Wkd Box Office 07•19-21•13 - it's SCARY at the top, turbomba, R.I.P.D. DOA R.I.P.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Maybe Blake's more fun to be around? When you are Ryan Reynolds, you don't exactly have a hard time getting gorgeous women. At some point, I would imagine that personality starts to be the bigger draw.

Anyhow, back on topic:

Now You See Me
Domestic: $114,440,000
Foreign: $86,000,000
Worldwide: $200,440,000

- Lionsgate has to be happy with this result
 
Maybe Blake's more fun to be around? When you are Ryan Reynolds, you don't exactly have a hard time getting gorgeous women. At some point, I would imagine that personality starts to be the bigger draw.

Anyhow, back on topic:

Now You See Me
Domestic: $114,440,000
Foreign: $86,000,000
Worldwide: $200,440,000

- Lionsgate has to be happy with this result

They're in a good position to have a GREAT year when all is said and done.

What's funny is that they're one of the few studios that appear to be working an old model: Make a bunch of mid-budget features. If a few of them break 80 mil, you're still good. If one of them breaks huge, you're set for the rest of the year.

They've got one blockbuster (Hunger Games) that's guaranteed, and I think they still managed to keep costs on that relatively low, right? Or am I wrong about that?

Regardless - I remember when more studios took that tack. The majority of their stuff was in the mid-budget range, between 20-60mil, tops. Easier to produce, easier to turn a profit. Not as easy to market.

But why be proud of your solid batting average when everybody else is having a homerun contest.
 
Pacific Rim will end up making close to 2x as much as all those movies combined worldwide on about the same cumulative budget. That's still not enough to make Pacific Rim a success, but it's not on the same level as any of those films you mentioned. Prince of Persia is a more fitting comparison.

I don't think the internet was ever high on PoP.

The internet was gushing about the films I mentioned.
 
They're in a good position to have a GREAT year when all is said and done.

What's funny is that they're one of the few studios that appear to be working an old model: Make a bunch of mid-budget features. If a few of them break 80 mil, you're still good. If one of them breaks huge, you're set for the rest of the year.

They've got one blockbuster (Hunger Games) that's guaranteed, and I think they still managed to keep costs on that relatively low, right? Or am I wrong about that?

Regardless - I remember when more studios took that tack. The majority of their stuff was in the mid-budget range, between 20-60mil, tops. Easier to produce, easier to turn a profit. Not as easy to market.

But why be proud of your solid batting average when everybody else is having a homerun contest.

It's important to remember that Lionsgate still sell all their films internationally distribution rights (like New Line did back in the day) to a network of foreign distributors so they recoup something like 60-75% of the budget of every film they make before they even open.

Of course the down side is they don't get to reap any of the benefits that a large International gross can bring like the big studios can if a film becomes a WW hit.
 
Regardless - I remember when more studios took that tack. The majority of their stuff was in the mid-budget range, between 20-60mil, tops. Easier to produce, easier to turn a profit. Not as easy to market.

But why be proud of your solid batting average when everybody else is having a homerun contest.
I think an economist did a study and concluded that the higher the budget (with all other things being equal), the greater the likelihood that a movie would get to break even point or better. Of course, that likelihood won't get anywhere near 100% no matter how much you spend, so it's risky to put too much money into one movie.

So, doing more movies in the mid-budget range is possibly more risky.
 
I don't think the internet was ever high on PoP.

The internet was gushing about the films I mentioned.

The only film I can think of that is close was Prometheus, but that was cheaper than Pacific Rim, and will probably have a little higher WW total. Scott Pilgrim which made like half its budget worldwide is not a good comparison.

BobbyRoberts said:
They're in a good position to have a GREAT year when all is said and done.

What's funny is that they're one of the few studios that appear to be working an old model: Make a bunch of mid-budget features. If a few of them break 80 mil, you're still good. If one of them breaks huge, you're set for the rest of the year.

They've got one blockbuster (Hunger Games) that's guaranteed, and I think they still managed to keep costs on that relatively low, right? Or am I wrong about that?

Regardless - I remember when more studios took that tack. The majority of their stuff was in the mid-budget range, between 20-60mil, tops. Easier to produce, easier to turn a profit. Not as easy to market.

But why be proud of your solid batting average when everybody else is having a homerun contest.

Hunger games was pretty cheap ($75-80M) but I think they ramped up the budget for Catching Fire.

I think that Lionsgate will end up a lot closer to Sony this year (domestically) than one might have expected not too long ago. They have a good chance of finishing the year with $1B domestic if Catching Fire finishes in the same range as the Hunger Games, and the rest of their slate doesn't bomb miserably.
 
The movie fails because the internet =/= general sentiment.
absolutely agree

What I dont understand is this desire and hope by some to see a movie fail simply because it got Internet hype. Like it's their job to be the anti-hype and sit back after the fact to laugh while a new, original ip by a great director fails to produce a profit.

I don't see any reason to celebrate
 
Some might argue Blake Lively is an upgrade. I would probably call it a lateral move myself.

Either way, he stays winning.

Downgrade for sure. Scarlet simply looks more interesting and doesn't pass herself off for cheap ass when she talks. Also, it's important to consider that Scarlet has a much much better career and name recognition.

