Another thing, no one ever writes about the fact there are only 4 movies that have made $400m in their first run. Titanic in December and the other 3 were all in May. No other movie released outside of those months have been able to do it.

Also, there have been 5 movies that opened like POTC 2 (SM2, Sith, ROTK, Passion, and Shrek), and only one made it to $400m. All the other movies were very comparable to POTC at this point, but the only one that dropped +50%. Oh, that's the one that is going to make $400m. That's the one that is going to start reeling off sub 45% drops next weekend. I just don't get the reasoning at this point. Last week sure it still seemed possible, but after 13 days of numbers, I don't see it.

Well, I just don't want you to be a WATB like Dr. lector. He stated X3 was a lock for $250m and I said it would have a hard time breaking $230m and he acts like he was just good at projecting the final number as my projection. So, unless you give me a hard figure like my $385-395m, then no Howie, we have no deal.

The deal is is if it is below $400 million, you win. If it is above, I win. I don't care if it is a smidgeon below or a smidgeon above. If this film does not make $400 million, you have won the bet, because those are the terms. I'm not going to say "close enough", because it isn't. I said it will make $400 million, so I will have to stick to it. Your deal with Lecter was different, because there was a middle ground (you picked $230 million and he picked $250 million). In this case, there is no middle ground, no blur, and no mistaking the winner.

Above $400 million domestically: Winner = Me
Below $400 million domestically: Winner = You

You can quote this.

So, deal, or no deal?

PEACE, Mike.

There hasn't been enough $400 million films to use the July release date as reasoning. I could easily say that the highest opening weekend in July never topped $90 million, but Pirates kinda changed that, you know.

While there has only been 6 films to ever do $400 m, its important to take a close look at the top films of all time:

-Of the films that have made $300 m or more, 12/21 have done it in the past 5 years.
-6/10 of the top films of all time have come out in the past 4 years, and 8/13 of the top films of all time have come out since 2002 (so all but 5 of the biggest films ever, didn't come out from 2002-now).

The top films of all time domestic chart has been changing incredibly fast. The $400 m level is quite high, but its more attainable than it ever has been thanks to inflation.

What do I win? And I hate Howie Mandel, so you have kind of ruined the whole subject. So, no thanks

I don't get it? So you do think it'll do $400 m now?

Zing I hear ya, but it just doesnt seem right in my book

A 28.5 million weekend could very well be in store. After that It will make around 30 million by the end of that weekend. That would put its total at about 345 million, then Add 15, 8, 5, 3, 2, 1, 1 for the rest of its run, that will be at 380 million. Thats with Sub 50% drops after this week. Im not saying it can't do 400 million, but based on its current run, and the fact that it is performing less than the other big blockbusters. It just seems unlikely, In fact I think that on its current run, Anything over 375 million would be a gift.

lol. No flippin' way. You just spent pages upon pages telling us how it won't pass $400 million, but now you refuse to take the bet? You are not confident in your own analysis/prediction at all.

PEACE, Mike.

How is having a 2nd week above everything except Shrek 2 (mind you, it got a holiday boost), peforming less than the other big blockbusters? If you're basing it on yesterday's drop, that's bullshit. Didn't you just see everything drop hard today?

I am not sure that is so true. This year most likely will only have one $300m movie just like last year. I think 2002-2004 (9 of those 12) spoiled us and $300m is going back to being a hard number to achieve. I mean actual admissions go down every year it is only inflation that keeps the box office looking healthy. I think the last HP and Narnia would have made it if they were released 2/3 years ago. Look at it this way there are as many $300m movies released in the last two years as there were in two weeks in May 2002. I agree with the inflation making it easier to a certain extent, but I am not sure it is enough filling to cover the shrinking pie.

Ok, fine, I'll jump in and say it won't make $400m.

Can you direct me to that specific post. Mike stating that $400m is not a lock, and that $400m is still possible is not the same as stating it won't pass $400m. What I was arguing is that it has to meet certain conditions to pass it. It hasn't so far, but that doesn't mean it won't in the future. I am pretty sure of the odds, but what I am stating may not happen, is something that is more than likely to happen. It it was a real bet, I would get odds and you are asking to make an even money bet on something that is not even money. I feel confident of the odds, but I don't win anything, so I it is not worth making the bet. I make actual bets, and I am not getting the action I feel the bet deserves, so I am not taking the bet. You are asking me to meet on your terms and that is a sucker bet for your interests.


So, if this was a real bet you would have to give at least 3/2 odds. That being stated, I don't really care at this point. I have convinced myself that it is more likely than not that it won't reach $400m. So, I bet it doesn't make $400m

Looks like Box, beat me to it.

OH MY GOD!

Every person on this forum that thinks Pirates WON'T make $400 mil is insane!!!

It is the biggest opener of all time. It has grossed more than ANY movie ever at this point in it's run. It is STILL making more daily than any film ever.

And you all think it WON'T pass $400 mil?

Are you all fucking insane?

Knock some sense into yourself. Run into a wall or something.

400m+

Firstly, sorry mdana. I was under the impression you were convinced this wouldn't make $400 million. My apologies. Secondly, this isn't a casino. People make bets here all the time, and they are usually simple "If it makes over x amount, you win; if it makes below x amount, I win" or something like that. I laid out a bet that was fair for both of us, but you refuse to do it. I shouldn't have assumed though that you were totally cutting out $400 million as a possibility.

I've been very edgy because of the rude comments you've been throwing at me. I simply want to take a bet. I don't know what you mean by sucker bet. You either are confident enough to bet that it won't make $400 million or not. I don't care. But that is fine if you are against this betting stuff. I will leave you alone now. Box and I will do the bet then, since you are against it. Ciao.

PEACE, Mike.

Perhaps you are mistaking my comments for rudeness, because you are either not comprehending what I write or not taking the time to read my posts through. I apologize if I get annoyed when people add meanings or words I didn't write and attribute them to me.

The bet is on, I just felt the way you were approaching it was kind of weasily, but no big deal. It was the whole Howie Mandel thing, I think he is a weasil and I attributed my animosity towards him to the wager. My bad. The more I think about it, I would probably take it if it was even money. Definition of a sucker bet, the odds of something happening better than than the odds you get. For example, the odds are 50/50 but you get 3/2 odds. Like if we flip a coin every time its heads I pay you $2, everytime it is tails you pay me $3.

What exactly did you find rude to your comments? I know the O comment was harsh and I stated I didn't mean to read that way. I am just stating Pirates is in trouble and now I am insane, high. I state one thing and people disregard what I am stating and go back to arguing their original point. People take tangential aspects and make that the thrust of their arguements like the whole Carla and Connie thing. They don't really make any case for POTC 2 performing better.

This is my problem with the thread today, so many posters stated Pirates will do $9m on Monday. Then it doesn't do it, so they lower their projections a few days down the road by a little, and we are supposed to take them seriously. I have posted projections a few days out and I feel like mine have been more realistic and accurate (they have actually been too high). Yet I get constant criticism that I am not realistic and that I am harping on Pirates. When all I am doing is trying to be as realistic and accurate as possible. I would cheerlead if their was something to be cheerleading about, but the numbers both in the dailies and internet ratings don't bare it out.

I try to constantly reasses my projections and see what I am doing right and wrong. I am not always right, Kong being a prime example, but I always try to learn. I was very positive on POTC the first week, but I noted some troubling signs. There are obvious signs this week and so many posters want to point the finger at me and state I am the problem. Shoot the messenger sort of thing.

MikeQ if you feel like I am attacking or being rude, I don't see it, but I apologize if you feel that way.

fanboys/girls for ya

Mdana...

If you will...

Can you perhaps give day by day projections for Pirates until the end of it's run to justify your thinking?

Instead of just multiplying percentages from OTHER movies that in NO WAY correlate to Pirates2 at all

well i do find it kind of stupid peoplea predictions for the dailys keepnot being met, and then they lower their expecs for the following day and its not met, and so on and so fourth, yet they all seem to think itll make the same final gross. the thign i do expect several films ot rise onthursday, and your looking at 30 million flat weekend. but its another 50% drop. wom might not be as hot as you ll thought.

Another thing about Wed's numbers. Many posters state all movies were down in the top ten which is true, but POTC 2 had the biggest drop -13.9%. The avg. drop for the holdovers was -7%. On the comparable Wed. for SM2 it had the highest drop -7.3% in the top 10 (sleepover dropped so much it fell out of the top 10), but the avg drop was -4%.

That sounds oddly familiar to some other poster who did that for Superman Returns a few weeks ago.

really, i dont remembr last week saying :its alock for 2.5 million today!" ect. i remember saying "wo supermans gottewn the same number 3 days in a row". other then that i duno wat da fuck ur dumbass is talking about

Oh, nothing. I'm just rambling. It's just that whenever I think of Superman Returns, I think of how you got every aspect of its box-office wrong, including the recent "it won't drop more than 600 theaters" comment.