• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Wkd BO 02•05-07•16 - no Chinese or Martians = FAIL, Caesar! 4 Coens, TFA hits 2B WW

Status
Not open for further replies.

xaosslug

Member
Q7zP3VO.jpg
zXjaiRr.jpg
XpAXV4m.jpg
GOccjfZ.jpg
uXkImKH.jpg


tomatometer:
Cfk79.gif
80% Kung Fu Panda 3
9wcOG.gif
79% Hail, Caesar!
kavuF.gif
83% The Revenant
8vteV.gif
92% Star Wars: The Force Awakens
5f4ew.gif
08% The Choice
aAS8X.gif
40% Pride and Prejudice and Zombies

metacritic:
*click pic(s) for source*

‘Kung Fu Panda 3’ Trumps ‘Hail, Caesar!,’ ‘Pride & Prejudice & Zombies’ Flops


Hollywood fumbled the ball during a quiet Super Bowl weekend at the multiplexes as new releases such as “Hail, Caesar!” and “Pride and Prejudice and Zombies” failed to make much noise.

For the second weekend in a row, DreamWorks Animation’s “Kung Fu Panda 3” easily topped box office charts. The animated sequel added $21 million to its $69 million domestic haul. The film is playing particularly well in China, where it is being distributed by Oriental DreamWorks, a $330-million East-West joint venture. It crossed the $100 million mark in the People’s Republic this weekend after opening day-and-date in the U.S. and China on Jan. 29.

Universal’s “Hail, Caesar!,” a sendup of the Hollywood studio system from the Coen Brothers, fared best among the new entrants, though that’s grading on a generous curve. It picked up a mediocre $11.4 million for a second place finish. A C-minus CinemaScore could spell trouble for the film’s long-term prospects, signaling the satire is divisive with audiences.

Universal distribution chief Nicholas Carpou said that CinemaScore may not capture the Brothers’ fan base, noting that previous films from the pair, such as “The Ladykillers” (C CinemaScore) and “Intolerable Cruelty” (C+) have scored poorly, but made showed some endurance. The pair’s biggest hit, “True Grit,” earned a B+ CinemaScore.

“There are some films that really defy polling in a general sense,” said Carpou. “The Coen Brothers are legitimate auteur filmmakers and they have a loyal fan base they is coming out to see this movie.”

“Hail, Caesar!” stars Josh Brolin, Channing Tatum, George Clooney, and Scarlett Johansson and cost $22 million to produce. Universal distributed the film across 2,222 locations. The opening weekend crowd was 52% male, 69% over the age of 35, and 86% Caucasian.

The picture was brutal for the other films elbowing into theaters. “Pride and Prejudice and Zombies,” a hybrid of Jane Austen’s romances and “The Walking Dead,” earned a wan $5.2 million from 2,931 locations. It’s another sign that Seth Grahame-Smith, the author of the book that inspired the movie, has had trouble translating his genre-mashing style to the big screen. Grahame-Smith’s “Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter” also struggled at the box office when it was released in 2012. Sony and Screen Gems distributed the film, while Cross Creek fully financed the $28 million production.

The film skewed female, with women making up 58% of ticket buyers and was seeing as a counter-programming play against the Super Bowl.

“We would have liked to have done more,” said Rory Bruer, Sony’s distribution chief. “It’s a movie that screened well and that we all really liked a lot. It’s clever and smart and fun.”

“Pride and Prejudice and Zombies” has been in the works for years, with directors such as David O. Russell and stars such as Natalie Portman falling into and out of the project at various stages in its development. The cast that finally shepherded the film to screens includes Lily James, Matt Smith, Sam Riley and Jack Huston, with Burr Steers (“Igby Goes Down”) directing from a script he wrote.

Lionsgate’s “The Choice” rounded out the top five, mustering a feeble $6.1 million from 2,631 North American theaters. The story of a veteran (Benjamin Walker) who falls in love with his neighbor (Teresa Palmer) comes from the pen of romance novelist Nicholas Sparks. Given the tepid reception, it seems unlikely to rival the popularity of previous Sparks’ adaptations such as “Dear John” or “The Notebook,” both of which made more than $80 million stateside. Lionsgate acquired the film for $10 million.

Two holdovers picked up third and fourth place on the charts — “The Revenant” and “Star Wars: The Force Awakens.” The Leonardo Dicaprio survivalist drama picked up $7.1 million to bring its domestic total to $149.7 million. “Star Wars: The Force Awakens” nabbed $6.9 million bringing its North American haul to a godly $906 million. On Saturday, the space opera became only the third film in history along with “Avatar” and “Titanic” to cross $2 billion globally.

In limited release, the Weinstein Company debuted the Ethan Hawke and Emma Watson psychological thriller “Regression” in 100 theaters where it eked out $31,000 for a dismal $310 per-screen average.

Look for ticket sales to flatline on Sunday as Americans gather around their television sets to watch the Denver Broncos take on the Carolina Panthers.

More to come…


*click pic for full list/source*


*click pic for full list/source*
 

cj_iwakura

Member
Not a good sign for the future of the parody. I've heard compared to the Wayans' tripe, P&P&Z is practically Shakespeare.
 
Any chance that it can pass snow white on the all time inflation adjusted list? It would need to make another $40 million
 

kswiston

Member
Kswiston, how much more do you think star wars has in it?

Around $30M domestic. I am not sure about overseas. Maybe about the same.

I see it ending between $2050M and $2075M worldwide. It might creep a bit higher than that if late legs are really great, but I don't see $2.1B happening.
 

Peru

Member
Not a good sign for the future of the parody. I've heard compared to the Wayans' tripe, P&P&Z is practically Shakespeare.

I don't know how the movie solves it but the book is bafflingly lazy. Literally the original text copy/pasted with bursts of zombies added. Calling it "parody" is very generous.
 

BumRush

Member
Around $30M domestic. I am not sure about overseas. Maybe about the same.

I see it ending between $2050M and $2075M worldwide. It might creep a bit higher than that if late legs are really great, but I don't see $2.1B happening.

One hell of a run. It's insane to think that the rest of the trilogy plus the prequels easily has another 5M+ in it over the next 4-5 years...guaranteed
 

John Dunbar

correct about everything
is the choice one of those delightful christian movies or just some random crap?

edit: just random, it would seem. bummer.
 
Did they even bother to track that for those 7 episode Star Wars marathons in front of TFA?

Nah, I don't think so.

TFA will likely make a good chunk more money when it's resurrected for showings pre-Episode 8, too.

We went over this in the last thread, but the "re-release" hopes are probably false ones for any number of reasons:

The Avatar Special Edition Re-release (w/ 9 minutes of extra footage re-edited into the film) happened in August of 2010 (8 months after initial release) and took12 weeks in 3D and IMAX 3D theaters to make another 10 million.

Seeing as Abrams doesn't like doing Special Edition cuts of his films, and there's another Star Wars movie opening in December anyway, and a Force Awakens re-release anytime during the summer season is going to suffer pretty steep competition, I'm not seeing a re-release of Force Awakens anytime in 2016 doing much more than 20-30 mil in a limited run at best. I mean, 20-30 is being really optimistic, too. Titanic's highly successful re-release was helped by the fact it was converted to 3D, the Chinese market, and had been off theater screens for 15 years.

If it's going to make a billion domestic at any point, it'll have to happen in a couple years, when the novelty of being able to see it at the theater returns to such a level that it can maybe feel like an event again, much like the Special Editions did 20 years after Star Wars initially opened.

And by "a couple years" I mean more like 10.
 
Problem with Abe Lincoln Vampire Hunter was that it took itself seriously despite the ridiculous premise. I wonder if P&P had the same problem.
 

cj_iwakura

Member
I don't know how the movie solves it but the book is bafflingly lazy. Literally the original text copy/pasted with bursts of zombies added. Calling it "parody" is very generous.

The trailer for the movie looks great, like they're playing it 100% straight... except zombies sometimes.

I'll share my thoughts when I see it on Tuesday, and I am very picky about parodies.


It takes a lot more effort to make a movie entertaining, so I'm confident it'll be better than the book.
 

Abounder

Banned
TFA will likely make a good chunk more money when it's resurrected for showings pre-Episode 8, too.

My guess: Star Wars saga will be ready for 3D marathons at Ep8, and TFA will be a part of it. So a 'new' TFA might count towards just Ep8 but I'm no expert

Anyway amazing numbers for TFA. Going to double Ultron domestically
 

xaosslug

Member
Is America finally getting over Nicolas Sparks adaptations? One can hope!

imo, it's because producers started thinking the material (that it's a Nicholas Sparks adaptation) could carry the films as w/ every adaptation the cast becomes lesser known... and they's wrong-o. LOL
 

border

Member
Why is it that The Walking Dead nets some of the highest ratings on television, but the interest in zombie movies is virtually nothing? They all seem to tank quite quickly.
 
That title lol, did they apologize yet?

That's not gonna happen. I bet the next person to try and bring up the Yamato interview gets both barrels just as bad.

Not that there's likely to be a next person, because Film Twitter has circled the wagons HARD around those bros.
 

RPGamer92

Banned
Why is it that The Walking Dead nets some of the highest ratings on television, but the interest in zombie movies is virtually nothing? They all seem to tank quite quickly.
Probably because people are more attached to TWD characters because they're more familiar to audiences than random generic zombie movie. TWD being a show also has the chance for character development that most movies don't do.
 

kswiston

Member
Also, Force Awakens has a shot at passing Furious 7's foreign total in the next couple weeks, yeah?

Seems like a long shot. TFA is more than $60M away from Furious 7 overseas. Seeing as the film made $14M during the entire week, it would need amazing holds.
 

Ridley327

Member
True Grit made 170M dom? That can't be right, right?

It was really damn popular. Great cast combined with the optics of appearing to be a remake of an already well-loved film that had one of John Wayne's most iconic performances. It was that once-in-a-decade western that did really damn well on every level.
 
Seems like a long shot. TFA is more than $60M away from Furious 7 overseas. .

It is? I musta read that wrong, I thought it was sub 40.

Apologies.

(although getting within 50 mil without China contributing a whole lot is still noteworthy. The UK really turned out for this movie)
 

Ridley327

Member
Why is it that The Walking Dead nets some of the highest ratings on television, but the interest in zombie movies is virtually nothing? They all seem to tank quite quickly.

Zombie movies have traditionally done better on home video. It also doesn't help that this was PG-13, which means you've already lost the more dedicated horror fans.
 

kswiston

Member
I sort of wonder if getting 16 episodes a year of the Walking Dead, plus all of those lesser Zombie shows is enough to satisfy most genre fans. Why spend $10 going to see basically the same shit (or a spoof of it), unless it's coming with the sort of budget that allows for visuals you can't do on TV?
 

cj_iwakura

Member
Zombie movies have traditionally done better on home video. It also doesn't help that this was PG-13, which means you've already lost the more dedicated horror fans.

Hilariously enough, it seems to have drawn Jane Austen fans instead. Zombie fans may not want Elizabethan drama in their horror, but Austin fans sure want some zombies in their drama.
 

Ridley327

Member
I sort of wonder if getting 16 episodes a year of the Walking Dead, plus all of those lesser Zombie shows is enough to satisfy most genre fans. Why spend $10 going to see basically the same shit (or a spoof of it), unless it's coming with the sort of budget that allows for visuals you can't do on TV?

It's really hard to imagine what a movie could do that the show can't. They've pulled off some really gnarly kills on that show that could stand to get on the MPAA immediate snip-snip list.

One of the bigger benefits of having one of the best SFX makeup talents ever as an executive producer.
 

pestul

Member
It will be very interesting to see how World War: Z 2 performs since the first did so well financially ($540M).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom