Was this post the cause of Algren's ban? lol

Doubt it. I guess you can't be banned because you said something true.

Banned (removed) post is in the "Female Dr. Doom???" thread.

I also thought this was the reason he got banned. He just said here what everyone else is thinking.

lmao lol

PETTAAARRRRR is now desperately trying to bring more people in with a battle title for the third movie. Yeah the battles in the LOTR movies were epic and PETTTAARRR hopes to lure folks in the cinema because they remeber those awesome battles. Its just the shit wont work here. I stick to my first post.

^ That's good, general audiences enjoy epic battles on films, that fact will prevent this club to succed

Actually given the big difference in totals of first two movies I think the third one might end up lower than Hobbit 1 somewhere close to $275m-$280m and I don't think WB is really going to market hell out of this one like they did for HP movies.

They are going to, it's their biggest franchise right now

they should.

Well they should but for the last two Hobbit movies the marketing wasn't as good as it could have been IMO.

Hobbit 1 made a billion with that marketing, and Hobbit 2 marketing centered on a dragon and made almost a billion, I guess marketing hasnt been that bad at all

Probably but I always thought they could have done more to make this a bigger event and again IMO

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King made almost $1.5 billion adjusted (and that's not counting the HFR/3D/IMAX ticket premiums).

This third Hobbit movie has the potential to sell less than half as many tickets as the third LOTR movie.

If that's what you refer to as "marketing hasnt been that bad at all", you have just been ejected from the hiring pool for marketing executives at Bradley Witherberry International Productions™.

Hobbit 3 will make at least $900M worldwide. A movie with bad marketing doesn't gross that much.

exactly, that is why I think the Hobbit movies have underperformed domestically especially. They definitely haven't been marketing these movies as events. The Hobbit 2 had a great trailer, that they released only online and not in theaters for instance

I like how Bradley compares the third Hobbit movie to RETURN OF THE KING, the highest grosser of the LotR franchise.

Audience anticipation and box office rose from the first film to the second film to the third - - the exact opposite of the phenomena that FILMO is pointing out in this thread.

Yet you still compared them. Why?

Hmmmm... I wonder why anyone might compare the third film in this hobbit trilogy to the third film in that other hobbit trilogy?

They're completely seperate trilogies. With, what, 2 of the same actors?

They share the same fanbase and are from the same world and writer, so the comparison is apt.

But Bradley, you have to understand that the lesser box office has little to do with the marketing of either movie. It's related to time and the natural human behaviour of loving something when it's fresh and ignoring it when it's "been done before". The Hobbit, as a series, is just unlucky to come after The Lord of the Rings. The marketing has been, actually, eerily identical, which itself is rather uninspiring, but the marketing certainly has not been a factor for the "underperformance" of the Hobbit series. Hardcore fans attend, but other moviegoers (such as ones that are swayed by what is "popular") are instead anticipating Marvel or Disney's latest cash-grab.

I'm gonna compare King Kong to it, then.

You can do what you like.