I guess he meant this one:

As more and more movies disappoint, could this be the one to help 2014 end on a strong note? There are no other assured hits outside of The Hobbit to come this year, and Disney is marketing the fuck out of this without showing too much. The Golden Globe nominations show that it should be at least a good if not great film, and WOM should be good. I"m feeling very good about 150 million at this point and this club looks like a possibility. It just needs $188,755,691 to do it, which I think is not unreasonable.

Also, as one of the 5 most popular shows for high schools to perform in the country according to Playbill.com, drama departments are likely to organize field trips which should help as well.

Into the Woods' fan base is not as rabid as that of Les Miserables, which should help legs. I think all this needs to happen is a 40 million opening. Right now I"m thinking 35 million OW, but you never know.

This has always been more likely than that 200 million Exodus club.

I will be happy with this making $120 million.

I don't think that this will do big numbers or have great legs after Christmas so it has to do open well and I don't see a bigger buzz than Les Miserables which also didn't do $150m so I don't see how this will do it.

I hope to god that Annie crushes this.

Annie will make half of Into the Woods if it is lucky.

Lowering my prediction for this. Buzz seems low and reviews will not be good. That may be why Disney is keeping reviews under wraps until 5 days before the movie is release.

There is already a review at RT. And considering it has already been nominated for the Golden Globe and made AFI's top eleven, I find it hard to believe reviews won't at least be decent, if not stellar.

And what are you basing its low buzz on? Not that I'm saying buzz isn't low, but how can you tell?

making AFI does not mean nothing. unbroken made that list as we'll and we see how much critics are loving that film. Also getting a globe nob in comedy/musical don't mean much when it's the only musical other than Anna to come out this year.
in case you have forgotten Nine also got a globe nob for best picture and was trashed by critics. It was also by the same director of Into the woods. Also Burlusque got a glove nod as well. As for the one review on RT. Let's just saw that same critics gave a good reviews to Annie.

Very true, and one positive review means shit. Using AFI or playbill.com is kind of silly too. If it was really going to be an awards contender it wouldn't have an embargo so close to release. Unbroken, Big Eyes, and every other film over christmas has already been reviewed quite a bit. Also TV spots seem to be hiding the musical aspects (Which could turn off WOM in general audiences)

75-90 still seems like a good range for it.

I'm not saying it will be a big awards contender, but I'm just saying it would be very difficult for it not to be at least halfway decent. And every tv spot i've seen has had music.

Its a big disney movie being released for Christmas. That at least means something for its box office.

It also won't have the issue of bad singers like Les Miserables.

It's not a big Disney film, it cost only 50 million to make. Which will be great for when it does 250-350 WW.

...all of the marketing I have seen has made it quite obvious it was a musical.

Godzilla wasn't screened until the Sunday before its release, and that got very decent reviews. Into the Woods has had leaked responses for several weeks that are generally positive, if some reviewers don't like some of the aspects, like the length or the music, though even the reviews that are just good praise the story and visuals. I find it hard to believe that its tomato won't be red come Christmas day, even if it is not a best picture winner.

Really? Godzilla is your comparison for this?

Sweeney Todd was 86% fresh, it made 53 million. Big Budget May blockbusters always have their reviews late, not award films in late December trying to build buzz. Leaks never are any indicator of how a film will be reviewed. That's because usually 80% of reviews are fake at that point.

I hope it's great too. I love the show. I played the Big Bad Wolf in a production and one of the most fun I ever had. I'm just not seeing any hype for it coming in a week away.

Also there have been dozen+ reviews that say it's "nails on a chalkboard" and "Marshall was the worst director to adapt it," Right now it can definitely go 50/50 in my opinion.

Brian bl1222 Thompsoncory MGKC publicenemy#1 back me up here. Only movies35 seems to not be hating on this movie and its box office potential.

Sweeney Todd had a poor release pattern and was R and was a horror musical. It is also not as popular among high schools as Into the Woods. It is not about fairy tales. Meryl streep is more of a draw than Helena Bonham carter. Into the Woods is not for kids, but since the violence is mostly off screen, kids can be brought. Sweeney Todd was not given a huge marketing push by disney. It was not the next big fairy tale musical to come out after Frozen. Its also not as good of a musical IMO. Reviewers are easier on family friendly films as well, which is how you explain every meh Dreamworks movie getting a fresh score..

Les Miserables had much more obstacles to overcome (poor singing, a three hour runtime, no dialogue) in terms of appealing to critics and that still got 69% positive. The only reason it got nominated for best picture was because it was historical fiction and the academy likes that. Into the Woods has no bad singers in the cast. It has a less appealing subject matter for Oscar voters, but just because it does not get Oscar love does not mean it cannot become a good film and do well at the box office

Into the Woods is a wonderful musical. As long as it stays faithful to the original, it cannot be worse than decent.

Thegun I know you're going to say I'm stupid, but please withdraw. I just don't understand why everyone is hating on this film and its box office chances.

I've seen that nails on a chalkboard review and it still praised the visuals and performances and was more positive than negative. They must not like the music. Rob Marshall's directing really has no effect on the quality of the film I don't think as most people can't watch a film and identify it as Rob Marshall unless they know ahead of time that he directed it. He has directed good and bad films. He seems to have stuck to the musical, and that alone should be enough for decent reviews.

Nobody is baiting on the film they are just being real. All signs are not pointing towards a good movie. Mixed early reaction, weak proof romance from this awards season. A one hit wonder director who has directed one good movie and four bad ones including two musical and buzz that seems to be decent but not great.

How do you even know what appeals to critics and what doesn't? Making excuses for the film doesn't say anything about its box office potential or its quality.

You're arguing based on your perception of what it could be as opposed to what it seems to be from early WOM and general attitude and choices made by the marketing team. Anyway, just wait a couple more days and all will be clear.

I still think this has got it in the bag. The musical-fearing crowd will be lessened since it's focus is on fairy tales (and people are used to songs in Disney films). It's got a great cast, a bit of intrigue, and it just looks different-enough to really be appealing to see in the theater.

Les Mis had the advantage that it was very well known. I'm not saying Into The Woods isn't well known... but I have honestly never heard of it.

I hadn't heard of it until the film either. It's no where near as famous as Les Miserables. I suppose the title "Into the Woods" vaguely conjures up imagery of Red Riding Hood or similar Disney/fairy tale stories.

The question here is that will it be good and interest many people to see it. Disney has a great record with fairy tails but something as good as Enchanted (more family appeal and in-line with Disney's strongest Princess storyline) didn't get past $150m mark. Yes it did not release in December but it did have holidays to support it.

Please do enlighten us on Disney's track record with fairy tails.

lol at algren's sparrow jab.

If only this was animated... Then a 250 million gross would be assured.

Into the Woods has never been a long running musical professionally. Les Miserables has. Into the Woods is an immensely popular show for amateur groups to perform for years. Les Miserables has not. I'd say there are nearly as many people familiar with both. Into the Woods ran for over 900 performances, while Sweeney Todd ran for just 500 some, which means theoretically it should make more.

Chicago came out before the revival became a smash hit. The original run of Chicago was very short. It wasn't until after the movie the musical became so popular and eventually became the third longest running show.

I'd say Enchanted numbers are minimum, with Maleficent numbers the ceiling.