Page 1 of 57

The Official Box Office Thread

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 5:39 pm
by Pops Freshenmeyer
Here's an interesting article on new software being developed for predicting box office results.

http://tinyurl.com/atq84

Imagine a world where those criteria are plugged in and movies are greenlit based on the results! Scary.

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 5:51 pm
by EliCash
that's pretty ALF. those things dont work.

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 5:51 pm
by jgraphix
It's the beginning of the end.

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 5:56 pm
by Pops Freshenmeyer
EliCash wrote:that's pretty ALF. those things dont work.


Or when they do, you end up with Ryan Reynolds in "Just Friends."

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 6:01 pm
by DorkmanScott
Here's a crazy thought, Hollywood. Instead of spending money on software and research and focus groups trying to figure out how to second-guess the audience of the future, why don't you spend that money on people who actually have some fucking talent for making movies? You know, get someone capable of writing a script to write a script, get people who can act, get someone who knows there's more to directing than pointing the camera and clicking it on. Make movies that are based on stories instead of spreadsheets.

I won't even patent that. You can have it free.

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 6:38 pm
by vicious_bastard
I'm confused. Would this mean a studio would put more or less money into the picture, 'knowing' it was going to be a success?

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 6:42 pm
by Pops Freshenmeyer
I don't know. I'm guessing, if the program works, they'll plug and chug all kinds of numbers, seeing what stars the film succeed with, release dates, number of screens, etc. Maybe if Warners had this program for Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, they wouldn't have opened it so limited. I feel sorry for the good films that don't stand a chance at making any money and will never be greenlit, at least by studios.

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 7:28 pm
by DorkmanScott
vicious_bastard wrote:I'm confused. Would this mean a studio would put more or less money into the picture, 'knowing' it was going to be a success?

Hell no. It means that they'll assume a movie's success is a foregone conclusion and cut the budget down to whatever number gives them the best investment-profit ratio.

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 8:35 pm
by Shane
Any movie created due to this is destined to be the biggest pile of donkey shit ever.

Worse than Julia Roberts movies and worse than I know what you did last summer

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 8:53 pm
by vicious_bastard
DorkmanScott wrote:
vicious_bastard wrote:I'm confused. Would this mean a studio would put more or less money into the picture, 'knowing' it was going to be a success?

Hell no. It means that they'll assume a movie's success is a foregone conclusion and cut the budget down to whatever number gives them the best investment-profit ratio.


That's what I thought - no wonder the studio is remaining anonymous. It can only be bad for the public.

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 10:10 pm
by Pops Freshenmeyer
IMDB says Kong will make $75million over the five day weekend, Drudge says the studio's predicting $110m. Any guesses? I'm leaning closer towards the later.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:16 pm
by Koola
Wow - this surprised me. BoxOfficeMojo just reported that KING KONG made 'only' 9,7 million dollars first wednesday!! (in North-America)

Isn't this WAAAYYY behind expectations?

My theater in Oslo was PACKED last night, and everyone loved the film. So I'm surprised.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:17 pm
by Koola
Hmm, I thought that hyperlink-stuff worked. Apparently it didn't my bad. Anyway, this is the link: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/daily/chart/

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:18 pm
by Alex DeLarge
Just wait till the weekend, not many people, at least at my age(highschool) like to go see movies on week days.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:21 pm
by havocSchultz
meh... i don't enjoy boxofficemojo - i prefer guru - at least he does a write up expalining why and what and how the movie made that much money and what-not - he's supposed to have an update later today in regards to the first day or so of release - should be able to go into a little more in depth then...

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:24 pm
by Koola
Well, I also track the Prophets, they write up and keep a very cool style on their analysis.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:26 pm
by MelaWolf
For people with jobs and/or in school (which is most of us), a 3 hour movie is tough to do on a weeknight.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:28 pm
by Pudie
You wure it's all of Wednesday?

