Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board
EVA

The Box Office Thread

Recommended Posts

Yeah, things have gone too far with some of these blockbusters. It's one thing if you're pushing Batman, Iron Man, or a Pixar film.  Those are licenses to print money.  But Hollywood has totally forgotten how to produce a mid-range film.  Maybe in a couple of years, we'll see them come back in style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, things have gone too far with some of these blockbusters. It's one thing if you're pushing Batman, Iron Man, or a Pixar film.  Those are licenses to print money.  But Hollywood has totally forgotten how to produce a mid-range film.  Maybe in a couple of years, we'll see them come back in style.

The Wolverine is basically a heat check by Marvel Entertainment. Some of their movies are bound to flounder if they keep cranking them out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, things have gone too far with some of these blockbusters. It's one thing if you're pushing Batman, Iron Man, or a Pixar film.  Those are licenses to print money.  But Hollywood has totally forgotten how to produce a mid-range film.  Maybe in a couple of years, we'll see them come back in style.

A friend and I were trying to think of films the past half decade or more that are very good-to-excellent and not giant blockbusters. We had a very hard time, but to be fair I don't watch a tonne of newer movies (perhaps due to this point).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, not only is The Wolverine not going to hit the 70+ mojo predicted for it, it's not even going to hit Fox's 60 million projection.

 

It's not *quite* bombing (pending how it does in the coming days and weeks) but it damn sure ain't soaring.

 

What needs to happen is a reigning in on the budgets of things that don't have Iron Man or Batman (or maybe Spider-Man and Superman.)  You can make a Wolverine movie, but spend 80 million on it, not 120.  Especially given that, no matter how much they disavow Origins, it's the sequel to a very poorly received film, and I'm guessing that played a big role in it underperforming.

 

But they spent 120 million on a movie that it's direct predecessor only made 179 domestic, and was very poorly received, and that the previous movie in the franchise, despite good reviews and word of mouth, only did about 147 domestic.  Cut the goddamn budget.  If that means, heaven forbid, using practical in-camera effects, then do it. 

 

Cause, hey, if you do that, and the movie DOES take off, you make more money.  And if it turns out to be The Lone John Carter, Ranger of Mars...  At least you aren't out 250 million bucks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What needs to happen is a reigning in on the budgets of things that don't have Iron Man or Batman (or maybe Spider-Man and Superman.)  

 

Cause, hey, if you do that, and the movie DOES take off, you make more money.  And if it turns out to be The Lone John Carter, Ranger of Mars...  At least you aren't out 250 million bucks.

 

According to Indiewire's The Playlist, Fincher's long-planned 3D remake of Disney's "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea," from a script by "Contagion" screenwriter Scott Z. Burns, is sleeping with the fishes -- despite an April report that the Australian government was luring the production down under with enticing tax incentives.
 
The project has actually been dead for some time, the site reports, in part because of casting difficulties, which started when Brad Pitt passed. The proposed 140-day shoot was too much for most of the actors Fincher and Disney wanted (including Daniel Craig and Matt Damon), and when Fincher finally settled on Channing Tatum, the studio balked and suggested Chris Hemsworth, one of their golden boys thanks to the "Thor" movies and "The Avengers," instead. With that, Fincher decided to depart the project, thus killing our hopes of ever seeing a Civil War-set Disney "Avengers"-style movie that would team up John Carter, Tonto, and Captain Nemo.
 
Over on the financial front, Indiewire's Thompson on Hollywood claims Sony wants to avoid a ballooning budget, something that could happen under Fincher's "headstrong" direction. 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

They got to start drug testing some of these directors. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kinda crazy, but it really looks like there might not be another big hit movie this summer. ELYSIUM, you're our only hope?

Other than that, all we've got is Denzel and Marky Mark playing Denzel and Marky Mark in a movie with a lot of gunplay (that's literally all I've been able to glean from the ads) and a lot of 3rd rate kiddie fare - SMURFS 2, PLANES, PERCY JACKSON: THERE'S A PERCY JACKSON SEQUEL?, and that other thing with the weird title that's not Hunger Games.

There's KICK-ASS 2, I guess, but let's be real: An R-rated offbrand superhero movie isn't going to save the summer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess maybe Planes could blow up big...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 Guns could be the biggest comic book movie of the summer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, MAN OF STEEL came out this summer and is going to finish around $290mil, so...probably not.

I feel like the best case scenario for 2 GUNS is around $125mil, which is what SAFE HOUSE did (also a "Denzel carries a non-draw to a hit" movie).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The funny thing is that Grant told me that they have been very careful not to play up the fact it's based on a comic. I guess because the last action movie based on a comic (The Losers, unless I missed one) didn't do all that well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess because the last action movie based on a comic (The Losers, unless I missed one) didn't do all that well.

Red?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess because the last action movie based on a comic (The Losers, unless I missed one) didn't do all that well.

Red?
Was that after The Losers? (Checks box office mojo)So, it was, by six months.I stand corrected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen a couple of doom and gloom headlines over this summer's box office failures, but I don't think it's surprising.  Look, after Man of Steel was released, the only summer movies you could believe were going to be surefire blockbusters were the two big animated releases: Despicable Me 2 and Monster University.  Anything else was a genuine surprise (looking at you, World War Z).  Honestly, the significance of international box office probably needs to get more attention in the U.S. before we label things a complete box office failure.

 

Also, of course, this year's box office numbers are down compared to 2012.  Last year was a historic year for box office.  This year didn't have a chance.  Inflated ticket prices and increase 3D movies be damned.

 

As for Wolverine, I don't know.  There's probably a lot factors.  We already know now you can't just put out any type of superhero film with the expectation it will make bank, even if it has a popular character in it.  This implication is only going to increase as more superhero films are released next year. Plus, Wolverine has already been a bunch of films so he's not a fresh draw or an exciting idea.  His own film was not received well (do they even acknowledge the events in the new one?) so the new film was going to need a significant upgrade to appeal to people.  I wasn't overwhelmed by the marketing for it in my area too.  I didn't even know it came out this weekend until about Thursday.

Edited by _MJ_
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anybody expected this year to match last year, which had a phenomenally loaded deck with the culmination of AVENGERS, the end of the BATMAN trilogy and the TWILIGHT series, the return of LOTR, the debut of HUNGER GAMES, and a major surprise with the biggest BOND ever, but if you look at the trends, the yearly box office was on a two year slide prior to 2012. And if 2013 finishes down, then that will be 5 of the last 9 years that the yearly BO has finished down, or basically flat, from the previous year, after a decade+ of consistent growth. It's a little gloomy.

My guess is this year will scare them a bit, but then 2015 will come around and AVENGERS 2, the last HUNGER GAMES, BATMAN VS SUPERMAN, and STAR WARS VII will do trillions and bail their asses out of the wringer and it'll be back to business as usual.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hunger Games was also somewhat of a surprise.  I mean, people knew it was going to make money, but I don't think anyone thought it would make more money (domestic) than any film released in 2011, go over 400 million dollars (for a studio that had never had 200 million dollar movie before, although they then bought the company that did the Twilight films and changed that) and out gross (domestic, again) every single Harry Potter (non-inflation adjusted) and Twilight film.

 

Hunger Games was a run away smash hit.  It just happened to have The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises in it's path. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It took me about a week to figure out that Percy Jackson didn't direct Lord of the Rings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still can't believe The Hunger Games made all that money in the U.S.  If it had made $100 million, I think it probably would have been considered a moderate success, yet it made 4 times that amount.  Bananas.

 

Despite not reading the books, I knew it was a popular series, but a couple of these Young Adult book trilogies have passionate followings.  I did not get what made this one stand out, especially since Jennifer Lawrence wasn't a big name yet.  Matter of fact, I kept confusing it with the "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A friend and I were trying to think of films the past half decade or more that are very good-to-excellent and not giant blockbusters. We had a very hard time, but to be fair I don't watch a tonne of newer movies (perhaps due to this point).

 

 

Really?  I guess it's a matter of personal taste, but like, if you look at everything that got nominated for any category of Academy Award in the past five years, there's nothing you would consider at least very good?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't think of anything good in the last 5 years that wasn't a Blockbuster? Quick pass on Flickchart

2008 had The Wrestler, Slumdog Millionaire, Revolutionary Road, Gran Torino, In Bruges, Man on a Wire. JCVD, Let The Right One In, Frost/Nixon

2009 had Moon, Whip It, Black Dynamite, Mother, The Brothers Bloom, An Education, Cracks, Paper Heart, The White Ribbon, The House of the Devil

2010 had 127 Hours, I Saw The Devil, Social Network, Black Swan, Biutiful, Incendies, The Trip, Greenberg, The Kids are Alright, Winter's Bone

2011 had Melancholia, The Skin I Live In, Martha Marcy May Marlene, Take Shelter, Killer Joe, Win Win, Tree of Life, Hanna, Carnage

2012 had The Master, Moonrise Kingdom, The Cabin in the Woods, Zero Dark Thirty, Beasts of the Southern Wild, Holy Motors, 

 

I dunno...Watch more movies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 Guns did a solid enough 10 million Friday.  Smurfs 2 only did 5.5, well behind The Wolverine for second place.

 

I can't help but consider that good news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 Guns did a solid enough 10 million Friday.  Smurfs 2 only did 5.5, well behind The Wolverine for second place. I can't help but consider that good news.

Good news for my online pal (and longtime wrestling fan) Steven Grant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This weekend seems to be setting up to be a real mess, with no less than 4 new nationwide releases on tap entering an already pretty crowded field. Seems pretty certain someone gets burned fairly badly.

 

Critics seem to hate Planes, though I doubt it really makes a ton of difference to the opening weekend bottom line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Elysium will squeak ahead by a small margin, I think. I think the sleeper will be the Percy Jackson joint.  We're The Millers is probably a touch too crude to beat a kids movie during the summer... at least one not named Planes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't think of anything good in the last 5 years that wasn't a Blockbuster? Quick pass on Flickchart

2008 had The Wrestler, Slumdog Millionaire, Revolutionary Road, Gran Torino, In Bruges, Man on a Wire. JCVD, Let The Right One In, Frost/Nixon

2009 had Moon, Whip It, Black Dynamite, Mother, The Brothers Bloom, An Education, Cracks, Paper Heart, The White Ribbon, The House of the Devil

2010 had 127 Hours, I Saw The Devil, Social Network, Black Swan, Biutiful, Incendies, The Trip, Greenberg, The Kids are Alright, Winter's Bone

2011 had Melancholia, The Skin I Live In, Martha Marcy May Marlene, Take Shelter, Killer Joe, Win Win, Tree of Life, Hanna, Carnage

2012 had The Master, Moonrise Kingdom, The Cabin in the Woods, Zero Dark Thirty, Beasts of the Southern Wild, Holy Motors, 

 

I dunno...Watch more movies?

 

Out of the films I've seen from your post, Let the Right One In is the best of them. A terrific film. I've always supported Whip It (2009) here. Add the blockbusters from 2008: The Dark Knight, WALL-E, Iron Man, Hellboy II: The Golden Army and Kung Fu Panda to your films from 2008 and you have a memorable year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...