Obviously, I don't know either of them but at face value going from Scar Jo to Blake looks like poor decision making. Karma had its say too, Green Lantern was dog shit and bombed hard.... and his career isn't on its way up but down. Unlike Scar Jo.
 
Scarlett isn't a great actress (although I really liked her in The Avengers, significantly better than she was in IM2), but Blake Lively in Green Lantern might be the most wooden performance I've ever seen.
 
Pretty sure Reynolds filmed Green Lantern when he was still with ScarJo. Maybe if he wants to save his career he should get back with Alanis since that was his peak era.
 
Can someone explain to me the diference of foreign and worldwide ?

Always imagined that
Domestic = USA
Foreign = Worldwide that is not USA

Bu the numbers don't match ....
 
Pretty sure Reynolds filmed Green Lantern when he was still with ScarJo. Maybe if he wants to save his career he should get back with Alanis since that was his peak era.

He put a pair on Scar during Green Lantern, with Lively. Seems to me that's when fates turned around playboy.

Went from Marvel to DC, traded Scar for Lively.... Green Lantern bombed and now RIPD, Lively then made Savages and went back to Gossip Girl after that. Scar on the other hand.... 2nd highest grossing movie of all time. Facts don't lie.
 
Loved "The Conjuring". Great movie.

My theater was packed and was hilariously silent during the tense moments. That movie had you by the balls.
 
Can someone explain to me the diference of foreign and worldwide ?

Always imagined that
Domestic = USA
Foreign = Worldwide that is not USA

Bu the numbers don't match ....

Foreign/international = worldwide minus domestic/North America

So domestic = NA, international = everywhere else, and worldwide = domestic + international
 
Pacific Rim will end up making close to 2x as much as all those movies combined worldwide on about the same cumulative budget. That's still not enough to make Pacific Rim a success, but it's not on the same level as any of those films you mentioned. Prince of Persia is a more fitting comparison.

From a new property perspective PR already did quite respectably, it's possible Legendary who fully owns the PR franchise wants to invest further on the franchise and goes for a sequel.
 
He put a pair on Scar during Green Lantern, with Lively. Seems to me that's when fates turned around playboy.

Went from Marvel to DC, traded Scar for Lively.... Green Lantern bombed and now RIPD, Lively then made Savages and went back to Gossip Girl after that. Scar on the other hand.... 2nd highest grossing movie of all time. Facts don't lie.

I'm sure he is crying into his millions if dollars while sleeping with lively....sounds like a tough life
 
He put a pair on Scar during Green Lantern, with Lively. Seems to me that's when fates turned around playboy.

Went from Marvel to DC, traded Scar for Lively.... Green Lantern bombed and now RIPD, Lively then made Savages and went back to Gossip Girl after that. Scar on the other hand.... 2nd highest grossing movie of all time. Facts don't lie.

I'm assuming "Scar" refers to Scarlett? If so, Avengers isn't the second highest grossing film ever. Am I missing something here?
 
Reynolds and Launter need to team-up in the ultimate bomb

the shouldn't even be subtle about it, it's a buddy cop film about bomb defeusal
 
Can someone explain to me the diference of foreign and worldwide ?

Always imagined that
Domestic = USA
Foreign = Worldwide that is not USA

Bu the numbers don't match ....

Domestic = US + Canada
Foreign = Everywhere else (Mexico is foreign)
Worldwide = Domestic + Foreign
 
Reynolds and Launter need to team-up in the ultimate bomb

the shouldn't even be subtle about it, it's a buddy cop film about bomb defeusal

It should be about the development of the Tsar Bomba.

They told them to make the biggest bomb the world has ever seen.

Reynolds
Lautner

in M. Night Shyamalan's

BOMBA
 
RED 2 came out this week?

Another odd placing on the release schedule. I don't know, maybe they were planning more for home video and rental before Christmas. Who knows. The original didn't come out during summer, I don't know why they suddenly thought it was a blockbuster film.
 
everyone go buy Pacific Rim toys and the game app.

there are some small toys out right now, but these bad ass fuckers are coming out later.

-------

18 inch Gypsy Danger up for pre-order.

http://www.toywiz.com/18gipsy.html

-------

yKZkiky.jpg


4ehuOBz.jpg


gBuQNH3.jpg


E82mmQM.jpg


IBOvgJa.jpg


HAknuWT.jpg


U2y24LT.jpg


nqJB2aY.jpg
 
Nope, just pointing out that like

Snakes On A Plane

Scott Pilgrim

Sucker Punch
In no way does Scott Pilgrim belong with the likes of SOAP or Sucker Punch. It's actually well written, superbly directed and just a well thought out & executed movie overall. The only bigger flaw is that it has Cera as a lead character. Though not everyone hates him, he's as far from lead man material as can possibly be.
 
Next weekend will be the first weekend in awhile that we can't talk about an opener bombing. The Wolverine is the only thing opening wide, and tracking on that is looking pretty good.
 
people hating on Scott Pilgrim?

both the comics and the movie are fucking awesome and fun.

Speed Racer, Scott Pilgrim and Pacific Rim, yall deserved so much better.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom