It's mostly about how much people liked the previous film. Duh.

I never understood predictions over 170m since films usually need solid WOM to have sequels earn at least 80% of their gross. If the movie has poor to mediocre WOM, like MI2, it can be far worse.

Cruise's antics didn't help either, but hype was also far lower then last time.

In any case, I must add, POTC is one of the most beloved films of the generation, so increase those predictions.

DP, what are you trying to say exactly?

People predicting MI3 to pass the original but POTC2 to fall short of the original = Morons

I happen to agree.

i think we may see a better legs.

Yeah, you're probably right, MI2 made its money because it didn't have much competition, whereas MI3 doesn't stand out and is just one of many blockbusters in the summer season. Honestly, i wasn't feeling the hype for this one to be anything big enough to warrant such high predictions, yet i predicted $72m for its opening just because of what MI2 did back then and partially because of the good early buzz MI3 has been receiving, thinking that would bring people back for the next installment. Guess i was wrong...

Totally does not surprise me in the least.

How many mid 40s action stars are there?

Tom Hanks?

That's not an action movie.

The first weekend of May is the one of the big three weekends of the year to open a film. Even if the gross is subdued compared to Memorial day weekend, I don't think the release date is to blame at all if MI3 disappointments. It had literally NO competition this week. Cruise's antics and a subpar last film are mostly to blame, but release date actually helped the film more than hurting it imo.

personally, i blame the marketing.

But how do you really determine that? Legs? M:I-2 had very good legs for a sequel actually. Now look at Resident Evil and Underworld. Both weren't exactly beloved, well-graded and didn't have good legs at all, yet the sequels outperformed them.

Like I said last year about the dissappointing openings of Stealth, the Island and XXX2, people are tired of the machismo action flicks and it shows. I dont think it will affect flicks like Bond since hes one of a kind or smart thrillers like the Jason Bourne series since it doesnt advertise itself filled with explosions

I think there's some things we have to face:

* We can't blame the marketing. I've been ASSAULTED with commercials, promotional appearances and the like for this movie. There's no way that awareness wasn't out there.
* We can't blame the release date. We've had too many successes in the past with that date (SPIDER-MAN, MUMMY RETURNS, etc.).

It's all about Mr. Cruise...who this film is put completely around. His antics didn't deter from last summer's WOTW because of the concept and the presence of Mr. Spielberg at the helm. MI3 is a product built completely around him...and people are rejecting it. That image that he took 20 years to perfect has come down to a self-parody that particularly women are not buying.

When I saw the opening night showing of V FOR VENDETTA at the Cinerama in Seattle, one of the ushers came out to tell us what films would be playing there for the rest of the summer. SUPERMAN RETURNS: applause. X-MEN3: huge applause. MI3: major booing. So much so that the usher said that he personally knew it was a good film and for people to please come anyway. That's when I knew for sure that Tom was in trouble (and deservedly so).

Still...a sub $50M opening? I still didn't quite expect that as I have been burned so many times with trying to estimate America's taste (or lack thereof).

Yeah it all goes to Mr Cruise, he may be depressed about his movie bombing but at least he can pop some Paxil pills to keep it under controll

I get the feeling that audiences have outgrown the non sci-fi/non comic book "action" film that was so big in the 90s. Really apart from the Bourne Series, the guns and explosions actioner hasnt had a major hit since what? Bad Boys 2??

That one and S.W.A.T., yeah.

Good point...but I only remember like one explosion in the trailers for the movie. It was advertised as being a globe-trotting adventure with Tom Cruise in every shot. I still think this rests on his shoulders.

I mean, when shows commonly refer to your relationship and the birth of your baby as a publicity stunt...I think you've reached a point of no return! His personal life has completely shadowed any kind of persona that he could try to present onscreen (a la J. Lo). Seeing is that he's been concerned since the early 90s with being a brand name and not doing anything resembling a challenging acting performance (with the glorious exception of MAGNOLIA...which I'm sure he'll never do again since it didn't make anything close to $100M!), his career is effectively shot!

Magnus

I wouldn't group Van Helsing as disappointing. If that movie hadn't opened that weekend, it would have scored a whole lot less. i would put helsing with spidey and the rest.

KOH would have done badly any weekend. Bloom has no bankability whatsoever. Even in Dec, I would have seen it disappointing. Van Helsing looked quite subpar, and did $50 m + only due to its release date. MI3 is an example of a film just not already appealing to the public.

1996 : Twister
1998: Deep Impact
1999: The Mummy
2000: Gladiator
2001: Mummy Returns
2002: Spiderman
2003: X2
2004: Van Helsing
2005: Kingdom of Heaven
2006: MI3

I think the last three years just reflect poor films to start out the summer.

This is of course a question of taste, but there was one thing that M:I-1 and M:I-2 had, but M:I-3 didn't. Kickass trailers. The trailer for the third film is certainly good, but the two first flicks had much more effective trailers with much more impressive action, IMHO. They offered the idea that people were going to see something fresh and excting, while the trailer (and TV-spots) made the third film look more like a standard actioner.

I think what certainly didn't help matters was that Cruise's female lead looked like a Katie Holmes clone....

Mr. & Mrs. Smith.

That was not a straightforward, serious actioner. It was more of a comedy. At least that's how I perceived it.

You are correct. The film was an absolute joke.