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 334

post #16651 of 16675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Stockslivevan View Post


Let me guess, Worfs name is revealed midway.

 

Played by Ben Whishaw.

 

Back to box office talk, I think F&F6's success in the UK is due, in some part, to the London-set scenes, which were admittedly quite refreshing to see. I thought they'd CGI the cars into famous landmark areas, but it looks like they genuinely got permission to film on quite a few of the not-so-friendly streets of the city.

post #16652 of 16675
Quote:
Originally Posted by cognizant View Post

 

Played by Ben Whishaw.

 

Back to box office talk, I think F&F6's success in the UK is due, in some part, to the London-set scenes, which were admittedly quite refreshing to see. I thought they'd CGI the cars into famous landmark areas, but it looks like they genuinely got permission to film on quite a few of the not-so-friendly streets of the city.

 

It also opened alongside The Great Gatsby which had more pull with female audiences. It was a natural alternative for male cinema-goers (or females who favored action movies over extravagantly staged literary adaptations) who had already watched Star Trek Into Darkness the week before.

post #16653 of 16675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey View Post

 

Please don't give Kurtzman, Orci, and Lindelof any ideas, Fleed.

 

They should find out what it's like to have one.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by User_32 View Post

I could see Star Trek holding onto #3 cause if anything is going to outright tank next weekend it's Epic. No buzz at all for that film.

 

Epic is safe. There's no competition for the family dollar.

post #16654 of 16675
It's kind of stunning that movies are so huge now that 70 million in four days is a disappointment. Where are we going to be in ten years with this shit?
post #16655 of 16675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd View Post

It's kind of stunning that movies are so huge now that 84 million in four days is a disappointment. Where are we going to be in ten years with this shit?

 

Even better.

post #16656 of 16675

Probably watching Cyber-Madea Gets Married In 3D, which has to gross $104m just to cover Tyler Perry's gambling debts.

 

Well, I won't, but you might.

post #16657 of 16675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammerhead View Post

Epic is safe. There's no competition for the family dollar.

 

I still think it's going to be a Rise of the Guardians kind of deal here struggling to make it to 100 M. I could be wrong. It'll just need to make all of its money before Monsters University comes and destroys it. 

post #16658 of 16675
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSaxon View Post

Probably watching Cyber-Madea Gets Married In 3D, which has to gross $104m just to cover Tyler Perry's gambling debts.

Well, I won't, but you might.

In ten years? Surely we'll be up to at least 5D by then.
post #16659 of 16675

From the advance stuff I've seen, Epic looks like the better movie. Not that that necessarily makes a difference.

post #16660 of 16675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey View Post


In ten years? Surely we'll be up to at least 5D by then.

 

Apparently the 5th Dimension contains kaiju, and nobody liked Spy Kids: All The Time In The World in 4D. Trust me, it all gets scaled back to reliable 3D in ten years time.

post #16661 of 16675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammerhead View Post

From the advance stuff I've seen, Epic looks like the better movie. Not that that necessarily makes a difference.

 

Judging by their respective creator's track records, Epic most likely won't be the better movie. At least Guardians had Guillermo del Toro behind it.

 

Interestingly enough, they're both based on books from the same author.

post #16662 of 16675
Epic has Steven Tyler in it.
post #16663 of 16675

I meant better than Monsters U.

post #16664 of 16675

He plays a slug thingee.

 

post #16665 of 16675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammerhead View Post

I meant better than Monsters U.

 

Then it's an even worse track record for Epic.

post #16666 of 16675

The trailer for Epic was weak, in my opinion, and probably isn't going to do the film any favors.  It looks like just another computer-animated movie, this time with a bizarre and somehow less interesting hook.  I can't imagine being interested in it if I was a child.  Maybe it will flop.  

post #16667 of 16675

Epic looks about as bland and forgettable as anything I've ever seen based on the promotional material.

post #16668 of 16675
So not an Epic fim huh?

Ha. This movie looks like a way more bland version of Ferngully .
post #16669 of 16675
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaylaisMagic View Post

So not an Epic fim huh?

Ha. This movie looks like a way more bland version of Ferngully .

Exactly, yeah!  biggrin.gif

post #16670 of 16675
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaylaisMagic View Post


Ha. This movie looks like a way more bland version of Ferngully .

Are we talking about AVATAR???

post #16671 of 16675
Only if it has elements of Pocahontas.
post #16672 of 16675

I'm more interested in seeing how Fast 6 performs, both domestically and worldwide, and the big sloppy blowjob that the human race (including myself) gave the last one upon its release.  It will obviously be a hit, but how big?

post #16673 of 16675

They've surprised me twice in a row with the franchise. So I'm betting 135 for the four days. 

 

Hangover and Epic both get around 60 or so. Maybe a little less.

 

Trek gets 30 or so. Baddish.

post #16674 of 16675

I could even see Trek dropping to fifth behind Iron Man 3.

post #16675 of 16675
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrBananaGrabber View Post

I could even see Trek dropping to fifth behind Iron Man 3.

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