World of KJ
http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/

Friday Numbers (05/29)
http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=77458		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Corpse [ Sat May 30, 2015 12:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Friday Numbers (05/29)










Author:  Excel [ Sat May 30, 2015 12:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
Knew SA was topping that 16m estimate after it's midnights.

It won't get 50 million with that #, I think. But high 40s isn't bad.
Author:  Flava'd vs The World [ Sat May 30, 2015 1:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
I should have never doubted The Rock. Male starpower isn't dead after all ... until you look down and see how far Coops has fallen since January.

Screw everyone who isn't seeing Tomorrowland. :(
Author:  Algren [ Sat May 30, 2015 1:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
I expect it is refreshing for people to get a "blockbuster" that isn't a sequel, a reboot, a remake, or based on a comic-book. San Andreas will let the youth of today know what a 90s summer blockbuster was like.
Author:  David [ Sat May 30, 2015 1:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
Do people still believe Tomorrowland will squeak by 100 million?
Author:  Dil [ Sat May 30, 2015 1:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
Great OD for SA and it should go well over $100M. I actually think it will end up around Taken 2's gross or slightly more eventhough JW is going to hurt it. Not much else to say about the rest except that it's nice to see that MM might have the best drop out the bunch.
Author:  Jack Sparrow [ Sat May 30, 2015 1:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
Tomorrowland is not going to make $100m and it is bombing in OS markets as well.
Author:  Dr. Lecter [ Sat May 30, 2015 2:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
As I asked before: were Dennis Quaid and John Cusack considrered big draws after The Day After Tomorrow and 2012?
Author:  Flava'd vs The World [ Sat May 30, 2015 2:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
Both of those movies had brands though. Everyone knew about the Mayan prophecy and everyone knew about global warming. This was just The Rock and some jabroni earthquakes.
Author:  Flava'd vs The World [ Sat May 30, 2015 2:13 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
Why can't Fury Road put up a decent friday increase? Most deceiving daily numbers ever. $150M is probably out now.
Author:  Excel [ Sat May 30, 2015 2:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
Dr. Lecter wrote:
As I asked before: were Dennis Quaid and John Cusack considrered big draws after The Day After Tomorrow and 2012?


No but at the point in time the genre was the star. The straight up disaster concept isn't that big of a sell any more.
Author:  O [ Sat May 30, 2015 2:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
These numbers are very encouraging for ID4 imo. Even without Smith, 90's nostalgia is a powerful thing. I expect the budget, effects, teasers/trailers, to be much stronger for that one as well as release date. There's still demand for popcorn blockbusters.
Author:  Excel [ Sat May 30, 2015 2:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
Yes but today people eithe rlike ultra serious Nolany films or self aware tongue in cheek wink wink borderline parodies ala Transformers or Avengers or what have.

You the mix, which was heavily featured in the 90s and early 2000s, doesnt work any more.
Author:  O [ Sat May 30, 2015 2:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
Excel wrote:
Yes but today people eithe rlike ultra serious Nolany films or self aware tongue in cheek wink wink borderline parodies ala Transformers or Avengers or what have.

You the mix, which was heavily featured in the 90s and early 2000s, doesnt work any more.


This makes no sense? What are you talking about? :P I feel like people are over the Transformers type movie.
Author:  Skyblade [ Sat May 30, 2015 2:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
Dr. Lecter wrote:
As I asked before: were Dennis Quaid and John Cusack considrered big draws after The Day After Tomorrow and 2012?


I think Jake Gyllenhaal walked off with DAM clout, rightfully or not.
Author:  Excel [ Sat May 30, 2015 5:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
O wrote:
Excel wrote:
Yes but today people eithe rlike ultra serious Nolany films or self aware tongue in cheek wink wink borderline parodies ala Transformers or Avengers or what have.

You the mix, which was heavily featured in the 90s and early 2000s, doesnt work any more.


This makes no sense? What are you talking about? :P I feel like people are over the Transformers type movie.