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:28 pm
by Koola
Hmm. Here it's more like: Finally an event of ANY kind!!! So we all flock to a huge 970 seat cinema in my neighbourhood, and it's packed, and joy everywhere. And yeah, the christmas holdiday has also set in. So I guess we have time.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:30 pm
by Rindain
For comparison, here are the opening Wednesday #'s for the 3 LOTR films:

Fellowship of the Ring: $18,214,211
The Two Towers: $26,159,972
Return of the King: $34,450,834

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:36 pm
by TheBaxter
The expectations I've heard have been about $75mil for the first 5 days. So $10mil on Wednesday seems about right for that estimate. I don't think this is the kind of movie that gets people to rush out on a Wednesday night for, like a Star Wars or LOTR movie. To an AICN'er who hears the Kong-fetishizing and PJ-fetishizing that goes on there on a daily basis, you'd think this would be bigger than Spiderman, but to the average moviegoer it's a 3-hour long movie about a big monkey. I'll be waiting til Sunday, or maybe one night next week, to see it.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:37 pm
by Koola
TheBaxter; you've got a point.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:38 pm
by DinoDeLaurentiis
Just a the note, eh... Iffa you do go anna see a the movie, donna take a the bambinos, eh? It's a not like a the original Kong, eh?

Remember how when a you were a the bambino anna you parents, they took a you to a my Kong? Anna remember how uncomfortable they were when a the script, she make a the funny about a the "Deep Throat" anna Kong sees Jessie's boobies anna such?

Well they donna do that inna this a movie but HOLY CRAPPA those little bambinos gonna to be scared by alla sorts of a stuff, eh? Nightmares for a sure!

Listen to a your Uncle Dino anna do right by a the bambinos.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:40 pm
by TheBaxter
Also by comparison, Titanic opened to about $28mil in it's first weekend, and we all know how that turned out. If Kong is any good, people will go see it. Then again, Kong is no Leo DiCaprio.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:41 pm
by JAGUART
The Midnight Cleveland Premiere I went to Tuesday AM was only about 2/3 full, which was disappointing.

I was all set to wear a gorilla suit and carry a barbie doll, but decided against it because as I arrived the turnout was lame.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:42 pm
by TheBaxter
DinoDeLaurentiis wrote:Just a the note, eh... Iffa you do go anna see a the movie, donna take a the bambinos, eh? It's a not like a the original Kong, eh?

Remember how when a you were a the bambino anna you parents, they took a you to a my Kong? Anna remember how uncomfortable they were when a the script, she make a the funny about a the "Deep Throat" anna Kong sees Jessie's boobies anna such?

Well they donna do that inna this a movie but HOLY CRAPPA those little bambinos gonna to be scared by alla sorts of a stuff, eh? Nightmares for a sure!

Listen to a your Uncle Dino anna do right by a the bambinos.


I'm still traumatized by the scene of the guy getting flattened by Kong stepping on him. I can't walk anywhere without looking up every 10 steps or so to make sure there's not a giant foot about to squash me. Damn you Dino!

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:43 pm
by brainiac
Excellent advice Dino.... the movie is scary and loud and long so give the kids and the audience - who didn't pay to hear your kids cry - a break and leave them with their nana.

Also, how do I find the Prophet and the Guru?

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:45 pm
by DinoDeLaurentiis
That's a the good point, eh Brianiac? The sound inna the movie alone, she is enough a to give a the bambinos a the nightmares, eh?

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:45 pm
by burlivesleftnut
I had read that many analysts predicted Kong was going to make less its opening weekend than Narnia.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:47 pm
by MasterWhedon
Please be careful about SPOILERS in here, as this is also a forum for folks who haven't seen the film yet. Unless the forum is clearly marked, it's just a common courtesy.

Please either clearly mark them, shrink them to tiny text or mark them in black like this, so people have to hit either the quote button, highlight or copy and paste to see.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:47 pm
by burlivesleftnut
DinoDeLaurentiis wrote:That's a the good point, eh Brianiac? The sound inna the movie alone, she is enough a to give a the bambinos a the nightmares, eh?


