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 622

post #31051 of 35236

I was pointing to the stories that he bought some sweet bikes for the stunt team.  And then starred in John Wick for their directorial debut.  Win-Win.

post #31052 of 35236
Quote:
Originally Posted by First Class 782 View Post
 

I like hearing that about Waititi.  Keanu was incredibly rewarded for the Matrix sequels, and he (and the Wachowskis) really spread that success around on the sequels.  Nice to see good people share what they can with the people that often get overlooked.

 

I've never met Keanu Reeves (unfortunately) but I know three people who've never met each other who've all met him under different circumstances, places and times, many years apart and they all said he was absolutely delightful.

 

Add to that what people said about him and Sandra Bullock on the set of Speed in this truly inspired idea for an article and consider my faith in (some) of humanity at least restored for the next 24 hours or so, at least.

 

http://www.hitfix.com/in-contention/speed-20th-anniversary-meet-the-passengers-of-bus-2525/single-page

post #31053 of 35236
I've heard he's by far the most approachable celebrity there is, almost boring he's so normal and nice!
post #31054 of 35236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raynis View Post


Reeves didn't really do that. He's been super charitable, but that MATRIX stuff was all bologna. It came from a false-article saying he worked up a deal that would share his profit sharing points. But every crew member on those sets will tell you it's not true. It went to mostly costume designers, and was under $10 million. He finally laid that rumor to rest last year.

There are maybe a dozen fake stories of Keanu being godlike.

AW

 

THAT'S REALLY DISAPPOINTING TO HEAR

 

So he didn't get the VFX team motorcycles???

post #31055 of 35236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raynis View Post


Reeves didn't really do that. He's been super charitable, but that MATRIX stuff was all bologna. It came from a false-article saying he worked up a deal that would share his profit sharing points. But every crew member on those sets will tell you it's not true. It went to mostly costume designers, and was under $10 million. He finally laid that rumor to rest last year.

There are maybe a dozen fake stories of Keanu being godlike.

 

I was just thinking mainly about the bike story, too. I never thought it was everyone, though I can see it comes across that way when I said 'the people' instead of 'some people'.

 

Some people, then?

 

Also, under $10 million?

 

*checks wallet - notes emptiness*

 

I'll go with being right about that 'a lot' part. At least more than almost everyone else bar at most, very few exceptions (if any) which I'd love to hear about below (if they exist).

post #31056 of 35236

Well, let's put it this way then.

 

Keanu Reeves by default across better than everyone else in this glorious stink bomb that Bronson Pinchot dropped at the AV Club back in 2009. I don't think I've seen any public responses of note in response to an AV Club interview of such a nature (as linked to and/or described in the comments) bar Chloë Sevigny and the Big Love debacle.

 

Tom Hanks is an exception, of course.

 

http://www.avclub.com/article/bronson-pinchot-34310

post #31057 of 35236

I laughed pretty hard at that Pinchot interview. I have no trouble believing the stories about Denzel and Cruise.

post #31058 of 35236

The very best Random Roles interviews are with the people who don't care about their careers anymore. Teri Garr's is great too.

post #31059 of 35236

Pinchot's a bit of a creep himself but I don't doubt what he says.

post #31060 of 35236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shan View Post
 

Chloë Sevigny and the Big Love debacle.

 

What was this about?

 

Is it something other than her criticizing the quality of the show in a later season?

post #31061 of 35236
Quote:

 

Best part of this was the story about sending the actress who played his girlfriend on Perfect Strangers away for being "snotty."

post #31062 of 35236
Translation: She probably didn't smile between takes, and took offense when he chauvinisticly told her to.
post #31063 of 35236

By the way, speaking of Blockbuster cinema having a rough year, have you guys seen the list of 2018 releases?

 

Scheduled now are Avengers Infinity War, Aquaman, Deapool 2, Antman and the Wasp, Jurassic World 2, Black Panther, Toy Story 4, Pacific Rim 2, The Flash, Fifty Shades Freed, Jungle Book: Origins, The Predator, Mary Poppins, The Secret Life of Pets 2, Tomb Raider, Fantastic Beasts 2, the Han Solo movie, Hotel Transylvania 3, The Wolf Man, Wreck It Ralph 2, the Transformers Bumblebee spinoff, How To Train Your Dragon 3, Battle Angel Alita, How the Grinch Stole Christmas, The Maze Runner 3, Gambit, and Mission Impossible 6. There's probably more out there too, unscheduled. 

 

Now some of that will get pushed back a year, for sure. But with overall ticket sales still dropping, I can't imagine even half of those recouping their investment. At some point, these things are just going to start looking like bad business. 

post #31064 of 35236

Speaking of which:

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2016/08/09/box-office-hollywood-is-trapped-in-a-prisoners-dilemma-of-tentpole-oversaturation

 

Quote:
 

But what we’ve seen in the last month is a microcosm of a trend that is eventually threatening to undo the very fabric of the theatrical movie-going industry. One of the problems that we’ve had this summer, aside from the fact that most of the would-be “big” movies aren’t very good, is that we’ve had what amounted to one big would-be franchise tentpole offering opening after another, week-in and week-out. This blunted the legs of each preceding tentpole while neutering the “special-ness” of said big movie. The slate was filled with movies that at one time, a less franchise-dominated time, would have been special events. But this summer they were that week’s designated “big” movie and played out like “one week only” events.

 
 

It’s one thing to say that  20th Century Fox’s Independence Day: Resurgence or Universal/Comcast Corp.’s Warcraft opened low and crashed fast because they were “bad” or not terribly anticipated beyond the would-be hardcore fandom. But Star Trek Beyond was, my personal second act nitpicks notwithstanding, a relatively solid piece of popcorn entertainment that played to the fans and general audiences while being the third entry in a relatively well-liked franchise. Yet, it nosedived like a mediocre sequel, its (relative) quality seemingly irrelevant over the long haul. What we’ve seen this summer, for movies good and bad, is a situation where one studio’s giant movie, regardless of reviews or buzz, is steamrolled the next weekend by the next would-be “big” movie. If everyone is special, then no one is.

post #31065 of 35236

GOOD.  Burn it all down, let Netflix take over like the studios in the 70's.

post #31066 of 35236

I don't know what fills the void, but I'm inclined to think a return to cool, adult 70s auteurism probably won't be on the table. Would be cool, I suppose.

post #31067 of 35236

Don't kill my hope.  You hope slaying vampyr.

post #31068 of 35236

you'll never get what you want

 

at least not the way you hope and expect

 

it will be in other ways that you won't see coming

 

Hahahaha, everything will burn down and Netflix will take over and make everything VR experiences instead.

post #31069 of 35236

I don't know abut this being a new phenomenon.

 

2001 had:

May 4th - The Mummy Returns

May 11th - A Knight's Tale

May 18th - Shrek, Angel Eyes (JLo was a thing)

May 25th - Pearl Harbor

 

June 1st - Moulin Rouge (thank god)

June 8th - Evolution (chasing Ghostbusters $), Swordfish (chasing Matrix $)

June 15th - Disney's Atlantis, Lara Croft: Tomb Raider

June 22nd - Dr. Doolittle 2, The Fast and the Furious (holy shit)

June 29th - A.I.

 

July 4th - Scary Movie 2 (this was a big deal back then)

July 6th - Kiss of the Dragon

July 13th - Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, Legally Blonde

July 20th - Jurassic Park III, America's Sweethearts (Julia Roberts)

July 27th - Planet of the Apes (Bow Your Head!!!)

 

August 3rd - Princess Diaries, Rush Hour 2

August 10th - American Pie 2, Osmosis Jones

 

Then it sort of fades away...but still.  There is always a drumbeat in the summer.  Now it is just more superheroes and animated films.

 

Anyways, it evolves more than it breaks.  The studio will chase another dollar.

post #31070 of 35236
Quote:
Originally Posted by First Class 782 View Post
 

I don't know abut this being a new phenomenon.

 

2001 had:

May 4th - The Mummy Returns

May 11th - A Knight's Tale

May 18th - Shrek, Angel Eyes (JLo was a thing)

May 25th - Pearl Harbor

 

June 1st - Moulin Rouge (thank god)

June 8th - Evolution (chasing Ghostbusters $), Swordfish (chasing Matrix $)

June 15th - Disney's Atlantis, Lara Croft: Tomb Raider

June 22nd - Dr. Doolittle 2, The Fast and the Furious (holy shit)

June 29th - A.I.

 

July 4th - Scary Movie 2 (this was a big deal back then)

July 6th - Kiss of the Dragon

July 13th - Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, Legally Blonde

July 20th - Jurassic Park III, America's Sweethearts (Julia Roberts)

July 27th - Planet of the Apes (Bow Your Head!!!)

 

August 3rd - Princess Diaries, Rush Hour 2

August 10th - American Pie 2, Osmosis Jones

 

Then it sort of fades away...but still.  There is always a drumbeat in the summer.  Now it is just more superheroes and animated films.

 

Anyways, it evolves more than it breaks.  The studio will chase another dollar.

The difference is that most of the movies didn't need to make $700 million just to break even. Now, every week sees a movie that costs $120+ million. The schedule has always been packed, but it now it is packed almost exclusively with big-budget spectacle. 

post #31071 of 35236

I think the point being made about now is that your 2001 list would be more like

 

May 4th - The Mummy Returns

May 11th - The Knight's Returns

May 18th - Shrek, Pearl Harbor

May 25th - Pearl Harbor

 

June 1st - Moulin Harbor(thank god)

June 8th - Pearl Harbor, Swordfish (chasing Matrix $)

June 15th - Disney's Atlantis Harbor, Lara Croft: Tomb Harbor

June 22nd - Mummy Returns

June 29th - Pearl Harbor

 

July 4th - Pearl Harbor

July 6th - Pearl Harbor

July 13th - Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, Legally Harbor

July 20th - Jurassic Park III, America's Harbor

July 27th - Planet of the Apes (Bow Your Head!!!)

 

August 3rd - The Mummy Diaries, Rush Hour 2

August 10th - Mummy Pie 2, Osmosis Harbor

post #31072 of 35236

Ugh no stop.  So much crap.

 

Where's that Edgar Wright list again?

post #31073 of 35236

Planet of the Apes cost, like, 450M in 2016 dollars to make.  Maybe 475M.

post #31074 of 35236

Right!  That's why I left it on the list!

post #31075 of 35236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd View Post
 

I don't know what fills the void, but I'm inclined to think a return to cool, adult 70s auteurism probably won't be on the table. Would be cool, I suppose.

 

They gave us Nice Guys and we didn't show up!

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by COULD432 View Post
 

The difference is that most of the movies didn't need to make $700 million just to break even. Now, every week sees a movie that costs $120+ million. The schedule has always been packed, but it now it is packed almost exclusively with big-budget spectacle. 

 

 

Yeah, but they're also making more worldwide than they ever have. Titanic was the only 1 billion grosser back then. The biggest opening weekend in 2001 was Harry Potter with 91 M.

post #31076 of 35236

I think over-saturation is a non-issue, mainly because studios are looking ahead to massive theater expansions that are happening internationally, mainly in China, where there is tons of new money to be made. What's going to be interesting is how our domestic markets react to their blockbusters bending to the economic demands of South-east Asia. We're probably going to see a turnover in the types of properties that are endlessly rebooted. Warcraft is probably a sign of things to come. Less 80s nostalgia-gimmicks, and more appealing to 90s kitchy gaming. Diablo and Starcraft films seem bound to happen, hell there's been an entire shadow-war going on for the film rights to Nintendo properties the last few months. Makes sense, considering a live-action Pokemon film series could be the next Star Wars.

 

Mind you, I'm just waxing. This all depends on how the market trends the next three or four years. Right now, the down-market in 2016 is just an outlier. 

post #31077 of 35236
Quote:
Originally Posted by First Class 782 View Post
 

I don't know abut this being a new phenomenon.

 

2001 had:

May 4th - The Mummy Returns

May 11th - A Knight's Tale

May 18th - Shrek, Angel Eyes (JLo was a thing)

May 25th - Pearl Harbor

 

June 1st - Moulin Rouge (thank god)

June 8th - Evolution (chasing Ghostbusters $), Swordfish (chasing Matrix $)

June 15th - Disney's Atlantis, Lara Croft: Tomb Raider

June 22nd - Dr. Doolittle 2, The Fast and the Furious (holy shit)

June 29th - A.I.

 

July 4th - Scary Movie 2 (this was a big deal back then)

July 6th - Kiss of the Dragon

July 13th - Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, Legally Blonde

July 20th - Jurassic Park III, America's Sweethearts (Julia Roberts)

July 27th - Planet of the Apes (Bow Your Head!!!)

