X3 Box Office Tracker [Archive] - Page 14

Pickle-El

06-21-2006, 11:16 PM

Well it has 7 million to go to reach X2 worldwide total. It still has to open in Japan and China, there's 25 million from those 2 countrys. Plus more domestic, more overseas before that time. What do you consider a "large margin" ?

X1 to X2 jump...

X1-= Worldwide: $296,250,053
X2-= Worldwide: $407,557,613

About 110 Mill would have been amazing. This franchise was going up, up and :o........only to be brought down when it should have been X-Men's version of 'The Return Of The King' in scale, scope, and success.

Oh well.....There will be sequels, DVD sales/rentals will gaurantee that.

Pickle-El

06-22-2006, 12:29 AM

BULL SH#T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh really!!

I don't think so buddy u want X3 to drop more than the estimates BUT it won't.

Btw superman and their fans suck balls.

Batman and wolverine do NOT wear underwear in MOVIES. They would look extremely stupid and GAY. They wear in the comics and sometimes in the cartoons.

But Superman does in the movies so he is GAY.

This is the best part, then you say THIS to Lightning:

please check before saying something.

Child, think before speaking.

Avalanche

06-22-2006, 07:28 AM

^ The Superman being gay because he wears his underwear on the outside is by far the best quote. He exhibits such worldly knowledge with his quotes. Wiser than any of us could ever hope to be.

Thankfully, although I like to kiss other boys, I wear my boxers under my jeans, so I'm clearly not gay. It's amazing how where you wear your underwear can change your sexuality.

Carp Man

06-22-2006, 09:40 AM

Leno commented in his monolog last night about reports about Superman being gay. Batman and Robin have had those questions for years. And now Batwoman is comming out, sooooooooooooo. What's up at DC ?

Carp Man

06-22-2006, 01:42 PM

Ok. Wednesdays #'s are in. $ 843,088. Updated #'s below. Over the 400 million mark worldwide. $ 7.3 million from X2 worldwide figures.

Xfanfan

06-22-2006, 01:45 PM

yes the numbers are in, I got these from Box office mojo

Domestic: $218,806,943 54.7%
+ Foreign: $181,436,089 45.3%

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

= Worldwide: $400,243,032

and like the poster above said it made

$843,088 yesterday.

Xfanfan

PowersOfMind

06-22-2006, 02:33 PM

Thats some pretty big numbers for Superman to go up against. If it were generating more buzz I would say it would definitely pass X3 but im not sure.

Avalanche

06-22-2006, 02:38 PM

^

I'm almost certain Superman will pass X3 in both the domestic and internation box office. Not sure if it will have a larger opening weekend, but I think it will go on to be financially more successful, and a better received film in general.

I expect myself to enjoy Superman Returns more than X3, which is something I'd never had thought a few months back.

CapBeerCino

06-22-2006, 02:50 PM

X3 has already done $398 worldwide. So i am very sure the movie will surpass X2 worldwide without any doubt.

It better surpass x-3 with a $100 cause that's the budget difference between the two. :o

Amm-arD

06-22-2006, 03:14 PM

well considering the figures X3 gross will easily surpass x2's gross, even before the DVD's are sold!

Avalanche

06-22-2006, 03:16 PM

well considering the figures X3 gross will easily surpass x2's gross, even before the DVD's are sold!
DVDs aren't included in X2's gross are they?

The X2 DVD made a lot of money from what I can remember. It was a very large selling DVD.

antariksh

06-22-2006, 03:51 PM

It better surpass x-3 with a $100 cause that's the budget difference between the two. :o

Xmen aint a strong franchise. It is a loser compared to spider-man so forget it.

Xmen movies open big then get mediocre legs PERIOD.

expect the same from X3.

X3 budget is $165 million +$90 million in worldwide marketing and distribution.

It will break even with worldwide boxoffice and then make tons on DVD sales and rentals.

antariksh

06-22-2006, 03:55 PM

DVDs aren't included in X2's gross are they?

The X2 DVD made a lot of money from what I can remember. It was a very large selling DVD.

hahahahahaha

check the link-
http://www.leesmovieinfo.net/Video-Sales.php?y=2003&type=3

X2 was released on nov. 25 and by the end of the year sold 5.30 million units ($92.40 million) after that it might have sold another 1-2 million copies that is it.

so it made no where close to the money it made in boxoffice on DVD sales.

Lightning Strykez!

06-22-2006, 04:02 PM

please check before saying something.

Excuse me?

Considering the content of your posts lately it is you who needs to check themselves before typing anything.

I suggest you settle down.

antariksh

06-22-2006, 04:19 PM

Excuse me?

Considering the content of your posts lately it is you who needs to check themselves before typing anything.

I suggest you settle down.

OK no problems. I will settle down.

Actually i am myself so bored of talking about X3.

U know there is an indian superhero movie KRRISH that is going to destroy superman returns.

The first review is amazing.
http://www.indiafm.com/movies/review/12415/index.html

Iceman

06-22-2006, 04:42 PM

Finally the big 400 is on the board. :up: :up:

Advanced Dark

06-22-2006, 05:11 PM

hahahahahaha

check the link-
http://www.leesmovieinfo.net/Video-Sales.php?y=2003&type=3

X2 was released on nov. 25 and by the end of the year sold 5.30 million units ($92.40 million) after that it might have sold another 1-2 million copies that is it.

so it made no where close to the money it made in boxoffice on DVD sales.

You forget rental revenue, international rental and sales too. That's not tracked online.

TheVileOne

06-22-2006, 05:24 PM

X-men 3 could've made a hell of a lot more money if it wasn't such a rushed, hacked up disappointment.

That's a fact.

There's a reason X-men 2 was so much more successful than the first movie.

X-men 3's money is about on par with X-2 if you think about adjusted grosses. It's really not that impressive considering the budget was twice as big as the second movie.

Carp Man

06-22-2006, 06:08 PM

Summer 2006: 'Pirates' Likely to Squash the Competition
The top prize this summer may end up going to Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest. The epic production has potential to earn upwards of $100 million for three days, and maybe even $400 or more domestically (which would put it in direct competition with Shrek 2). The original opened to $46.6 million in three days and $70.6 million in five; and with the help of tremendous word of mouth, the film finished with $305.4 million domestically – a staggering 6.5% multiplier. The film was also a phenomenon on DVD.

Superman Returns could take second place. Bryan Singer, who previously worked on X2, is behind this remake and was able to lead X into an $85.6 million debut, and is now becoming a big power-player in Hollywood (X2 finished its run with nearly $215.0 million). Batman Begins should be a good comparison in the possibility that Superman underperforms; though its story is very well known, it is not guaranteed that there will be a huge rush-out effect. However, with Singer’s credibility stronger than (Batman’s) Christopher Nolan’s (who was riding off Memento and Insomnia), that factor could really make up for Superman’s weak spots and help deliver a sizzling performance throughout the summer.

Thanks to the $123.0 million four-day opening, X3 is looking to beat X2's total, but isn't likely to near $300 due to being very front-loaded. Most diehard fans will have seen X at least twice by the end of its second week, which should lead to a long line of weekend drops.

http://www.leesmovieinfo.net/Predictions.php?per_day=438

They also predict Superman $ 78 million opening, $ 285 million domestic. POTC, $ 105 million opening, $ 445 million domestic.

phantom47

06-22-2006, 06:13 PM

Carp Man

06-22-2006, 06:22 PM

Per rottentomatoes

NUMBERS
Box Office: $214,813,155
VHS Rentals: $7,330,000

51.8 million was the last X2 was in the top 50 http://www.imdb.com/boxoffice/rentals?date=2004-01-25

so for total rentals in the US its safe to say 60 million

+ International rentals and US and International VHS and DVD sales

so maybe another 60 mil = another 120 afterthe movie release

Lee's also has 92.5 million in DVD sales so 92.5 + 7.3 in rentals = 99.8 million + 407 million in box office = 506.8 million total. Not bad at all for a $ 110 million investment.

phantom47

06-22-2006, 06:24 PM

92.5 in DVD sales + last known figure of renatls 52 + 407 BO = 551 mil

Carp Man

06-22-2006, 06:29 PM

^^ does that include international DVD and internaional rentals and sales or just rentals

No idea. Just know the sales and rental figures. Don't know if they cove international sales. I would assume that is just domestic.

Advanced Dark

06-22-2006, 06:33 PM

No it doesn't. Oh and Carpman check out the FF2 thread. I have a bit of speculation that I think will turn out to be fact re: Silver Surfer.

phantom47

06-22-2006, 06:34 PM

92.5 in DVD sales + last known figure of renatls 52 + 407 BO = 551 mil

Advanced Dark

06-22-2006, 06:35 PM

It brought in much more than that w/TV rights (Cable/Network), PPV, Hotel distribution,Airlines, etc...

...and even a bit more on PSP sales though marginal.

Carp Man

06-22-2006, 06:42 PM

It brought in much more than that w/TV rights (Cable/Network), PPV, Hotel distribution,Airlines, etc...

...and even a bit more on PSP sales though marginal.

Edit : double post.

Carp Man

06-22-2006, 06:43 PM

It brought in much more than that w/TV rights (Cable/Network), PPV, Hotel distribution,Airlines, etc...

...and even a bit more on PSP sales though marginal.

If it made TOTAL with everything 600 to 700 million, very suscufull.Give me a link to your post.

PowersOfMind

06-22-2006, 06:47 PM

Is it bad that I hope Pirates triumphs over all?

Advanced Dark

06-22-2006, 06:59 PM

Pirates will it's not doubt. Superman should get #2 and X3 will be #3. What's Superman's budget? I hear it's near 300 million...what's the deal there??

PowersOfMind

06-22-2006, 07:10 PM

I thought it was 350? I think that was what I heard.

Mike059jig

06-22-2006, 07:11 PM

Carp Man

06-22-2006, 07:16 PM

Pirates will it's not doubt. Superman should get #2 and X3 will be #3. What's Superman's budget? I hear it's near 300 million...what's the deal there??

Mojo has 260 million for SR, nothing for Spiderman.

Carp Man

06-22-2006, 07:17 PM

I know Spider-man budget it 300 million.....sooo...Superman returns budget is not that I think its reported to be around 230-250..I could careless about budget cause SR is going to be a monster hit seeing that everyone's praising it

Word of moth will be huge, seeing how WB likes to skimp on advertising. Why I don't believe it will be a fast starter, and POTC is going to crush all movies this year. SR 2nd ? X3 3rd ? I can see that, with nothing huge comming out rest of the year.

Mike059jig

06-22-2006, 07:22 PM

I have no doubts POTC 2 will be a Powerhouse this summer..but as for now it seems that the 2 movie Juggernauts are going to be SR and POTC 2 respectively

Carp Man

06-22-2006, 07:33 PM

I have no doubts POTC 2 will be a Powerhouse this summer..but as for now it seems that the 2 movie Juggernauts are going to be SR and POTC 2 respectively

And X3. It will make at least 450 total by the time it is all said and done, and if POTC makes 600, and SR makes 500, 450 would be right up there. X3 will be right up there, no matter how the DC fans detest that thought. And SR may not make 500. It might be right there with X3.

crappymovie

06-22-2006, 07:45 PM

Word of moth will be huge, seeing how WB likes to skimp on advertising. Why I don't believe it will be a fast starter, and POTC is going to crush all movies this year. SR 2nd ? X3 3rd ? I can see that, with nothing huge comming out rest of the year.

domestically?

But internationally,

Da Vinci and Ice Age 2 have made substantially more than X3 even dreams to make, but SR has a chance because it will play out well overseas, and it may do well domestically if word of mouth is good. And Cars even has an excellent shot at doing better than X3.

So I'd go with Pirates, Da Vinci, Ice Age 2, SR, X3 or Cars

crappymovie

06-22-2006, 07:47 PM

It's also highly likely that Cars will outgross X3 domestically, even by a small margin (it almost made the same amount as X3 in it's second week, and will probably witness smaller drops....but it could have X3-esque legs when Pirates shows up)

Carp Man

06-22-2006, 07:50 PM

domestically?

But internationally,

Da Vinci and Ice Age 2 have made substantially more than X3 even dreams to make, but SR has a chance because it will play out well overseas, and it may do well domestically if word of mouth is good. And Cars even has an excellent shot at doing better than X3.

So I'd go with Pirates, Da Vinci, Ice Age 2, SR, X3 or Cars

3rd, 4th, 5th, top 10, still works. And by the way X3 has made more domesticly then either Ice Age, or Da Vinci Code. X3, 218. Da Vinci , 200.8. Ice Age 193.0. So look before you open your mouth and insert your foot.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?view2=worldwide&yr=2006&p=.htm

crappymovie

06-22-2006, 07:54 PM

3rd or 4th, still works. And by the way X3 has made more domesticly then either Ice Age, or Da Vinci Code. X3, 218. Da Vinci , 200.8. Ice Age 193.0. So look before you open your mouth and insert your foot.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?view2=worldwide&yr=2006&p=.htm

:rolleyes:

Peel yourself away from watching the epic Fantastic Four for the hundreth time, and notice I was talking about international numbers.

But think whatever you want, even when Superman Returns potentially outgrosses X3. What will you attribute that to? Maybe the SR commericals brainwashed the public.

Wait, i know your answer. So?

BMM

06-22-2006, 07:59 PM

3rd, 4th, 5th, top 10, still works. And by the way X3 has made more domesticly then either Ice Age, or Da Vinci Code. X3, 218. Da Vinci , 200.8. Ice Age 193.0. So look before you open your mouth and insert your foot.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?view2=worldwide&yr=2006&p=.htm

Yeah, I think crappymovie is talking about international figures . . . he says, "But internationally" and then goes on to make his point.

Carp Man

06-22-2006, 07:59 PM

:rolleyes:

Peel yourself away from watching the epic Fantastic Four for the hundreth time, and notice I was talking about international numbers.

But we know you can't accept the success of other films, because of your obsession with Marvel. But think whatever you want, even when Superman Returns potentially outgrosses X3. What will you attribute that to? Maybe the SR commericals brainwashed the public.

Wait, i know your answer. So?

That's right so ? SR could be bigger then X3. Time will tell, but till it does....... X3 rules superhero movies this year. So I'll bask in that sun, till it shines no more.:)

antariksh

06-22-2006, 09:51 PM

Mojo has 260 million for SR, nothing for Spiderman.

OUCH!!!

SR has a production budget of $260 million.

All those who say that SR budget is including the money WB spent before SR are WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The movie costed $260 million PERIOD :o Add in another $40 million spent before SR. Another $100+ worldwide marketing and distribution.

You have a movie that has a total budget between $400-430.

BMM

06-22-2006, 10:19 PM

OUCH!!!

SR has a production budget of $260 million.

All those who say that SR budget is including the money WB spent before SR are WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The movie costed $260 million PERIOD :o Add in another $40 million spent before SR. Another $100+ worldwide marketing and distribution.

You have a movie that has a total budget between $400-430.

I don't see anyone saying that Superman Returns is inexpensive or less than The Last Stand. Given the way Returns looks, I would expect it to be expensive and more than The Last Stand. It's nice to have a studio willing to pour copious amounts of money into a project, even if that means biting the costs of previous attempts, in an effort to put out the best product possible. I wish I could say the same for FOX.

. . . and where are you getting your worldwide marketing and distribution figures from? If anything FOX does know how to do, it's market and distribute a movie . . . so I would put The Last Stand's marketing and distributing costs right up there with Returns' if abiding by your logic . . . and what would that bring The Last Stand's total budget up to? 310+ million dollars?

Regardless, although Warner Brothers is concerned with making money (like all studios are), they seem equally concerned with putting out an excellent product, and given everything that's been said about Returns, it looks like they've succeeded. I wish other studios would be willing to give their products the same concern and budgetary treatment (if not general treatment).

WorthyStevens

06-22-2006, 10:50 PM

antariksh

06-22-2006, 10:58 PM

Which makes me wish WB would take over the reigns of the X-franchise, despite their involvement with DC comics.

SORRY that is NEVER going to happen!!!

Once the rights for all comic based movies expire at FOX. I would like either SONY to take some from fox or MARVEL should make their own movies.

Ya i kinda agree FOX sucks.

The franchises they have, have a lot of potential but they screw it up.

Oh well... I will support all MARVEL movies.

antariksh

06-22-2006, 10:59 PM

I don't see anyone saying that Superman Returns is inexpensive or less than The Last Stand. Given the way Returns looks, I would expect it to be expensive and more than The Last Stand. It's nice to have a studio willing to pour copious amounts of money into a project, even if that means biting the costs of previous attempts, in an effort to put out the best product possible. I wish I could say the same for FOX.

. . . and where are you getting your worldwide marketing and distribution figures from? If anything FOX does know how to do, it's market and distribute a movie . . . so I would put The Last Stand's marketing and distributing costs right up there with Returns' if abiding by your logic . . . and what would that bring The Last Stand's total budget up to? 310+ million dollars?

Regardless, although Warner Brothers is concerned with making money (like all studios are), they seem equally concerned with putting out an excellent product, and given everything that's been said about Returns, it looks like they've succeeded. I wish other studios would be willing to give their products the same concern and budgetary treatment (if not general treatment).

well i think this time FOX also gave i guess $210 million for X3 which you and lot of other people belive in.
But my gut feeling is that it is no more than $165 million.

danoyse

06-22-2006, 11:08 PM

Regardless, although Warner Brothers is concerned with making money (like all studios are), they seem equally concerned with putting out an excellent product, and given everything that's been said about Returns, it looks like they've succeeded. I wish other studios would be willing to give their products the same concern and budgetary treatment (if not general treatment).

And they did have to learn the hard way--those god-awful Batman sequels were theirs also, as well as few misfires trying to restart 'Superman.' They have to be praying by candlelight right now that this things makes the money they need it to. :eek:

But I think they are going to score with Superman Returns--it looks amazing, and the early reviews seem to be very positive. I can't wait to see it at the IMAX next week. :up:

Visionary

06-22-2006, 11:45 PM

Visionary

06-22-2006, 11:48 PM

I'm glad to see X3 cross the 400M mark worldwide. It still has Japan which could add another 10M to 20M to its tally.

Fanticon

06-22-2006, 11:55 PM

someone somewhere else on the boards or in this thread said that the release date in Japan in September is going to hurt it because of the amount of pirating of the movie on various formats that will take place between now and then...and in the asian markets is where a lot of that takes place...it should have been released the same week imo. So its potential will be cut not quite in half but close to it?

obeastdyke

06-23-2006, 02:03 AM

Japan should add around 30 million. 10 millon wtf that is way too low for Japan.

Avalanche

06-23-2006, 05:36 AM

SORRY that is NEVER going to happen!!!

Once the rights for all comic based movies expire at FOX. I would like either SONY to take some from fox or MARVEL should make their own movies.

Ya i kinda agree FOX sucks.

The franchises they have, have a lot of potential but they screw it up.

Oh well... I will support all MARVEL movies.
Stop SHOUTING.

You don't get your point across ANY BETTER.

And the Superman Returns hate is getting very tiresome.

ProductionMusic

06-23-2006, 05:46 AM

MARVEL should make their own movies

Which is what will happen. Marvel will not be dependent on other Studio's anymore

antariksh

06-23-2006, 07:34 AM

Japan should add around 30 million. 10 millon wtf that is way too low for Japan.

go to BOM and see how much X1 and X2 did in japan.

Infact X2 did less than X1. LOL

Milkman95

06-23-2006, 08:49 AM

X3, like many have said, could have been A LOT bigger if they would have handled the production with more care. There was no reason to rush X3 out for this summer - the audience was built-in already, and it would have had the same opening weekend it had in another release date.

SR probably won't open as big, but it should go on to gross more since it looks to be an epic adventure that has something for everybody - it seems critics agree so far as well.

danoyse

06-23-2006, 09:20 AM

X3, like many have said, could have been A LOT bigger if they would have handled the production with more care. There was no reason to rush X3 out for this summer - the audience was built-in already, and it would have had the same opening weekend it had in another release date.

Exactly...that huge weekend was based on the strength of the first two movies.

Again, I enjoyed X3, but it was clear that Fox meddled far too much in the production--and in the series as whole.

Superman, if it's as good as they say...will be very big. And I hope it is, Superman is due for a good movie series again. :up:

antariksh

06-23-2006, 09:46 AM

Exactly...that huge weekend was based on the strength of the first two movies.

Again, I enjoyed X3, but it was clear that Fox meddled far too much in the production--and in the series as whole.

Superman, if it's as good as they say...will be very big. And I hope it is, Superman is due for a good movie series again. :up:

Ya SR can succeed if it wants BUT i don't want it to beat spider-man and spider-man 2 both domestic and worldwide boxoffice :o

Advanced Dark

06-23-2006, 09:46 AM

go to BOM and see how much X1 and X2 did in japan.

Infact X2 did less than X1. LOL

Cause X2 long, unfocused, and a bit slow moving for the average moviegoer. The kind of stuff we as fans eat up. The average moviegoer enjoyed X3 more than 1 or 2, as they also liked FF. It's two different groups. The average moviegoer and the comic fan/moviegoer. The latter being the one that really boosts opening weekends on these type of films if the buzz is hot.

Advanced Dark

06-23-2006, 09:48 AM

Ya SR can succeed if it wants BUT i don't want it to beat spider-man and spider-man 2 both domestic and worldwide boxoffice :o

Superman won't beat Spiderman 1 or 2 domestic but I could see International possibly...maybe in a long shot but the marketplace is so conjested now so it's doubtful. Spiderman 3 however should beat it's prior films thanks to more action and more villains.

NateGray

06-23-2006, 09:59 AM

NateGray

06-23-2006, 10:04 AM

Superman won't beat Spiderman 1 or 2 domestic but I could see International possibly...maybe in a long shot but the marketplace is so conjested now so it's doubtful. Spiderman 3 however should beat it's prior films thanks to more action and more villains.

See and with it being released at the height of the WC I think that could hurt its oversea's numbers badly.
We shall have to wait and see 5 more days.

GreenKToo

06-23-2006, 10:20 AM

I wouldnt say it wont beat spidey 1 or 2.it is possible,maybe not opening weekend,but domestic.over 95% of the reviews are very positive,and once w.o.m gets out,who knows what could happen.

BMM

06-23-2006, 10:41 AM

Cause X2 long, unfocused, and a bit slow moving for the average moviegoer. The kind of stuff we as fans eat up. The average moviegoer enjoyed X3 more than 1 or 2, as they also liked FF. It's two different groups. The average moviegoer and the comic fan/moviegoer. The latter being the one that really boosts opening weekends on these type of films if the buzz is hot.

. . . Considering X2 is rated higher than The Last Stand via the general consensus in every public poll, rating, and review system, I somehow doubt the average moviegoer enjoyed The Last Stand more than X2 . . . and so long as a movie is good, time doesn't appear to be an issue concerning the average moviegoer either. 8 of the top 10 grossing movies of all time are over two hours long--and with the exception of children's movies, (Shrek, Finding Nemo, The Lion King, Home Alone, The Incredibles, Monster's Inc., etc.), and a few others, every other movie among the top 40 grossing movies of all time are 2+ hours long . . . not to mention that the #1 grossing movie is over 3 hours long.

I think The Last Stand, as noted by Ratner, speaks to short attention spans and the ability of a studio to hype a movie . . . but I would hardly make the implication that it is enjoyed simply because the average movie goer shies away from length . . . X2's remaining acclaim and the box office certainly demonstrate otherwise.

Advanced Dark

06-23-2006, 11:07 AM

crappymovie

06-23-2006, 11:08 AM

. . . Considering X2 is rated higher than The Last Stand via the general consensus in every public poll, rating, and review system, I somehow doubt the average moviegoer enjoyed The Last Stand more than X2 . . . and so long as a movie is good, time doesn't appear to be an issue concerning the average moviegoer either. 8 of the top 10 grossing movies of all time are over two hours long--and with the exception of children's movies, (Shrek, Finding Nemo, The Lion King, Home Alone, The Incredibles, Monster's Inc., etc.), and a few others, every other movie among the top 40 grossing movies of all time are 2+ hours long . . . not to mention that the #1 grossing movie is over 3 hours long.

I think The Last Stand, as noted by Ratner, speaks to short attention spans and the ability of a studio to hype a movie . . . but I would hardly make the implication that it is enjoyed simply because the average movie goer shies away from length . . . X2's remaining acclaim and the box office certainly demonstrate otherwise.

Well said. As you mentioned, I agree that although X3 may have been an enjoyable film, people can hardly make the generalization that the general public like X3 more than X2 because critics, polls etc., all rank X2 above X3. So, I guess you can look at box office then? But, X2 had smaller drops, even when faced with the Matrix Reloaded. I doubt X3 would have even made $200 million had Superman Returns opened in it's third weekend. :up:

BMM

06-23-2006, 11:21 AM

^ Public poll? LMAO those are all in comic book fan forums. That's what I'm saying everyone I know (who's not into comic books) liked X3 the most. I'm into comics and I liked it the most. I thought it was the most fun and the most exciting chapter. It's also selling more tickets even after inflation.

I am not simply talking about public polls found in comic book fan forums (I am not that narrow sighted) . . . I'm talking about critical reviews, non-critical reviews, fan reviews, non-fan reviews, internet polls, magazine polls, and most importantly general ratings (which have nothing to do with polls or comparing a movie to its predecessor--The Last Stand still ranks below X2 in so far as ranking the general quality of the movie, and in some cases it ranks below X-Men). It should be selling more tickets . . . The Last Stand made 47% of its sales in its first four days thanks to heavy anticaption, which I'm sure had nothing to do with how well the previous film was received (I'm being sarcastic of course).

GL's Light

06-23-2006, 11:28 AM

crappymovie

06-23-2006, 11:30 AM

I am not simply talking about public polls found in comic book fan forums (I am not that narrow sighted) . . . I'm talking about critical reviews, non-critical reviews, fan reviews, non-fan reviews, internet polls, magazine polls, and most importantly general ratings (which have nothing to do with polls or comparing a movie to its predecessor--The Last Stand still ranks below X2 in so far as ranking the general quality of the movie, and in some cases it ranks below X-Men). It should be selling more tickets . . . The Last Stand made 47% of its sales in its first four days thanks to heavy anticaption, which I'm sure had nothing to do with how well the previous film was received.

X-Men had a multiplier of 2.89
X2 had a multiplier of 2.5
X3 has a 2.13, will end up at MOST with a 2.34, factor in the extra holiday day, and you're at a 1.97 multiplier.

X2's legs got cut short because of the Matrix, but what about X3? Perhaps "all films have short legs these days?" But wait...didn't Batman Begins have a 4.21 multiplier just last year? or more importantly, Star Wars III had a 3.5? Wouldn't the fans have frontloaded these openings as well? But maybe, because they weren't disappointments, people came back to watch them.

But I guess you could say the same of X2 because of it's short legs. I just wish Superman had opened earlier so we could have done a better comparison of X2 and X3....

Advanced Dark

06-23-2006, 11:30 AM

^ How could it. It was the final chapter that tied everything together from the first 2 films and it's being touted as the "last film" which I think was a mistake. It was fun, it was exciting, it did it's job...now we move onto the character study of Wolverine. It's all fun stuff. Nobody should take this stuff too seriously.

It's like half the board members here are like Kathy Bates in Misery and they want Brett Ratner and Tom Rothman tied up in a bed with broken legs. LOL

crappymovie

06-23-2006, 11:33 AM

I think it's fair to say that X2 dramatically expanded the fanbase of the X-Men franchise, and that expanded fanbase turned out for X3's opening weekend, but X3 wasn't a strong enough film to capitalise on that momentum and further expand the fanbase. Adjusted for inflation it'll end up selling about the same number of tickets as X2. Certainly a success, but it could've been an even bigger success had it fired on all cylinders, rather than being just a reasonably enjoyable film.

I agree. I think we can all say, the film was a success. But it had the potential to be the great end to the trilogy, aka Return of the King, but it preformed more like Batman Forever. A good movie, just not great, and thus it preformed slightly better than it's predecessor. Not an iconic film that could've gotten to $300 million, or even $250 million.

Advanced Dark

06-23-2006, 11:34 AM

Unfortunately the attention span of the average moviegoer that X3 was targeted at wouldn't sit in an X-Men film for 3 hours. LOL

crappymovie

06-23-2006, 11:39 AM

Unfortunately the attention span of the average moviegoer that X3 was targeted at wouldn't sit in an X-Men film for 3 hours. LOL

haha maybe so. But I always thought of the X-franchise public as a bit more "mature." I mean, X2 doesn't have the same tone as Spider-man. I think it's a little darker, and a little more cerebral. So we COULD have gotten a 2 1/2 hour film (it's 95% likely after seeing the running time for Superman Returns), but instead we got a film that played out like an episode from the cartoon.

It didn't have to be mind-numbingly long, just had to have that "epic tone." A little longer, a little more emphasis on characters, and a big finale.

...btw, ever wonder why Phoenix was standing around while the X-Men fought the soldiers, etc. and just watched. What was she doing before she decided to de-molecularize everyone? Maybe, someone got some blood on her costume and she thought, "That's it, these *****es are gonna get it?"....It's moments like that, that made the film so anti-climactic and shoddy.

BMM

06-23-2006, 11:49 AM

NateGray

06-23-2006, 11:55 AM

I agree. I think we can all say, the film was a success. But it had the potential to be the great end to the trilogy, aka Return of the King, but it preformed more like Batman Forever. A good movie, just not great, and thus it preformed slightly better than it's predecessor. Not an iconic film that could've gotten to $300 million, or even $250 million.

See and I will agree with this but take it a step further all three movies are just good and could and should have been great like LOTR instead they were just good movies.
Alot of people seem to let Singer slid for things they bash Ratner for IMO.

crappymovie

06-23-2006, 12:05 PM

See and I will agree with this but take it a step further all three movies are just good and could and should have been great like LOTR instead they were just good movies.
Alot of people seem to let Singer slid for things they bash Ratner for IMO.

You're right Nate, I'll admit it. :up: X1 was pretty mediocre in itself, but I excused it because it was an origin film. I think we all did (especially after the budget Singer was given, and the basic tyranny of Fox at that time.) X2 stepped it up in many ways, and I think the film ranks pretty great. Furthermore, I forgave it's problems because the film seemed to correct a lot of problems with the first film and even more: set up an explosive third movie.

With the third movie, everything came crashing down, but definitely fell short of hitting the ground. It was a good movie, considering the constraints, but it's just disappointing to think that X3 could potentially a) be the last film and b) complete the original trilogy. Because I don't feel that it did, because sure, it killed of a few characters and had a MINI-war, it...just didn't feel resolved.

I think X2 was far more in the right direction, than X3, although X3 had it's great points. The action sequences were good, and...well that's about it that I can think of right now. It was a little more frenetic as well.

TheVileOne

06-23-2006, 01:45 PM

Unfortunately the attention span of the average moviegoer that X3 was targeted at wouldn't sit in an X-Men film for 3 hours. LOL

According to what? Why do you buy into this false perception that young people can't sit through longer movies?

People sat through X-men 2 didn't they.

They sat through the Harry Potter films and Chronicles of Narnia.

They sat through Return of The King which was the longest Lord of the Rings movie, and was the only one not just over 3 hours, but over 3 hours and 15 minutes.

TheVileOne

06-23-2006, 01:47 PM

^ How could it. It was the final chapter that tied everything together from the first 2 films and it's being touted as the "last film" which I think was a mistake. It was fun, it was exciting, it did it's job...now we move onto the character study of Wolverine. It's all fun stuff. Nobody should take this stuff too seriously.

Return of the King and Revenge of The Sith. You might've heard of them.

It's like half the board members here are like Kathy Bates in Misery and they want Brett Ratner and Tom Rothman tied up in a bed with broken legs. LOL

It's more like Ratner and Rothman are Kathy Bates, and X-men 3 was what was tied up.

Carp Man

06-23-2006, 01:49 PM

SR probably won't open as big, but it should go on to gross more since it looks to be an epic adventure that has something for everybody - it seems critics agree so far as well.

Critics. LOL. Take their collective brains, put it in a bird, and the bird would fly backwards. The public will decide if this movie is suscufull. Word of mouth, and viewers reviews. Word of mouth will be huge in determing the suscess of this movie. So far looks like another 50 % drop for X3 this week.

narrows101

06-23-2006, 01:54 PM

Critics. LOL. Take their collective brains, put it in a bird, and the bird would fly backwards. The public will decide if this movie is suscufull. Word of mouth, and viewers reviews. Word of mouth will be huge in determing the suscess of this movie. So far looks like another 50 % drop for X3 this week.
XMen has pretty much made it's money domestically I think - it was predicted it would make about $225M domestic. I remember a quote where it was said "we will play all of June" so I don't think they expect much after June 30.

BMM

06-23-2006, 01:57 PM

Critics. LOL. Take their collective brains, put it in a bird, and the bird would fly backwards. The public will decide if this movie is suscufull. Word of mouth, and viewers reviews. Word of mouth will be huge in determing the suscess of this movie.

Haha. Interesting analogy, although with Returns it appears their collective brains are in agreement, and the bird looks to be flying straight ahead toward success . . . although you're right, word of mouth will ultimately determine how well Returns does (like any movie), but if early reports are correct . . . it looks to appeal to a wide range of people . . . as it has certainly appealed to a range of critics thus far.

Carp Man

06-23-2006, 02:00 PM

XMen has pretty much made it's money domestically I think - it was predicted it would make about $225M domestic. I remember a quote where it was said "we will play all of June" so I don't think they expect much after June 30.

Mojo is predicting 4.4 million this weekend for X3. X3 is loosing another 404 theaters this week. Down to 2,408. SR is opening at 3,900 + theaters.

josh8

06-23-2006, 02:02 PM

X-Men had a multiplier of 2.89
X2 had a multiplier of 2.5
X3 has a 2.13, will end up at MOST with a 2.34, factor in the extra holiday day, and you're at a 1.97 multiplier.

X2's legs got cut short because of the Matrix, but what about X3? Perhaps "all films have short legs these days?" But wait...didn't Batman Begins have a 4.21 multiplier just last year? or more importantly, Star Wars III had a 3.5? Wouldn't the fans have frontloaded these openings as well? But maybe, because they weren't disappointments, people came back to watch them.

But I guess you could say the same of X2 because of it's short legs. I just wish Superman had opened earlier so we could have done a better comparison of X2 and X3....
batman begins is THE success story. it was a questionable franchise that was met with a little fear but was ultimately reinvigorated by quality.

HOWEVER, it was a fluke. these things hardly happen anymore and the recent times (say about five years) can be counted on your two hands. the overall multilpliers of big movies are often below 3 now (and not even in the summer), for good movies and bad. yeah, it's kind of sad, but that's how moviegoing is nowadays.

Advanced Dark

06-23-2006, 02:03 PM

Carp Man

06-23-2006, 02:17 PM

7. X-men: The Last Stand 20th Century Fox 2,810 855,000 304 -41% 219,622,000

http://www.showbizdata.com

X3 will cross 220 million domestic easily with today's #'s when they're reported tomorrow.

230-235 will be the total.

Doesn't that squrel ever stop drinking ? What A lush. :D I said it would make 225 to 230 by time SR opens.

Iceman

06-23-2006, 02:48 PM

Mojo is predicting 4.4 million this weekend for X3. X3 is loosing another 404 theaters this week. Down to 2,408. SR is opening at 3,900 + theaters.This will probably be X3's last significant weekend with the Supes debut on the horizon.

Carp Man

06-23-2006, 02:55 PM

This will probably be X3's last significant weekend with the Supes debut on the horizon.

Then POTC following weekend ? Yep. This week is the last horrah. Drips and drabs will be it after Wednesday. Still don't see anything about SR openings overseas. Overseas #'s will keep it going for a bit, but domesticly this is the last biggy till Wednesday. Why it was soooooooooo front loaded. Fox knew they would have to make it before SR opened, and it did.

demitri_vampiro

06-23-2006, 03:22 PM

haha maybe so. But I always thought of the X-franchise public as a bit more "mature." I mean, X2 doesn't have the same tone as Spider-man. I think it's a little darker, and a little more cerebral. So we COULD have gotten a 2 1/2 hour film (it's 95% likely after seeing the running time for Superman Returns), but instead we got a film that played out like an episode from the cartoon.

It didn't have to be mind-numbingly long, just had to have that "epic tone." A little longer, a little more emphasis on characters, and a big finale.

...btw, ever wonder why Phoenix was standing around while the X-Men fought the soldiers, etc. and just watched. What was she doing before she decided to de-molecularize everyone? Maybe, someone got some blood on her costume and she thought, "That's it, these *****es are gonna get it?"....It's moments like that, that made the film so anti-climactic and shoddy.
phoenix did nothing because she doesn't care for magneto's goals. and she can't be controlled. she does what she wants when she wants.

TheVileOne

06-23-2006, 03:41 PM

7. X-men: The Last Stand 20th Century Fox 2,810 855,000 304 -41% 219,622,000

http://www.showbizdata.com

X3 will cross 220 million domestic easily with today's #'s when they're reported tomorrow.

230-235 will be the total.

This isn't very impressive considering that the movie had a budget well over $200 million.

X-men 3 also got beat in its second weekend by an anti-romantic comedy that had a QUARTER of the budget X-men 3 did. That's pretty sad.

Carp Man

06-23-2006, 03:45 PM

This isn't very impressive considering that the movie had a budget well over $200 million.

X-men 3 also got beat in its second weekend by an anti-romantic comedy that had a QUARTER of the budget X-men 3 did. That's pretty sad.

Only reason Break Up did well is because Jen, and Vince are an issue. Other then that it wouldn't have done diddly. You just have an issue With either X-Men, or Fox. Plain as day.

Advanced Dark

06-23-2006, 03:49 PM

Vile you're not one known for pointing out the negative side of things. I'm surprised. It's made over 400 million and should hit 450+ million and is the #1 film at the box office this year in the US. It's gonna make a healthy profit when it's all said and done and there's nothing sad about it. Everyone saw X3 who wanted to see it in the first week on over 8000 screens. Break up was a sorely needed comedy and fit the bill for those suffereing from Wedding Crashers withdrawal since we hadn't had a good comedy this year till then. It's far from sad for X3, Fox, MVL, etc...X3's total box office is higher than every single financial and box office analyst expected at this point right now. You won't find a reputable analyst anywhere that said before X3 came out that it would already be at 400+ million not one. Most had 300-350 worldwide figured and some lower. None higher.

TheVileOne

06-23-2006, 03:49 PM

Only reason Break Up did well is because Jen, and Vince are an issue. Other then that it wouldn't have done diddly. You just have an issue With either X-Men, or Fox. Plain as day.

Of course I do. I'm not sure what person with common sense wouldn't.

I didn't see much about Aniston and Vaughn being an item, outside of some questions in the EW interview. And what does Vaughn say? Nothing really. He's very private about it. I don't see him jumping around on a couch on Oprah acting like some goofball man in a mid-life crisis.

You seem to be forgetting that everything Vaughn does these days is gold especially at the BO. The man is a draw plain and simple. It has nothing to do with going out with Aniston.

TheVileOne

06-23-2006, 03:54 PM

Vile you're not one known for pointing out the negative side of things. I'm surprised. It's made over 400 million and should hit 450+ million and is the #1 film at the box office this year in the US.

Had they given the movie the time and care it deserved, it could've made a lot more.

Look at the huge jump X-men 2 made, they could've done something equally bigger with X-men 3. All they did was spend twice as much money to deliver a mediocre product.

It's gonna make a healthy profit when it's all said and done and there's nothing sad about it.

I think it is sad considering it's 20th Century Fox's biggest release of the year. It could've performed so much better.

Everyone saw X3 who wanted to see it in the first week on over 8000 screens. Break up was a sorely needed comedy and fit the bill for those suffereing from Wedding Crashers withdrawal since we hadn't had a good comedy this year till then. It's far from sad for X3, Fox, MVL, etc...X3's total box office is higher than every single financial and box office analyst expected at this point right now.

I assume expectations were low then.

You won't find a reputable analyst anywhere that said before X3 came out that it would already be at 400+ million not one. Most had 300-350 worldwide figured and some lower. None higher.

Mainly because of inflation of ticket prices and adjusted grosses. The movie isn't much more profitable than X-men 2 at all.

Carp Man

06-23-2006, 03:58 PM

Ok. Thursdays #'s are in. Updated #'s below.

Week 1 $ 141,331,162. - :)
Week 2 $ 44,834,912. - 68.2 % drop.
Week 3 $ 22,232,526. - 54.8 % drop.
Week 4 $ 11,265,612. - 49.5 % drop.

Carp Man

06-23-2006, 04:16 PM

You know I could go here : http://www.themoviespoiler.com/ and get the ending to SR, and give it to everyone. :eek: Many movies I go here, read all about it, and don't have to go to the movie at all. Great little site. Any movie you want you can read the whole movie, or go right to the ending. The most fun you can have at the movies, without being there. And I'm sure SR will be up soon after the midnight showing. Wouldn't do that, but boy it sure would be tempting.

BMM

06-23-2006, 04:31 PM

^ Uh . . . random . . . is that supposed to stop people who frequent spoilers boards from going to see the movie (as though that would actually put a dent in Returns money making abilities)? . . . wouldn't posting the ending be more of a deterrent concerning people in the Returns boards rather than those individuals in The Last Stand forum? . . . I mean, you can post away Returns spoilers all you want, but that's not going to stop me from seeing the movie (and I doubt anyone else to the extent that it would matter). Visually, Returns looks better than any other movie released thus far this summer . . . I would go to see it simply for the visuals regardless of whether or not I knew the ending.

Carp Man

06-23-2006, 04:38 PM

vvvvv Like I said. I'll give it my 2 quarters when it comes to the cheep movie theater. 50 cents all day Tuesday. Bout all it's worth to me. Don't support DC.

danoyse

06-23-2006, 04:46 PM

You know I could go here : http://www.themoviespoiler.com/ and get the ending to SR, and give it to everyone. :eek:

Wow, so then I officially stop reading this thread.

Exactly what do you want to accomplish with that, Carp? The world won't see SR because you gave away the ending? :rolleyes:

It's going to be a big hit. It looks great. I firmly believe that the worlds of Marvel and DC can co-exist as long as the movies don't suck.

I saw X3 last night--it was still decently crowded, and the audience reacted very enthusiastically to the SR trailer, myself included. I'm probably going to see it at the Imax theater after I go to the Yankee game on Wednesday.

Give it up...you really think you're cooler because you can give away the ending?? No one's particularly impressed.

Advanced Dark

06-23-2006, 04:47 PM

Hey Carp put the spoiler in your sig. LMAO

j/k ;)

danoyse

06-23-2006, 04:58 PM

I didn't see much about Aniston and Vaughn being an item, outside of some questions in the EW interview. And what does Vaughn say? Nothing really. He's very private about it. I don't see him jumping around on a couch on Oprah acting like some goofball man in a mid-life crisis.

Well...Tom jumped on a couch just before "War of the Worlds," and it turned out to be his highest-grossing film.

Have you ever seen the tabloids at a supermarket checkout? Watched an entertainment show? They actually call the two of them "Vaughniston". Their vacation photos ended up on the front page of the NY Post. When Vince won an award at ShoWest this year, all they asked him as where Anniston was.

Frankly, I could care less and can't believe people would just see a movie based on tabloid fodder...but they are a huge item in the press.

You seem to be forgetting that everything Vaughn does these days is gold especially at the BO. The man is a draw plain and simple. It has nothing to do with going out with Aniston.

Well, if he's such a huge draw...why is such a big deal to you that it beat out X-Men 3 on it's opening weekend? It wasn't just a "chick flick," obviously.

danoyse

06-23-2006, 04:59 PM

Hey Carp put the spoiler in your sig. LMAO

j/k ;)

Don't encourage him! :mad:

Advanced Dark

06-23-2006, 05:01 PM

http://www.sheknows.com/graphics/emoticons/nopity.gif

;)

danoyse

06-23-2006, 05:06 PM

You want me to start talking about how much better "The Incredibles" is than the "Fantastic Four"????

Advanced Dark

06-23-2006, 05:07 PM

^ No!

http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/sign/sign0202.gif

danoyse

06-23-2006, 05:09 PM

Haha...hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. :)

antariksh

06-23-2006, 05:30 PM

This isn't very impressive considering that the movie had a budget well over $200 million.

X-men 3 also got beat in its second weekend by an anti-romantic comedy that had a QUARTER of the budget X-men 3 did. That's pretty sad.

wait when SR comes out that movie has a budget more than $250 million and i am sure its domestic boxoffice won't be that great.

for a movie that costed $260 million it SHOULD do $300+ million domestically. :o

And i am sure it won't do that. HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAA

Avalanche

06-23-2006, 05:32 PM

^ I think it might do $300. Only just, but I think it might hit it.

TheVileOne

06-23-2006, 05:46 PM

Well...Tom jumped on a couch just before "War of the Worlds," and it turned out to be his highest-grossing film.

The disappointing performance of MI:3 is a direct result of his outlandish behavior.

Have you ever seen the tabloids at a supermarket checkout? Watched an entertainment show? They actually call the two of them "Vaughniston". Their vacation photos ended up on the front page of the NY Post. When Vince won an award at ShoWest this year, all they asked him as where Anniston was.

I don't read tabloid garbage. I do watch entertainment shows.

Once again, this was not a relationship of the profile that the whole Bennifer/TomKat business was.

Frankly, I could care less and can't believe people would just see a movie based on tabloid fodder...but they are a huge item in the press.

The press makes up a lot of **** that isn't true and like to run with their little stories. Maybe people actually found something charming and endearing about The Break-Up and how startingly grounded it is and not some stupid, mediocre bloated comic book movie.

Well, if he's such a huge draw...why is such a big deal to you that it beat out X-Men 3 on it's opening weekend? It wasn't just a "chick flick," obviously.

Because Vaughn is a draw and people will go out to see him now because they like his work. Publically he acts cool and reserved and he's not alienating his demographic like Tom Cruise did. He respectfully tries to keep his private life private. He doesn't jump on political bandwagons either. I listened to him on the radio last year promoting Wedding Crashers, I found it very likable how he wasn't acting pretentious or snobby like certain other celebrities.

Milkman95

06-23-2006, 06:26 PM

vvvvv Like I said. I'll give it my 2 quarters when it comes to the cheep movie theater. 50 cents all day Tuesday. Bout all it's worth to me. Don't support DC.

Hilarious. This is why you'll never have any credibility with me - you can't be objective while "rooting" for your favorite character(s) at the same time.

It's been known for a long time that when Singer left the X-franchise, he took the quality and respectability of that franchise with him.

You should be supporting every comic book film, but that's just me.

Avalanche

06-23-2006, 06:48 PM

The disappointing performance of MI:3 is a direct result of his outlandish behavior.

I don't read tabloid garbage. I do watch entertainment shows.

Once again, this was not a relationship of the profile that the whole Bennifer/TomKat business was.

The press makes up a lot of **** that isn't true and like to run with their little stories. Maybe people actually found something charming and endearing about The Break-Up and how startingly grounded it is and not some stupid, mediocre bloated comic book movie.

Because Vaughn is a draw and people will go out to see him now because they like his work. Publically he acts cool and reserved and he's not alienating his demographic like Tom Cruise did. He respectfully tries to keep his private life private. He doesn't jump on political bandwagons either. I listened to him on the radio last year promoting Wedding Crashers, I found it very likable how he wasn't acting pretentious or snobby like certain other celebrities.
The relationship between Vince and Jen did boost The Break-Up's box office. All the analysists in the know seem to think so. The relationship might not be of Brad/Angelina quality, but it still acts as publicity.

Carp Man

06-23-2006, 06:51 PM

Hey Carp put the spoiler in your sig. LMAO

j/k ;)

Well you know AD, just put that in there for effect. LOL. Just a thought that crossed my mind. :)

Carp Man

06-23-2006, 06:55 PM

Hilarious. This is why you'll never have any credibility with me - you can't be objective while "rooting" for your favorite character(s) at the same time.

It's been known for a long time that when Singer left the X-franchise, he took the quality and respectability of that franchise with him.

You should be supporting every comic book film, but that's just me.

No I just like to save 7 bucks. Why pay 7.50 for a movie I don't really care to see, when I can pay 50 cents ? Simple economics. Only movie I would pay 7.50 to see is FF, and I did that 9 times, and paid 50 cents every Tuesday at the cheepie movie. I'll wait till X-Men comes to the cheepie movie, even thou I know how it ends. Spent 67.50 plus about 5 bucks when it came to cheepie movie, plus bought the DVD, plus will buy the DC when available. So I will have spent over 100 bucks, plus the FF calander, plus the Clobbering Time Thing. So I have done my fair share of suporting. Lets see any SR fan do that.

Advanced Dark

06-23-2006, 06:57 PM

^ I'd pay the 7 bucks to stay away from the creeps who probably live in the 50 cent theatre. Where the hell do you live? LOL Is there a hole in the back of your seat and the one in front of you. ;)

Avalanche

06-23-2006, 07:00 PM

^

His 50 cent theater:

He sites down at a desk and is given a flip book of images from the film, and varying items with which to make his own sound effects.

TheVileOne

06-23-2006, 07:25 PM

The relationship between Vince and Jen did boost The Break-Up's box office. All the analysists in the know seem to think so. The relationship might not be of Brad/Angelina quality, but it still acts as publicity.

In what way? You seem to be ignoring the fact that Vaughn and Aniston both were strong BO performers before they started going out and before Aniston broke up with Brad Pitt.

You also seem to be ignoring the fact that it was the first rom-com (sorta) released in quite a while so in brought in a big female demographic that X-men 3 didn't.

danoyse

06-23-2006, 07:32 PM

In what way? You seem to be ignoring the fact that Vaughn and Aniston both were strong BO performers before they started going out and before Aniston broke up with Brad Pitt.

Aniston is a terrible box office draw. There was even an article in Entertainment Weekly about why she wasn't famous yet. People saw it for Vince, not Aniston.

You also seem to be ignoring the fact that it was the first rom-com (sorta) released in quite a while so in brought in a big female demographic that X-men 3 didn't.

No I'm not. I wasn't even surprised that it was #1 on opening weekend. I just don't think X3 was so bad that it was beat out by just another 'chick flick'.

Carp Man

06-23-2006, 07:39 PM

http://www.fandango.com/TheaterPage.aspx?location=64801&tid=AAKKD

http://www.cinematour.com/location/usa/mo/cine6jop.jpg

Best 50 cent movie house there is. 50 cents all day Tuesdays. 1.50 every other day. 6 screens, hold 150 people each screen, 900 total. So yea. I'll go there to see SR. Got to get there early on Tuesdays. Standing room only. It's owned by WallaceTheaters. Norstar 14, the 7.50 theater here, is in same group, so it's not some hole in the wall you think it is. It's not some peep show theater. And for 50 cents, it works. 1.50 for big tub of popcorn that you would pay 8 bucks for at the Norstar 14. So It's owned by the big boys, they have made there money showing it at the Norstar 14,and this is a side business theater. Why they can show it so cheep. Same manager for both theaters. Both theaters owned by the same corporation. Everything they make from there is pure profit.

danoyse

06-23-2006, 07:39 PM

The disappointing performance of MI:3 is a direct result of his outlandish behavior.

But the infamous couch incident was just before the release of "War of the Worlds."

By MI:3, the world had given up on Tom Cruise. There was also a lot of interest lost in a 3rd 'Mission Impossible' movie too.

I don't read tabloid garbage. I do watch entertainment shows.

And you've never heard of Vaughiston? It's been all the rage since Brad dumped Jen for Angelina and she hooked up with Vince while shooting "The Breakup".

For the record...I despise tabloid garbage, and I can't stand their new habit of nicknaming celebrity couples. But they're difficult to avoid.

Once again, this was not a relationship of the profile that the whole Bennifer/TomKat business was.

Oh yes it was. See the Brad-Jen-Angelina-Vince thing again.

The press makes up a lot of **** that isn't true and like to run with their little stories. Maybe people actually found something charming and endearing about The Break-Up and how startingly grounded it is and not some stupid, mediocre bloated comic book movie.

That sounds like your opinion, actually. The Breakup actually scored lower than X3 on Entertainment Weekly's critics roundup.

Because Vaughn is a draw and people will go out to see him now because they like his work. Publically he acts cool and reserved and he's not alienating his demographic like Tom Cruise did. He respectfully tries to keep his private life private. He doesn't jump on political bandwagons either. I listened to him on the radio last year promoting Wedding Crashers, I found it very likable how he wasn't acting pretentious or snobby like certain other celebrities.

He's also fairly new to movie stardom as well. Tom only jumped off the crazy wagon recently. He's been a big star and big draw for a very long time.

By the way, when did this become about Tom Cruise?? :confused:

TheVileOne

06-23-2006, 08:33 PM

Aniston is a terrible box office draw. There was even an article in Entertainment Weekly about why she wasn't famous yet. People saw it for Vince, not Aniston.

While most of the Friends cast were performing in giant bombs, Aniston did some very successful stuff.

Aniston not being famous now? Well not sure what pipe that writer was smoking out of.

No I'm not. I wasn't even surprised that it was #1 on opening weekend. I just don't think X3 was so bad that it was beat out by just another 'chick flick'.

Well the fact of the matter is that The Break-Up was NOT just another chick flick. But that's how Fox sees is and that's why they are so badly embarrassed about the horrible drop and getting beaten by the Break-UP.

TheVileOne

06-23-2006, 08:38 PM

But the infamous couch incident was just before the release of "War of the Worlds."

The balloon hadn't deflated yet.

By MI:3, the world had given up on Tom Cruise. There was also a lot of interest lost in a 3rd 'Mission Impossible' movie too.

There was also the interest that this was the best MI movie ever and it was MI:3 finally done right.

And you've never heard of Vaughiston? It's been all the rage since Brad dumped Jen for Angelina and she hooked up with Vince while shooting "The Breakup".

I've never heard that term once, and it's not being overexposed to the levels that Pitt/Jolie, Cruise/Holmes, and Affleck/Lopez were. I hear about Pitt/Jolie now more than anything else. That couple has effectively replaced Cruise/Holmes in the eyes of the media.

For the record...I despise tabloid garbage, and I can't stand their new habit of nicknaming celebrity couples. But they're difficult to avoid.

That's why I avoid them. I don't even look at them in the supermarket.

Oh yes it was. See the Brad-Jen-Angelina-Vince thing again.

Once again, I hear more about Pitt/Jolie more than anything else. Aniston/Vaughn is a drop in the bucket by comparison.

That sounds like your opinion, actually. The Breakup actually scored lower than X3 on Entertainment Weekly's critics roundup.

Which makes it even more embarrassing for X-men 3. That they were upstaged by a movie that got worse reviews.

He's also fairly new to movie stardom as well. Tom only jumped off the crazy wagon recently. He's been a big star and big draw for a very long time.

Vaughn's been around and in the public high for well over a decade.

By the way, when did this become about Tom Cruise?? :confused:

When you started invoking the BO numbers of War of the Worlds.

danoyse

06-23-2006, 08:45 PM

While most of the Friends cast were performing in giant bombs, Aniston did some very successful stuff.

I wouldn't exactly call "Rumor Has It," "Derailed" and "Friends With Money" blockbusters either.

Aniston not being famous now? Well not sure what pipe that writer was smoking out of.

I think she's more famous thanks to the tabloids. I don't think she can carry a movie on her name alone. And I do think she's very talented--not the funniest "Friend," but very talented. :up:

Well the fact of the matter is that The Break-Up was NOT just another chick flick. But that's how Fox sees is and that's why they are so badly embarrassed about the horrible drop and getting beaten by the Break-UP.

But if it's not another chick flick, then what's to be embarrassed about? It's a sorely-needed romantic comedy, with a high-profile Hollywood couple, a huge box office draw like Vince Vaughn...what was it, about a $5 million difference in box office between X3 and "Breakup" that first weekend?

It they'd gotten their butts kicked by "The Lake House" that weekend, I'd be embarrassed.

danoyse

06-23-2006, 08:53 PM

There was also the interest that this was the best MI movie ever and it was MI:3 finally done right.

Doesn't really matter when people didn't like I or II.

I've never heard that term once, and it's not being overexposed to the levels that Pitt/Jolie, Cruise/Holmes, and Affleck/Lopez were. I hear about Pitt/Jolie now more than anything else. That couple has effectively replaced Cruise/Holmes in the eyes of the media.

That's because they haven't had a baby yet. Just wait....

That's why I avoid them. I don't even look at them in the supermarket.

I read the headlines for a laugh.

Once again, I hear more about Pitt/Jolie more than anything else. Aniston/Vaughn is a drop in the bucket by comparison.

But it's there. And it's been big enough to publicize a movie with, ridiculous as it is.

Which makes it even more embarrassing for X-men 3. That they were upstaged by a movie that got worse reviews.

Oh, so now it's about the reviews. :rolleyes:

X2 was unseated by "Daddy Day Care." Who cares?

Vaughn's been around and in the public high for well over a decade.

But not as big as he's been in the last 3 years or so. Even bigger since he got a new girlfriend. :)

When you started invoking the BO numbers of War of the Worlds.

You're it. You mentioned him first:

"I don't see him jumping around on a couch on Oprah acting like some goofball man in a mid-life crisis."

Advanced Dark

06-23-2006, 08:53 PM

^ This is very difficult to read this way. I'm cross eyed.

TheVileOne

06-23-2006, 09:06 PM

But it's there. And it's been big enough to publicize a movie with, ridiculous as it is.

Because God forbid, people actually want to see a Vince Vaughn comedy based on the merit of his strong body of work and the good advertising.

But not as big as he's been in the last 3 years or so. Even bigger since he got a new girlfriend. :)

Wedding Crashers came out before he was going out with Aniston. Bleh, :p .

You're it. You mentioned him first:

It was in comparison to show that this relationship isn't getting shoved down our throats or the publicity of that event.

Advanced Dark

06-23-2006, 09:10 PM

^ Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

TheVileOne

06-23-2006, 09:16 PM

I wouldn't exactly call "Rumor Has It," "Derailed" and "Friends With Money" blockbusters either.

Derailed was a low budget drama/thriller.

Friends With Money was a low budget indie comedy. Not a big budget studio tentpole. It made quite a bit of profit as well.

Along Came Polly and Bruce Almighty are blockbusters. The Break-Up clearly is.

I think she's more famous thanks to the tabloids. I don't think she can carry a movie on her name alone. And I do think she's very talented--not the funniest "Friend," but very talented. :up:

Well it wasn't a blockbuster, but she definitely carried The Good Girl. She carried Picture Perfect a long time back just fine.

But if it's not another chick flick, then what's to be embarrassed about? It's a sorely-needed romantic comedy, with a high-profile Hollywood couple, a huge box office draw like Vince Vaughn...what was it, about a $5 million difference in box office between X3 and "Breakup" that first weekend?

Yes after X-men 3 dropped off almost 70%.

It they'd gotten their butts kicked by "The Lake House" that weekend, I'd be embarrassed.

No you wouldn't. But Fox and Tom Rothman would be, which they are.

TheVileOne

06-23-2006, 09:17 PM

^ Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Why don't you work on more questions for Favreau :down .

Advanced Dark

06-23-2006, 09:18 PM

http://www.soulcysters.net/images/smilies/i_karate.gif

Ok I'm warning you.

TheVileOne

06-23-2006, 09:24 PM

This guy is my sensei.

I'm not scared.

http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/6653/musclebuster2ih.gif

Advanced Dark

06-23-2006, 09:29 PM

^ Well we'll have to match sensei's because my Sensei can beat up your Sensei.

http://students.washington.edu/~hksa/officers_pics/patrick_star.jpg

Carp Man

06-23-2006, 09:57 PM

Your both amatures.

danoyse

06-23-2006, 10:42 PM

Derailed was a low budget drama/thriller.

Friends With Money was a low budget indie comedy. Not a big budget studio tentpole. It made quite a bit of profit as well.

But hardly enough to carry a major movie alone. Rumor Has It was a high-profile movie, and it tanked.

Along Came Polly and Bruce Almighty are blockbusters. The Break-Up clearly is.

They're blockbusters because of Ben Stiller and Jim Carrey.

Well it wasn't a blockbuster, but she definitely carried The Good Girl. She carried Picture Perfect a long time back just fine.

She was terrific in The Good Girl. But good luck trying to find a theater that was actually playing it.

You have a little crush, don't you? :p

Yes after X-men 3 dropped off almost 70%.

::yawn::

No you wouldn't. But Fox and Tom Rothman would be, which they are.

Are they? Fox, the masters of spin?

I think you're embarrassed for them.

Fanticon

06-24-2006, 01:03 AM

Fanticon

06-24-2006, 01:33 AM

Hey Advance Dark...you responded to one of my questions on the Favs Q&A

TheVileOne

06-24-2006, 01:44 AM

But hardly enough to carry a major movie alone. Rumor Has It was a high-profile movie, and it tanked.

She can carry a movie alone. The Good Girl is proof of that. The Break-Up wasn't just carried by Vaughn. Aniston had to do an equal amount of work. It was a dual lead.

They're blockbusters because of Ben Stiller and Jim Carrey.

They are still blockbusters she starred in. She had the title role in former.

But I thought The Break-Up was a blockbuster because of . . . VAUGHNISTON!

She was terrific in The Good Girl. But good luck trying to find a theater that was actually playing it.

You have a little crush, don't you? :p

Not at all. I think she's a solid performer and does pretty good work.

Are they? Fox, the masters of spin?

I think you're embarrassed for them.

I'm not embarrassed at all, I'm happy.

And yes, Rothman and co., all they did was spin a web of misleading direction in regards to X-men 3.

tkenji69

06-24-2006, 02:01 AM

TNC9852002

06-24-2006, 02:19 AM

X3 still hasn't made as much as X2, in terms of adjusted gross...I think X3 has to make over 235m domestically in order to do that. Nonetheless, it still has a very good domestic and worldwide gross so far. I expect the worldwide numbers to pass up X2's by Monday...

-TNC

TNC9852002

06-24-2006, 02:30 AM

This isn't very impressive considering that the movie had a budget well over $200 million.
It should be impressive...Only because not many high budget movies have been passing the 200m mark too recently...The budget shouldn't make a huge difference. Passing 200m should already an impressive feat, IMO.

X-men 3 also got beat in its second weekend by an anti-romantic comedy that had a QUARTER of the budget X-men 3 did. That's pretty sad.
Well, it's not sad at all, considering how X3 opened on a memorial day weekend. I mean, most of the people who would see X3 right away would be fans of the series (movie/comic), which would have to make up the majority of the moviegoers...The numbers up until the second weekend speak for themselves..

Again, I don't see what the budget or "The Beak-Up" has to do with anything...A movie doesn't need a remarkable budget to make up for it's popularity at the box office...

-TNC

BMM

06-24-2006, 04:27 AM

Alright who got the Vile One started... l was just looking at the daily comparisons of X3 and X2 it looks like X3 is holding its own. So what is all this talk of a movie having legs... did X2 have legs??? Or is legs reserved for movies like Spiderman and the Titanic.

Well, in a manner of speaking, yes. Thus far, X2 has better legs than The Last Stand. X2 earned 39% of its total domestic gross during its opening weekend, while the other 61% was earned subsequently . . . which is pretty good considering X2 was the first summer movie released in 2003 and later went head to head with the first highly anticipated sequel to The Matrix . . . not to mention insanely popular movies such as Bruce Almighty, Finding Nemo and Pirates of the Caribbean (each of these three films easily earned more than the top grossing movie of 2006—pretty good competition) as well as Bad Boys 2, Charlie’s Angels 2: Full Throttle, Hulk, Terminator 3, The Last Samurai, etc. (and although these last five movies aren’t considered major box office successes, they are still competition vying for moviegoers’ dollars—not to mention, with the exception of the Da Vinci Code and Over the Hedge, each of them earned almost as much, if not more, than 2006’s only seemingly other financially well-received summer movies, Cars and Mission Impossible 3).

Again, this is not to say that The Last Stand isn’t holding its own, but I would have to say thus far it doesn’t quite have the competition felt by X2, especially since X2 was the first summer movie released during the summer of 2003 and was consequently forced to go up against every other potential blockbuster released thereafter . . . but we have yet to feel the impact of Superman Returns and Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest, so who knows where The Last Stand will ultimately fall amongst increased competition.

Haha . . . and as for Titanic, that's not a fair comparison for any movie in recent years to go up against.

tkenji69

06-24-2006, 05:43 AM

Well, in a manner of speaking, yes. Thus far, X2 has better legs than The Last Stand. X2 earned 39% of its total domestic gross during its opening weekend, while the other 61% was earned subsequently . . .

So X3 doesnt get to have legs because it made more of its money on the opening weekend????:( I want legs dammit :)

Carp Man

06-24-2006, 07:57 AM

Holy crap that looks depressing...hows the screen and sound? Do they have bathrooms or do you just go outside? just asking...but is it as bad as it looks...

ok back to X3 and not really...but how do you think Click is gonna debut? imo...this looks like his worst one yet....but everytime i say that...I end up sorta like-ing them. Do you think X3 will be outa the top ten?

Never judge a book by it's cover. That picture was taken 10 years ago, before Wallace Theaters took it over. When it was a hole in the wall. They have done work to the exterior, and interior. It's a fully functunal theater. It has everything any other theater has. It's clean, well lit, the sound is as good as any, the seats are comfortable. they recline. It doesn't look as fancy as the Norstar 14, but then again like I said, the compay owns both theaters. If your ever in the area, check it out, you'll be plesently surprised.

WorthyStevens

06-24-2006, 10:55 AM

Numbers are in for Friday...

$1,312,000, a drop of 38%...

http://www.showbizdata.com/dailybox.cfm

Pickle-El

06-24-2006, 11:24 AM

Critics. LOL. Take their collective brains, put it in a bird, and the bird would fly backwards. The public will decide if this movie is suscufull. Word of mouth, and viewers reviews. Word of mouth will be huge in determing the suscess of this movie. So far looks like another 50 % drop for X3 this week.

Thing, you have some of the best one-liners on the Hype. :up:

phantom47

06-24-2006, 11:36 AM

1,350,000 per BOM when actuals come in it will probably be 1,500,000 +57.5% the biggest increase in the top 12

danoyse

06-24-2006, 11:37 AM

They are still blockbusters she starred in. She had the title role in former.

And second billing.

But I thought The Break-Up was a blockbuster because of . . . VAUGHNISTON!

Well, now you know it exists. :p

I'm not embarrassed at all, I'm happy.

And yes, Rothman and co., all they did was spin a web of misleading direction in regards to X-men 3.

If that makes you happy, I'd hate to see what makes you mad. :confused:

danoyse

06-24-2006, 11:39 AM

ok back to X3 and not really...but how do you think Click is gonna debut? imo...this looks like his worst one yet....but everytime i say that...I end up sorta like-ing them. Do you think X3 will be outa the top ten?

Not sure if Adam Sandler still has the box office power he did before...but the movie's been advertisted to death, so it will probably do well this weekend.

X3...eh, it's been out awhile now. Although I did see it again on Thursday night and it was still decently crowded. :up:

Amm-arD

06-24-2006, 12:15 PM

is the last scene of the whole film Magneto trying to move the chess piece or is there a scene after the credits as well??

GL's Light

06-24-2006, 01:06 PM

Judging by the Friday estimates, X3 will have its first drop of less than 50%, Click is headed for an opening in the low to mid 40's, and Cars is on track for an excellent hold with a likely mid-20's take - it's looking very strong to make it passed the $ 200 million domestic mark.

Fanticon

06-24-2006, 01:37 PM

hmm...x3 is still fighting off davinci code and doing a good job at it...i did think that it would atleast pass garfield and nab the number 8 spot in the top 10.
Click was expected to be adam sandlers biggest hit? some sites were predicting a 50m opening...40's not bad but...again the movie just looked bad.

Carp Man

06-24-2006, 01:56 PM

Updated #'s below. $ 1.3 million estimate for friday. Ranks it 9th. Up 57.5 % from Thursday, down 39.6 % from week ago.

Carp Man

06-24-2006, 01:57 PM

Thing, you have some of the best one-liners on the Hype. :up:

Tks. :)

Avalanche

06-24-2006, 02:05 PM

In what way? You seem to be ignoring the fact that Vaughn and Aniston both were strong BO performers before they started going out and before Aniston broke up with Brad Pitt.

You also seem to be ignoring the fact that it was the first rom-com (sorta) released in quite a while so in brought in a big female demographic that X-men 3 didn't.
I'm not ignoring any other factors that attribute to the reasonable success of The Break Up. I'm saying that the relationship between Vince and Jen was one of these factors. Naturally other factors where at play. I'm not suggesting The Break Up was only successful because of the relationship of the leads.

You seem to be ignoring this factor when it's widely recognised these kind of relationships to boost box office results.

Advanced Dark

06-24-2006, 02:42 PM

Tks. :)

^ There's another one. Your genius is showing.

phantom47

06-24-2006, 02:50 PM

I'm not ignoring any other factors that attribute to the reasonable success of The Break Up. I'm saying that the relationship between Vince and Jen was one of these factors. Naturally other factors where at play. I'm not suggesting The Break Up was only successful because of the relationship of the leads.

You seem to be ignoring this factor when it's widely recognised these kind of relationships to boost box office results. I agree look how Mr. and Mrs. Smith did when all the animosity of the Brad and Jen situation was dealing out. That movie performed better with the hype that came with the tabloids. The break-up has far exceeded anyones expectations and will probably get to 100 mil plus mark this weekend which is awsome for a comedy.

To me X3 is holding its own, most of the weekdays this week beat out the same for X1 and X2 and when the actual numbers come in for Friday it will probably do the same

TheVileOne

06-24-2006, 03:57 PM

Avalanche

06-24-2006, 04:00 PM

The Break-Up still would've performed well regardless.
Maybe.

I don't think it would have performed as well though. Their relationship had a positive effect on box office sales.

danoyse

06-24-2006, 04:57 PM

And therefore reasonable enough competition against X3. :p

Visionary

06-24-2006, 07:53 PM

X3 should pass X2 worldwide cume in about a week or less, and I couldn't be more happy. :)

TheVileOne

06-24-2006, 07:57 PM

Maybe.

I don't think it would have performed as well though. Their relationship had a positive effect on box office sales.

Whatever. I actually heard people were bashing the movie in support of Jolie/Pitt's illegitimate child.

Theweepeople

06-24-2006, 08:32 PM

"X3 should pass X2 worldwide cume in about a week or less, and I couldn't be more happy."

X3 passed X2 domesticaly by 6 million so far? What is so impressive about that? It also, passed King Kong by 3 million and cast 3 million more to make. Last time I checked King Kong was considered a financial failure.

Theweepeople

06-24-2006, 08:37 PM

Maybe I should post the profit% of the budget for the X-Men movies that I posted in the thread I started here.:) Some of the people in this thread may need a brutally honest reality check.

chaseter

06-24-2006, 09:10 PM

Fanticon

06-24-2006, 09:16 PM

Maybe I should post the profit% of the budget for the X-Men movies that I posted in the thread I started here.:) Some of the people in this thread may need a brutally honest reality check.

ok well you can do that...but lets pretend we know nothing about budgets, inflation, comparisons to world wide takes, marketing and all these other factors that may point to why X3 isn't as big a success as we think....and you could make your point and put people down and as Randal would say "I hope it feels so good to be right. Theres nothing more exhilarating than pointing out the shortcomings of others, is there?"

lets look at this in the simplest of forms...X1 157m...X2 214m...X3 219m and still going and thats how its gonna look on all those "All Time Top 200 Grossing" lists, not a notch below where X1 or X2 sit in ranking....people are happy that these movies make more than the previous...maybe not much more...maybe when you factor in all these other numbers...you want to look at dissapointments...try looking at other sequels in the past twenty years that made it to 3 movies...look at the declines...when almost everything that Hollywood tells us about the nature of how a sequel performs is going to be less than the original...it seems like these movies have done the opposite. We know that it may not in the long run end up being as profitable...we know the theory that...if Singer had done this or Mathew Vaughn...maybe it would have done better at the box office...but this is simple math...to those who do not care to factor in the other things that point to X3 being a failure in terms of how much money was spent just to make the film...its still did not sink below X2's domestic take...so in that respect...its a success to them...I had higher expectations...but atleast it didn't get any lower.
oh and werd to yer motha.

Theweepeople

06-24-2006, 09:17 PM

chaseter

06-24-2006, 09:25 PM

"Doubt it since X3 has not made all the profit it can make yet."

No kidding. That's why I calculated the profit% of the budget for what I think it will make which is still not impressive financially.
What you think it will make is not industry standards. You obviously have your doubts for the film and would therefore conceive a low profit yield for the movie.

Theweepeople

06-24-2006, 09:32 PM

"ok well you can do that...but lets pretend we know nothing about budgets, inflation, comparisons to world wide takes, marketing and all these other factors that may point to why X3 isn't as big a success as we think....and you could make your point and put people down and as Randal would say "I hope it feels so good to be right. Theres nothing more exhilarating than pointing out the shortcomings of others, is there?"

It was never my intention to put anyone down. I think the purpose of arguing is to learn something new and unique about your perspective and one that is contrary.

"lets look at this in the simplest of forms...X1 157m...X2 214m...X3 219m and still going and thats how its gonna look on all those "All Time Top 200 Grossing" lists, not a notch below where X1 or X2 sit in ranking....people are happy that these movies make more than the previous...maybe not much more...maybe when you factor in all these other numbers...you want to look at dissapointments...try looking at other sequels in the past twenty years that made it to 3 movies...look at the declines...when almost everything that Hollywood tells us about the nature of how a sequel performs is going to be less than the original...it seems like these movies have done the opposite. We know that it may not in the long run end up being as profitable...we know the theory that...if Singer had done this or Mathew Vaughn...maybe it would have done better at the box office...but this is simple math...to those who do not care to factor in the other things that point to X3 being a failure in terms of how much money was spent just to make the film...its still did not sink below X2's domestic take...so in that respect...its a success to them...I had higher expectations...but atleast it didn't get any lower.
oh and werd to yer motha."

All of this is relative and depends upon what you, I, and Fox's considers to be a successful film. You may say sequel that makes 20 million dollars over its budget and 15 million over its predecessor is a success. I say that a movie that will end up with a profit% of 9 to 12% of its budget is a failure at least domestically. I can't read Tom Rothman's mind but, statistics tell me he can't be happy with what the total gross will be. Therefore, don't expect any X-Men sequels for a long time. Not even the spinoffs are a sure thing now.

Theweepeople

06-24-2006, 09:57 PM

"What you think it will make is not industry standards. You obviously have your doubts for the film and would therefore conceive a low profit yield for the movie."

Your definition of industry standards are? Alien vs. Predator was a lot more financially successful than this movie due to it's budget and worldwide gross and I have not heard anyone talk about how wonderful of an investment it was for Fox. The franchise will die after the next movie because Fox completely destroyed the Aliens and Predator fanbase with the last film. Unless some other movie company buys the rights to this franchise then we will never get a quality Alien, predator, or Aliens vs. Predator film anytime soon.

danoyse

06-24-2006, 10:18 PM

phantom47

06-24-2006, 10:28 PM

Maybe I should post the profit% of the budget for the X-Men movies that I posted in the thread I started here.:) Some of the people in this thread may need a brutally honest reality check.you cant base prfit on the marketing of one aspect of sales. There is International take, DVD/VHS rentals, Sales, Toys, 7-11 Slurpee cups, whens its all said and done its what FOX gets as a total that makes it a profit or not, and YEAH FOX is going to make a BIG Profit off this movie.

Theweepeople

06-24-2006, 10:33 PM

"I refuse to be intimidated by reality anymore. After all, what is reality anyway? Nothin' but a collective hunch."

Who said anything about intimidation? I am not intimidated by hunches either. I merely post facts and analyze them. If people can't except them then so be it. But, there is no denying them.:)

Theweepeople

06-24-2006, 10:39 PM

"you cant base prfit on the marketing of one aspect of sales. There is International take, DVD/VHS rentals, Sales, Toys, 7-11 Slurpee cups, whens its all said and done its what FOX gets as a total that makes it a profit or not, and YEAH FOX is going to make a BIG Profit off this movie."