Holy crap... that one scream. Oh my.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:50 pm
by El Scorcho
Maybe I've been totally desensitized, but I didn't find anything scary at all. Besides the heights of the Empire State Building.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:55 pm
by DinoDeLaurentiis
MasterWhedon wrote:Please be careful about SPOILERS in here, as this is also a forum for folks who haven't seen the film yet. Unless the forum is clearly marked, it's just a common courtesy.


That's a the good point, MasterWhedon... but inna the case of a the Kong squashing the guy, I think a the poster was a referring to my Kong when a the Charlie Grodin, he get a his a, how you say? "comeuppance," eh?

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:58 pm
by MasterWhedon
DinoDeLaurentiis wrote:That's a the good point, MasterWhedon... but inna the case of a the Kong squashing the guy, I think a the poster was a referring to my Kong when a the Charlie Grodin, he get a his a, how you say? "comeuppance," eh?

Still can't believe you cast Charles Grodin...



<shudder>

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 3:59 pm
by brainiac
I'm thinking many scenes are intense and scary for small children
-- not scary to mature and sophisticated adults like us. :lol:

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:05 pm
by austenandrews
I haven't felt my skin crawl like it did in the ravine scene for a long time (unless you count when I rented Cannibal Holocaust in October).

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:07 pm
by TheBaxter
DinoDeLaurentiis wrote:
MasterWhedon wrote:Please be careful about SPOILERS in here, as this is also a forum for folks who haven't seen the film yet. Unless the forum is clearly marked, it's just a common courtesy.


That's a the good point, MasterWhedon... but inna the case of a the Kong squashing the guy, I think a the poster was a referring to my Kong when a the Charlie Grodin, he get a his a, how you say? "comeuppance," eh?


Yes, I was, but I was trying to be thoughtful by not mentioning the name of the squashee. But looks like you've gone ahead and spoiled your own film. Damn you again, Dino!

BTW is there an expiration date for spoilers? We all know Bruce Willis is a ghost here, right?

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:08 pm
by MasterWhedon
I spoke with Koola and he's down with making this the Official Box Office Thread, a place we can report in on a weekly basis about weekend tallies and such.

Please remember to keep it NON SPOILER territory!! Thanks!

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:09 pm
by havocSchultz
TheBaxter wrote:
DinoDeLaurentiis wrote:
MasterWhedon wrote:Please be careful about SPOILERS in here, as this is also a forum for folks who haven't seen the film yet. Unless the forum is clearly marked, it's just a common courtesy.


That's a the good point, MasterWhedon... but inna the case of a the Kong squashing the guy, I think a the poster was a referring to my Kong when a the Charlie Grodin, he get a his a, how you say? "comeuppance," eh?


Yes, I was, but I was trying to be thoughtful by not mentioning the name of the squashee. But looks like you've gone ahead and spoiled your own film. Damn you again, Dino!

BTW is there an expiration date for spoilers? We all know Bruce Willis is a ghost here, right?


what - a ghost... dammit all to fuck...

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:10 pm
by Cineister Jim
DAMN! Beat me to the Titanic comparison!

Monday will be a better sign...this could work like Titanic did, bulding an audience over several months, getting older people into the theater...or hell, it could flop hard!

I'm just sick of great movies getting passed over by audiences while diaper stains like Fantastic Four bank!

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:11 pm
by MasterWhedon
TheBaxter wrote:BTW is there an expiration date for spoilers? We all know Bruce Willis is a ghost here, right?

I'd say keep major spoiler discussion to the thread for the specific movie review, where it can be clearly marked.

Again, I know it seems a little anal, but I'm sick of having a movie completely ruined for me in the TalkBacks. Thanks!

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:12 pm
by mraig
They should just get the computer program to write, direct, and star in the movie too. I am so fucking sick of seeing movies made with human input. Humans are imperfect and make mistakes. Computers are perfect and better than humans. They should also have computers watch the movies. Humans sometimes can't understand the plot, or miss subtle things that the director puts in the frame. Computers can be programmed to see everything.