 

August 3rd - Princess Diaries, Rush Hour 2

August 10th - American Pie 2, Osmosis Jones

 

Then it sort of fades away...but still.  There is always a drumbeat in the summer.  Now it is just more superheroes and animated films.

 

Anyways, it evolves more than it breaks.  The studio will chase another dollar.

 

God, I forgot how shitty that summer was. And the sad thing is I saw most of those movies. 

post #31078 of 35236
Clarence was first in line for "Princess Diaries."
post #31079 of 35236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clarence Boddicker View Post
 

 

God, I forgot how shitty that summer was. And the sad thing is I saw most of those movies. 

 

The only thing on the list that I saw was KISS OF THE DRAGON. I don't remember anyone else being in the theater.

post #31080 of 35236

Suicide Squad was down from Sunday 56.5% and came in with $13.1 million.

 

That drop is comparable to BvS' first Monday drop of 55.5%.

 

Deadpool still has the best non-holiday Monday hold of the superhero movies this year with -53.6%.

 

If Suicide Squad's box office hold is comparable to BvS' multiplier of 1.9 it will end it's run with $252 million domestic.

 

If it manages a Deadpool multiplier of 2.7 it will end up around $359 million domestic.

 

This is where the reviews and word of mouth come in.

post #31081 of 35236
Double post.
post #31082 of 35236
Quote:
Originally Posted by User_32 View Post
 

 

They gave us Nice Guys and we didn't show up!

 

 

Yeah, but they're also making more worldwide than they ever have. Titanic was the only 1 billion grosser back then. The biggest opening weekend in 2001 was Harry Potter with 91 M.

I get that, but some of that is inflation and 3d/Imax premiums. Of course, some of it has to do with the huge increase in the number of theaters overseas, but I think this summer proved that that alone can't make all of these big-budget films successful. 

 

For example, I think Legend of Tarzan pretty much earned its peak potential at $335 million worldwide, due to the current conditions of the market (it may have made a bit more domestic with less competition), but that doesn't matter since it cost $185 million.  Sure, Planet of the Apes cost that much in 2001, but most weeks didn't have a movie with that kind of price-tag. This summer pretty much did. 

post #31083 of 35236
Quote:
Originally Posted by catartik View Post
 

Suicide Squad was down from Sunday 56.5% and came in with $13.1 million.

 

That drop is comparable to BvS' first Monday drop of 55.5%.

 

Deadpool still has the best non-holiday Monday hold of the superhero movies this year with -53.6%.

 

If Suicide Squad's box office hold is comparable to BvS' multiplier of 1.9 it will end it's run with $252 million domestic.

 

If it manages a Deadpool multiplier of 2.7 it will end up around $359 million domestic.

 

This is where the reviews and word of mouth come in.

Is this bad?  It sounds bad.  

post #31084 of 35236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul C View Post
 

Has anyone pitched an animal superhero movie yet?

 

If your definition of "pitched" is wide enough to include me strapping bombs to Bradley Cooper, wheeling him into Marvel HQ, and shouting "Make this into a movie, you fucks, or we all die!!!!" as I wave The Unbeatable Squirrel Girl #1 around in an agitated state.... then we might all get what we want next Thursday. 

post #31085 of 35236
Why does Sax have such a crush on Bradley Cooper?
post #31086 of 35236

I have a bigger crush on you, ♥ Brad ♥..

post #31087 of 35236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clarence Boddicker View Post

God, I forgot how shitty that summer was. And the sad thing is I saw most of those movies. 
That summer gave us MOULIN ROUGE and A.I.: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. I honestly can't remember the last time we had it so good.
post #31088 of 35236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agentsands77 View Post

That summer gave us MOULIN ROUGE and A.I.: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. I honestly can't remember the last time we had it so good.

Ew.
post #31089 of 35236
Do you even like musicals, bro?
post #31090 of 35236
True, so few of them like SINGING IN THE RAIN or SOUTH PARK. Last time I tried AN AMERICAN IN PARIS, I was bored to tears.
post #31091 of 35236
I had the soundtrack to "Moulin Rouge." Whew, I was a weird kid.
post #31092 of 35236
I thought Kiss of the Dragon was a fun time...

