I dont know, I think its fanbase is very big. It may not be in the comparison it SW, LOTR and such due to how hardcore the fans are. POTC fans are more casual. People who love the movie and will see it once. LOTR and SW fans own merchandise and see the movie maybe twice or more.

Yes, but the people who will see Pirates at least once outnumber the people who will see LoTR/SW/HP multiple times

It's not as involving to be a PotC fan as a SW or LotR fan. With Star Wars you have six movies, countless video games, books and other spinoffs; with LotR, huge complicated books with made up languages and everything. With PotC all you have is the movie. And the ride. As far as the number a fans, who can say, but Pirates fans are less outspoken, less 'hardcore' than other film franchises.

unsure

That's not true now. We do now have more than one movie, video games, books, toys, etc.

Joy

Video game* And it wasn't even originally a PotC game. They changed it at the last minute to tie it in. That's why it doesn't suck too bad.

And I don't know why you keep fighting this. You aren't going to prove much. LOTR and Star Wars fans are more devout and in bigger numbers. It's not like it's hard to understand or anything.

Let end this...POTC 2 will make more then any LOTR and HP movie...Then you will believe me that there is a huge fanbase...not a hardcore one, but a fanbase.

Uh, actually, that would be video games*. I was counting the DMC games, including the DS game, the PC game, the PS2 game, the Gameboy game, the cellphone game, the online MMORPG (though that doesn't debut 'til next year).

And these games have been created based on the movie, not changed from a non-PotC game like the first movie's game was.

Joy

Then it's like Shrek 2. It'd be ridiculous to say Shrek has a fanbase. It has tons of people who love it, but it doesn't have a fanbase. If Shrek 3 sucks, many people will go: "WTF, why did they screw this, I thought it would be good."; nobody will go: "NOOOOOOOOOOO why did Dreamworks do this to me!!??".

PotC of course has a fanbase compared to Shrek, but I don't it compares to SW and LotR. At best it compares to Matrix, though that's just my guess.

Agreed.

Don't count your chickens before they are hatched, POTC fanboys.

...WHAT? You guys are still talking about this reaching?

There is not a chance in hell that Pirates makes more than ROTK and you can take that to the bank. Pirtaes is not even close in popularity to LOTR.

I can't believe I am defending ROTK, but but there is no chance that potc passes ROTK. Not even a small chance.

$400 million could happen, but I very seriously doubt it will reach $500 million in the U.S.

I guarnatee it it will not make 400 mill. 300 seems reasonable, but it won't make more than the first.

It's apples and oranges. LOTR was a film with a devoted fan base, like Star Wars, Matrix and such. While Pirates is more like the Indiana Jones series or the Shrek series which have wide appeal and are not just for a core fanbase.

377m is not out of the question if it is an entertaining movie.

Sure, I guess it could make that kind of money. But most films, most, I know not all, but most films that have huge first movies, always have lesser grosses for their sequels. I know LOTR is an example of one movie that didn't, but if you look at most films, Raiders, Star Wars, Spiderman, Batman, Jurassic Park, Harry Potter and so on are all films that had massive debuts and then took a step back on their next film. You can site films like The Matrix and Shrek and Toy Story as films that had large but not guargantuan openings that made a lot more with their sequels. But the only film that I know of that opened to 300 mill (even adjusted) that made more in its sequel is TTT. Sorry Pirates will do well, but it will not exceed Pirates 1.

285 mill.

If Shrek grossed $300 million, would it have stopped Shrek 2 from grossing $441 million?

Yes.

You can only have so much of an audience. If people loved a film and they all spend money on it, there are only so many other ways that you can get fans. Shrek is a gr eat example of a film that did well, but then did extremely well in it's sequel. If a film makes 300 mill for the original, then there are so many expectations for the sequel and now you have 300 millio dollars worth of fans that are expecting something great. What if the magic in Pirates just isn't there? Then you let people down. No one knew what to expect in Pirates. Then it had super legs and everyone loved it. Now it will be frontlaoded and everyone will rush out to see it. It will not sustain the same pace or have the same legs as the original. So yes, I honestly believe that if the original Shrek made 300 mill, then the sequel would make less than 440. And if that is so hard to believe, then ask yourself, why did Spiderman 2 sell less tickets than the original, even though it is considered to be a better film?

ehh...i dunno. i dont think itll get 400, but it is defiently possible

Originals give a big effect on their sequels. Spiderman is a franchise that had a built in fanbase prior to the release of the movie. Its fanbase had the urge of seeing the movie no matter what, thus explaining its legs (The Phantom Menace is another example of this. Hell, I could go as far as Harry Potter). In the end, the movie probably didn't live up to the expectations of its fanbase. This affected the sequel's total gross, not much in its opening. Same thing with Harry Potter, but that affected its opening also. But honestly, after a $400 million gross of the first movie, a 7% decline is nothing to sneeze about.

The thing is that if Pirates fails to clobber $300 million, what movie will do it this year? There has to be at least one movie this year that has to gross more than $300 million. The candidates this year such as Da Vinci Code failed to do so. Of course Box Office has been unpredictable, especially this year. A winter movie could surprise and go on to be the highest grossing movie of the year. But Pirates is the only movie I'm seeing doing it right now, and if it fails to do so. The top 5 of this year would just seem to pale in comparison to previous years.

Okay, I'm not too up on which sites are legit and which aren't, so I shall submit the following link to you in hopes that someone can tell me if this is for real or if this is one of those satire places:

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/p ... g-monster/

There've been a couple fake reviews already on the 'Net -- one on Moviehole, which was pulled after a Disney rep confirmed that there was no screening at the place and date that the reviewer said he was at. Then there's another one out there, but it's one of those NoView reviews, which we're all guessing based on the title is movie reviews written without the movie being viewed.

So, no actual reviews so far, and I'm kinda weary about the link I'm posting as I've not been to that website before.

Joy

Wouldn't surprise me.

This article is a huge joke. Seriously, anyone with basic boxoffice knowledge could have written that about any big movie in recent years: SW, LotR, Spidey, Shrek, Matrix....

I think there's a small chance it doesn't make 300, but only if the movie is shit. A 110 mil opening, with a 2.6-2.7 multiplier.

But I think the movie will live up to expectations quality-wise, so I doubt that. All is has to do is entertain the audience, and it'll be set.