I would say that probably the only bad thing about computers is that they were invented by humans, which gives them certain inherent flaws. We should have the computers invent a kind of computer. I bet that kind would be perfect, and would be even better at writing, directing, and starring in movies.

In closing, I would just like to say Yay for computers.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:15 pm
by TheBaxter
havocSchultz wrote:
TheBaxter wrote:
DinoDeLaurentiis wrote:
MasterWhedon wrote:Please be careful about SPOILERS in here, as this is also a forum for folks who haven't seen the film yet. Unless the forum is clearly marked, it's just a common courtesy.


That's a the good point, MasterWhedon... but inna the case of a the Kong squashing the guy, I think a the poster was a referring to my Kong when a the Charlie Grodin, he get a his a, how you say? "comeuppance," eh?


Yes, I was, but I was trying to be thoughtful by not mentioning the name of the squashee. But looks like you've gone ahead and spoiled your own film. Damn you again, Dino!

BTW is there an expiration date for spoilers? We all know Bruce Willis is a ghost here, right?


what - a ghost... dammit all to fuck...


Yeah, kinda makes you see Die Hard in a whole new light, doesn't it?

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:22 pm
by havocSchultz
TheBaxter wrote:
havocSchultz wrote:
TheBaxter wrote:
DinoDeLaurentiis wrote:
MasterWhedon wrote:Please be careful about SPOILERS in here, as this is also a forum for folks who haven't seen the film yet. Unless the forum is clearly marked, it's just a common courtesy.


That's a the good point, MasterWhedon... but inna the case of a the Kong squashing the guy, I think a the poster was a referring to my Kong when a the Charlie Grodin, he get a his a, how you say? "comeuppance," eh?


Yes, I was, but I was trying to be thoughtful by not mentioning the name of the squashee. But looks like you've gone ahead and spoiled your own film. Damn you again, Dino!

BTW is there an expiration date for spoilers? We all know Bruce Willis is a ghost here, right?


what - a ghost... dammit all to fuck...


Yeah, kinda makes you see Die Hard in a whole new light, doesn't it?


what - die hard - dammit all to fuck...

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:22 pm
by Koola
About NON-spoiler-attitude.... MasterWhedon: Can you make Harry remove his MAJOR Brokeback Mountain-spoiler in his KING KONG-review...?

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:25 pm
by MasterWhedon
Koola wrote:About NON-spoiler-attitude.... MasterWhedon: Can you make Grande Rojo remove his MAJOR Brokeback Mountain-spoiler in his KING KONG-review...?

Dude, I don't have THAT kind of power...

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:35 pm
by Koola
Well - someone should. Heh. It's kind of like spoiling the end of Million Dollar Baby, which I'm ssoooooo happy noone spoiled me for.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:43 pm
by El Scorcho
mraig wrote:They should just get the computer program to write, direct, and star in the movie too. I am so fucking sick of seeing movies made with human input. Humans are imperfect and make mistakes. Computers are perfect and better than humans. They should also have computers watch the movies. Humans sometimes can't understand the plot, or miss subtle things that the director puts in the frame. Computers can be programmed to see everything.

I would say that probably the only bad thing about computers is that they were invented by humans, which gives them certain inherent flaws. We should have the computers invent a kind of computer. I bet that kind would be perfect, and would be even better at writing, directing, and starring in movies.

In closing, I would just like to say Yay for computers.


ROFL!!!

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:01 pm
by Ribbons
KING KONG!

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:17 pm
by BobGobbler
Uh, it's pretty obvious that this is far below expectations.

This is a 3+ hour movie about a monkey. It was clear that Universal was worried about the box office when they started pumping out those ALF "romance" commercials. They are trying to draw in the romance buck that Titanic grabbed.

Nobody is going to flock to see a monkey fall in love with a chick, and Adrien Brody is not Leonardo DiCaprio. This movie will struggle to make back the ridiculous budget.