...

That's pretty much just Rorschach's part of the story.

yes.

I've seen the Watchmen trailer like 3 times in theatres, and seen over 10 TV spots.

This is the first time I've had any idea of what the story is about. I'm seeing the film tomorrow.

...And it's the MAIN storyline in the book and in the film, lead by the only character who could be considered the MAIN character (when anyone who has read the book recalls it, they remember Rorschach the best. Apparently it's the same with the film). It has the most obvious appeal to mainstream, it has the most intriguing hook. The film both begins and ends with this storyline. It ties together all the most crucial elements of the plot.

When you sell a film, sell ONE premise, not a dozen. Even if you have a story heavy on sub-plots.

That's where the marketing screwed up, and that's why this film was never gonna do massive numbers. Premise does matter a lot to mainstream moviegoers.

This pisses me off! JONAS BROTHERS is doing horrible (that isn't what is pissing me off) and CORALINE could be kicking ass on those 3D screens. Such a waste! For next weekend theaters should get CORALINE back in 3D.

CORALINE was doing so awesome and JONAS BROTHERS ruined it. Now even if they put CORALINE back on 3D screens next weekend they would only have it there for a week until MONSTERS VS. ALIENS opens.

think about it this way, how much would it have grossed had it been rated PG-13?

Why hasn't anyone asked, "how do we know this 25M OD isn't the result of all the marketing WB has put into the film, and the lack of competition?"

And people jump on Nikki and Mason too much. They are usually more right than wrong on openers, they are getting their numbers from actual sources.

I thought there was a certain je ne sais quoi to it being R. Like "Oh, you're going to get to see stuff those Marvel and DC comic films don't show you."

I don't think the film would have been as good with less violence. But audiences are mixed on it already so maybe less violence would have won them over.

I predicted $60 million, and I thought that was optimistic. I think it's doing great. Who the hell thought it was that accessible to do like $80 million?

You people are spoiled.

Great for Watchmen, but a little dissapointing after the $85M tracking.

I agree though, the rest of the top 10 is boring now.

I'm bored of Taken, Paul Blart and Slumdog especially.

Though Watchmen is coming in where I expected and I think there are many reasons why it opened to what it opened and not more than 300, it is a little underwhelming for one main reason - its not expected to have good legs.

If a Pixar opens underwhelmingly (see Ratatouille and maybe even Wall-E) you know it has a chance to redeem itself due to good legs albiet because its a kids flick or its of great quality. That expectation isnt there for Watchmen so it in effect renders a very good OW dissapointing.

PG-13, and while hated by fans of the graphic novel, this movie grosses well over $80 million opening weekend. Sadly.

Boring #s for Watchmen. So Magnus' sort of theory that the recession won't benefit event-films is pretty much right. Or, could it have done "just" 40m+ OW without the recession?

Magnus' theory? I'm sure I had that theory too.
Whatever, this number remains disappointing, and I think MadGez has been hitting it precisely:
It's legs will not be good so if the OW is small then the total will be crappier than ever. (small)
Yes, in hindsight, Watchmen wouldn't have appealed to the masses and therefore couldn't get to 150-200m,
HOWEVER the trailers and marketing did not tell us that. It was effective, looked cool, what campiness people speak of, I don't know as the trailer featured much of Rorschach, Dr Manhattan, Comedian and Silk Spectre (just for sex appeal). nite owl and ozy weren't featured as much so really people couldn't have been turned off.
My point here being, the trailers sold a concept that wasn't in the movie and thus legs would be indefinitely bad but the OW should have rivalled 300s. no question.

oh and i don't think the theory of economy applies to Watchmen at all here.

I just think Watchman is a tough film to draw in outsiders of the fanbase.

i think we were all just a little high off 300's success. a 25m opening day for a dark, R-rated, 2 hrs 40 min superhero movie in March? That's a hell of a lot better than I would've ever predicted if it wasn't for 300. That would've probably been my OW prediction.

Regarding the recession - I think a few of us (BK, Magnus, myself and a couple of others) did say how the recession helps the smaller mid sized films and not these blockbusters. Looks to be the case.

As for the marketing - totally agree. I havnt read the book but its a good thing they focused on the cooler aspects and Night Owl amd Ozy are the campiest aspects of it and they were played down with good reason.

If 300 never existed, I suspect all our predictions would have been lower yes.

But that's not the point, right? 300 DOES exist. If it didn't maybe Snyder wouldn't have directed Watchmen. And it would have been a different kind of a film with different marketing and so on and so on.

unless they completely retold and redid the story and style and everything, I can't think of a non-Snyder way of making this movie that would've made me predict over 50m -- a normal studio treatment of this material would have done LXG numbers. I think it's a mixture of 300's style and 300's success that made our predictions so huge. That movie made this movie, so to speak. Even though I much preferred this one.

No that not what I meant. I meant that if a Zack Snyder directed Watchmen (as it is) came out and that the March record was still held by Ice Age and 300 never existed, we wouldnt have the $70m Zack Snyder/March/graphic novel benchmark to compare with.

I see nothing wrong with Watchmen's opening. As a member of the general public on this one (I've never read the graphic novel), considering the fact that the movie was nowhere near as marketable as 300 was (You can show a TV spot only so many times; if only one gender shows up.....), considering the fact that it's an R-rated superhero movie that doesn't involve vampires or Angelina Jolie, and considering the fact that the heroes looked, well, stupid...

25 million opening day/60 million weekend is good.

Oops. That's what I meant, don't know what I typed there.