They are, but they're not over that silly/stupid humor style. Or maybe they are, as Avengers can attest to.
Author:  Algren [ Sat May 30, 2015 8:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
Dr. Lecter wrote:
As I asked before: were Dennis Quaid and John Cusack considrered big draws after The Day After Tomorrow and 2012?

Definitely not. I'd argue that Roland Emmerich was more the draw in both of those. The performers were just recognizable faces that had no impact on its performance. As Excel said, the genre was the main star.

I actually even forgot that Dennis Quaid was in The Day After Tomorrow. :P
Author:  Algren [ Sat May 30, 2015 8:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
Variety claim that San Andreas is on for a $47m opening. It has 3D and is in 3,777 cinemas compared to The Day After Tomorrow and 2012's no 3D debuts of $65m and $68m at 300+ less cinemas. It's a great, great opening for The Rock, but I am not convinced this was all his doing. I believe that people were just in need of a blockbuster that wasn't part of an existing franchise. This was an "original" blockbuster. Easy escapism. The Rock didn't hinder its success, but he sure as hell did not manage that $47m on his own. I don't believe the 90s nostalgia was in play either. I just think that it's the summer and $47m isn't so impressive for pretty much any mid-large sized film to obtain. Sure, it feels hugely impressive, though, but that was because predictions were rather low. Warner Bros. must be happy about the opening.
Author:  Alex Y. [ Sat May 30, 2015 10:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
Poor for San Andreas, the marketing costs alone was probably higher than its opening weekend numbers based on the saturation of advertising the entire month.
Author:  MadGez [ Sun May 31, 2015 1:18 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
Yeah the Cusack/Quaid argument does hold water. The Rock did have a far more positive influence on SA than those actors had on their films. That said - SA is obviously a hit because of more than just The Rock.
Author:  Dil [ Sun May 31, 2015 2:54 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
Quote:
RthWillSeeYouNow, on 30 May 2015 - 11:41 PM, said:


Sat looking like
SA 20.9,PP2 6.1,TL 6,MMFR 5.9,AOU 4.9,ALO 3.8,POLT 3.3


Woah at that San Andreas increase. Apparently, the WC is really going crazy over it and now $50M+ is pretty much a done deal.
Author:  Magic Mike [ Sun May 31, 2015 3:34 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
Great increase for San Andreas. Definitely doing over 50 now.
Author:  Jack Sparrow [ Sun May 31, 2015 6:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
That is a good increase of SA I don't know how WoM is good for this.
Author:  Dr. Lecter [ Sun May 31, 2015 8:06 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
Excel wrote:
Dr. Lecter wrote:
As I asked before: were Dennis Quaid and John Cusack considrered big draws after The Day After Tomorrow and 2012?


No but at the point in time the genre was the star. The straight up disaster concept isn't that big of a sell any more.


But how do we know that? San Andreas is the first large-scale film of its kind since then. Pompeii and Into the Storm are the only ones comparable and they were just way smaller in their presentation.
Author:  Dr. Lecter [ Sun May 31, 2015 8:09 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Friday Numbers (05/29)
Magnus wrote:
Dr. Lecter wrote:
As I asked before: were Dennis Quaid and John Cusack considrered big draws after The Day After Tomorrow and 2012?


you're being a jabroni.

TDAT/2012 were much more larger scale disaster films. Their basic premise was more appealing regardless of the stars. As Flava said, TDAT had global warming (and the controversey that came with it) and 2012 had the Mayan prophecy.

Both were also much bigger films. TDAT cost 125m (which with inflation is well over 150m these days) and 2012 cost 200m. San Andreas is 110m.

Those two films also had marketing campaigns with better money shots involving the destruction. Most of San Andreas marketing centered around The Rock.

If you think San Andreas opens to 40m+ with John Cusack or Dennis Quaid, you're just wrong.


But at the same time, TDAT's opening adjusts to almost $90 million, 2012 to $70 million - without 3D. Did The Rock help? Sure. Did he help more than an additional $5-7 million? Not so sure.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/