If anything it gave us doppleganger Glenn Shadix as Otho getting blown in half by a grenade whilst wearing a kimono.
post #31093 of 35236

KISS OF THE DRAGON was the best movie of that summer. Followed by SWORDFISH.

post #31094 of 35236
Oh, man. I started streaming SWORDFISH the other week via Netflix. So, so bad.
post #31095 of 35236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd View Post

By the way, speaking of Blockbuster cinema having a rough year, have you guys seen the list of 2018 releases?

Scheduled now are Avengers Infinity War, Aquaman, Deapool 2, Antman and the Wasp, Jurassic World 2, Black Panther, Toy Story 4, Pacific Rim 2, The Flash, Fifty Shades Freed, Jungle Book: Origins, The Predator, Mary Poppins, The Secret Life of Pets 2, Tomb Raider, Fantastic Beasts 2, the Han Solo movie, Hotel Transylvania 3, The Wolf Man, Wreck It Ralph 2, the Transformers Bumblebee spinoff, How To Train Your Dragon 3, Battle Angel Alita, How the Grinch Stole Christmas, The Maze Runner 3, Gambit, and Mission Impossible 6. There's probably more out there too, unscheduled. 

Now some of that will get pushed back a year, for sure. But with overall ticket sales still dropping, I can't imagine even half of those recouping their investment. At some point, these things are just going to start looking like bad business. 

There was a major article a little while back that said blockbusters were on an overall decline in terms of profit. These bad years are deceptive, because it seems like things will pick up next year, etc, but this is a trend that isn't going away. At some point in the near future blockbusters are literally going to STOP being profitable altogether, which is probably the implosion everybody laughed at Spielberg for predicting. It just won't happen in one summer as he thought. Or you will have maybe one or two franchises (probably Marvel and Star Wars, but even those aren't immune to burnout) that are worth the expenditure and everything else will either stop getting made or have their budgets slashed so drastically they won't evem be considered blockbusters anymore. Even if you spend $50M on a movie, the cost of marketing to a global audience is still $150M+ and that's not something that can be slashed...advertising costs what it costs.
post #31096 of 35236
The thing I heard most about Swordfish was how "cool" the intro scene was with the bomb going off.

I never felt compelled to sit through it.
post #31097 of 35236

I actually don't think it has a lot to do with wall to wall blockbusters, but the fact that people have a lot more options for their entertainment/time wasting now (not to mention the talking/texting and expensive tickets/concessions forcing people to wait for the home version), so unless a movie is TRULY special, its not going to have the legs to make it profitable. Wall to wall blockbusters have been a thing for a very long time, but declining profits has only been a fairly recent thing. Which is why I don't see this going away, since Hollywood won't allow anything to be special...bland, generic and hitting all four quadrants is the only way they can justify the huge budgets. Its a built in problem with the movie business in the internet age.

Even slashing budgets my not be enough since you still need to spend a ton to market globally...those budgets can't be slashed.
post #31098 of 35236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post


There was a major article a little while back that said blockbusters were on an overall decline in terms of profit. These bad years are deceptive, because it seems like things will pick up next year, etc, but this is a trend that isn't going away. At some point in the near future blockbusters are literally going to STOP being profitable altogether, which is probably the implosion everybody laughed at Spielberg for predicting. It just won't happen in one summer as he thought. Or you will have maybe one or two franchises (probably Marvel and Star Wars, but even those aren't immune to burnout) that are worth the expenditure and everything else will either stop getting made or have their budgets slashed so drastically they won't evem be considered blockbusters anymore. Even if you spend $50M on a movie, the cost of marketing to a global audience is still $150M+ and that's not something that can be slashed...advertising costs what it costs.


The consequences aren't as easily seen because it's always a gradual thing. No wonder lessons never get learned and fingers pointed in the opposite directions.

post #31099 of 35236
I think its also an ego thing. Billy Bob Thornton wanted to make All The Pretty Horses for $15M, but the studio wanted him to spend $50M even though BBT calculated it would be the exact same movie at $15M. The studio didn't care, they wanted it to be $50M. This tells me they are addicted to big numbers, big spending...it makes them seem more glamorous and powerful if they spend big. That explains a lot.
post #31100 of 35236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Call Me Roy View Post

The thing I heard most about Swordfish was how "cool" the intro scene was with the bomb going off.

I never felt compelled to sit through it.

*That's* the thing you heard most about SWORDFISH? There is, by my estimation, exactly one thing about that movie worthy of note and Halle Berry negotiated more money to do it.
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