it was actually a 10 year overnight success.

My comment on the A-list wasn't to say she was a proven, bona-fide hit magnet, it was to say that she's gone from a couple of one-shot TV show appearances to full fledged leading lady in two years, and unlike the Jude Law explosion of 2005 seems to be attaching herself to all-around critical hits, with some box office pluses to boot. Doesn't meant she's going to be opening films based on her name alone, but no one but Will Smith and Tom Cruise does that anymore anyway. A-list is more about visibility and general goodwill than it is about box office.

So America chose an interesting-looking original horror movie over an attempt to make a shitty, washed-up action star bankable again? I must have died and gone to heaven. 

Haha yeah, fuck Arnold.
 

As old as it might make some of us feel (me included), you have a whole generation of movie going teen agers that haven't ever seen an Arnold movie theatrically. To them he's just the "old guy that made the Terminator movies back in the 90's". 

I hope this puts Arnold's career back in the cooler. I hope this is the chilling sound of his doom. My heart is cold to his pleas of mercy.

 

Is that chair one of those plastic blow-up deals, or is that meant to be a block of ice? I am fascinated by that chair.