Who said anything about basing all the profit on one aspect of sales? Many movies have made a lot of money off of the things you mentioned above. Tron made a crap load of money off of merchandise. After that movie came out all my friends had light cycle toys. My mom had to travel 45 minutes to buy one of those damn things(All the local toy stores had sold out months in advanced.). However, a second Tron movie was never made.

phantom47

06-24-2006, 10:43 PM

^^ you stated in your other post that domestic sales it wat ultimately makes profit, which is not true look at Divinci Code it has made the majority of its take overseas

Carp Man

06-24-2006, 10:47 PM

^ There's another one. Your genius is showing.

Ya think ?

danoyse

06-24-2006, 10:52 PM

Who said anything about basing all the profit on one aspect of sales? Many movies have made a lot of money off of the things you mentioned above. Tron made a crap load of money off of merchandise. After that movie came out all my friends had light cycle toys. My mom had to travel 45 minutes to buy one of those damn things(All the local toy stores had sold out months in advanced.). However, a second Tron movie was never made.

Because Tron was a FLOP.

Notice the lack of merchandising for X3. I was in the supermarket yesterday, and nearly everything in the store had either Superman or Captain Jack on it.

But they didn't merchandise X3...no toys, no Wolverine breakfast cereal. They didn't spend the money merchandising because it would take away on the profits of the movie.

danoyse

06-24-2006, 10:56 PM

Who said anything about intimidation? I am not intimidated by hunches either. I merely post facts and analyze them. If people can't except them then so be it. But, there is no denying them.:)

It's a quote from a play called "The Search For Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe." :)

Can you back up your facts?

GL's Light

06-24-2006, 11:33 PM

Notice the lack of merchandising for X3. I was in the supermarket yesterday, and nearly everything in the store had either Superman or Captain Jack on it.

But they didn't merchandise X3...no toys, no Wolverine breakfast cereal. They didn't spend the money merchandising because it would take away on the profits of the movie.
Merchandising doesn't cost the rights holder anything. The right to produce and market various merchandising items - toys, t-shirts, etc - is granted to various licensees (manufacturers and retailers) who carry the full burden of costs and keep most of the profits, with the rights holder receiving royalty payments in exchange for those licensing rights.

You don't see a lot of X3 merchandising because Fox doesn't own the merchandising rights to the X-Men, Marvel does.

On the other hand, Time Warner and Disney own all of the rights to Superman and Jack Sparrow respectively, so you see a ton of merchandising.

Advanced Dark

06-24-2006, 11:38 PM

^ Actually you don't see alot of X3 merchandise because Marvel cancelled their contract with TBWW early and took over all toy business themselves for the remainder of 2006. They didn't want to spend too much money on it or get stuck with a glut of inventory because in 2007 Hasbro took over paying Marvel 215 million dollars for the rights to produce all of these toys for Marvel including the rights for Spiderman 4. So the lack of X3 toys was due to a business change in Marvel's toy sector. Ghost Rider will be the first film where Hasbro is making the toys and you'll see a crapload of toys from that film online by XMAS. The license holder makes loads of profit on the toys over and above the royalties and upfront fees they pay to Marvel. :)

Theweepeople

06-24-2006, 11:53 PM

"^^ you stated in your other post that domestic sales it wat ultimately makes profit, which is not true look at Divinci Code it has made the majority of its take overseas"

No. you misinterpreted what I said. I said that typically domestic sales determines whether a movie is a successful installment in a franchise. However, there a times when a sequel or prequel that has a good profit% of its budget ends up destroying future sequels because it was not well received by fans.

Theweepeople

06-24-2006, 11:56 PM

"Can you back up your facts?"

What is there to back up? Facts speak for themselves. What is the point of trying to force someone to believe in something that is true?

danoyse

06-24-2006, 11:58 PM

What is there to back up? Facts speak for themselves. What is the point of trying to force someone to believe in something that is true?

So if I told you it was a fact that Santa Claus was real, it would have to be true?

You're going to have to do better then that. :)

danoyse

06-24-2006, 11:59 PM

Merchandising doesn't cost the rights holder anything. The right to produce and market various merchandising items - toys, t-shirts, etc - is granted to various licensees (manufacturers and retailers) who carry the full burden of costs and keep most of the profits, with the rights holder receiving royalty payments in exchange for those licensing rights.

You don't see a lot of X3 merchandising because Fox doesn't own the merchandising rights to the X-Men, Marvel does.

On the other hand, Time Warner and Disney own all of the rights to Superman and Jack Sparrow respectively, so you see a ton of merchandising.

Ahhh....I see. :up:

Theweepeople

06-24-2006, 11:59 PM

"Because Tron was a FLOP.

Notice the lack of merchandising for X3. I was in the supermarket yesterday, and nearly everything in the store had either Superman or Captain Jack on it.

But they didn't merchandise X3...no toys, no Wolverine breakfast cereal. They didn't spend the money merchandising because it would take away on the profits of the movie."

Either you are lying about Tron are someone lied to you about Tron.

Profit% of its budget=94%:).

danoyse

06-25-2006, 12:03 AM

Either you are lying about Tron are someone lied to you about Tron.

Profit% of its budget=94%:).

The video game outgrossed the movie. The movie itself was a box office flop.

Advanced Dark

06-25-2006, 12:05 AM

Tron wasn't a flop. It doubled it's budget making 33 million in 1982 which was a good sum of money for a new franchise in the sci-fi genre.

danoyse

06-25-2006, 12:10 AM

But Disney was trying to create a Star Wars-type franchise, and it never happened. They released it the same summer as "ET", which slayed it at the box office, and they didn't bother with the sequel they were planning.

GL's Light

06-25-2006, 12:16 AM

Tron was a relatively expensive film by the standards of the early 80's. Ancillary revenue streams weren't the force they are today, so a film had to achieve profitability through theatrical box office alone. Taking into account the split between the studio and the theaters, Tron just about broke even. It was neither an outright flop nor a hit. It was a box office disappointment.

Advanced Dark

06-25-2006, 12:22 AM

Daynose,

I see what you mean. I loved the film though. Tron 2.0 is still in the works.

Theweepeople

06-25-2006, 12:24 AM

"So if I told you it was a fact that Santa Claus was real, it would have to be true?

You're going to have to do better then that."

What do you want me to tell you? I already stated everything about why this movie is a disappointment in the thread I started. I'm not going to rewrite everything in this thread.

Theweepeople

06-25-2006, 12:26 AM

"Daynose,

I see what you mean. I loved the film though. Tron 2.0 is still in the works."

Tron 2.0 has been in the works for like 6 years!!! Is another Tron movie really going to be made anytime soon. Unfortunately, the latest bad news I heard about Tron is that a parody of the movie involving Goofy will be made. I pray that what I read are merely rumours.

danoyse

06-25-2006, 12:30 AM

Daynose,

I see what you mean. I loved the film though. Tron 2.0 is still in the works.

I remember the summer it was out...the special effects were great, but it just didn't have the story to hold it up. And everyone was going to see ET.

Are they still working on Tron 2? Last I heard it was going to be a video game. I hear it's a bonus level (?) on the new Kingdom Hearts game.

danoyse

06-25-2006, 12:31 AM

What do you want me to tell you? I already stated everything about why this movie is a disappointment in the thread I started. I'm not going to rewrite everything in this thread.

Well, this thread, going back to the release date, has been dissecting the pros and cons of the box office pretty well so far. :)

Fanticon

06-25-2006, 05:27 AM

Hey, Theweepeople....just hit the http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/buttons/quote.gif icon to "quote" someones post...it might save you time while trying to keep up with your pointless points:up:

Carp Man

06-25-2006, 11:11 AM

Ok. Weekend box office estimates are in. Updated #'s below. If #'s hold true, $ 4.4 million, would be a 43.7 % drop from last weekend, and dead on prediction from Mojo. Looks like 225 to 230 domesticly before SR opens is reality. It will shatter X-Men 2's worldwide total, and mabey overseas #'s this week.

PoSeiDon

06-25-2006, 11:17 AM

I dont see how anyone would consider X3 a box office flop. It made lots of money. I think its not hitting peoples expectations so they consider it a flop!

RedIsNotBlue

06-25-2006, 11:19 AM

Hasn't X3 pretty much surpassed X2 moneywise?

ssj wolverine

06-25-2006, 11:21 AM

CapBeerCino

06-25-2006, 11:22 AM

Hasn't X3 pretty much surpassed X2 moneywise?

...And budgetwise?

Darkdd

06-25-2006, 11:28 AM

Carp Man

06-25-2006, 11:34 AM

I dont see how anyone would consider X3 a box office flop. It made lots of money. I think its not hitting peoples expectations so they consider it a flop!

There will always be those who want to look at the negatives in any situation. The DC crowd is the main culprites. It has beaten X2's domestic. 407.5 million was X2 worldwide #'s, and 192.6 million was It's overseas #'s.

antariksh

06-25-2006, 11:35 AM

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/?yr=2006&wknd=25&p=.htm

X3 #9th already surpassed X2 both domestically and most probably will surpass overseas too this weekend.

RedIsNotBlue

06-25-2006, 11:40 AM

...And budgetwise?

My point is it has surpassed X2's worldwide box office and is still going and people are STILL making it out to be a flop?? You can hate the movie all you want but to say this movie bombed is mildly retarded sorry.

Advanced Dark

06-25-2006, 11:42 AM

^ Because they're asshats.

http://oddworks.com/picz/asshat.jpg

Carp Man

06-25-2006, 11:48 AM

Rrrrrrrrrrrrrroooooooooooooooottttttttttttttffffff ffffffffflllllllllllllllmmmmmmmmmmaaaaaaaaaaaaaaoo oooooooooooooo

Angamb

06-25-2006, 11:51 AM

I think X3 could end getting 450 million worldwide. Isn't 500, but isn't bad.

RedIsNotBlue

06-25-2006, 11:52 AM

That Emma spin-off in your sig makes Jesus weep.

Darkdd

06-25-2006, 11:54 AM

^I wonder what it really is?

phantom47

06-25-2006, 11:55 AM

Id say X3 has a good 10-12 mil left domestically makeing a total of 237 mil here
it can probably do another 15 mil overseas before it opens up in China and Japan

bringingthe total WW 430 mil

plus chian and Japan = 450-460 WW

phantom47

06-25-2006, 11:56 AM

and it moved up a percent on rottentomatoes to 57% it has 26 more positive reviews than negative

Carp Man

06-25-2006, 12:12 PM

How many want to bet me Ebert will give SR 4 stars, and 2 thumbs up ? I was stunned he gave X3 3 stars.

WorthyStevens

06-25-2006, 12:13 PM

X1-X2-X3 comparison...

http://img333.imageshack.us/img333/6699/showdown2qg.jpg

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/showdowns/chart/?view=weekend&id=vs-xmen.htm

Advanced Dark

06-25-2006, 12:26 PM

Carp Man

06-25-2006, 12:35 PM

X3 was on about 2000 more screens than X1 or X2. Less theatres but more screens enabling more people to get in...in week 1 and week 2. Correct me if I'm wrong. Even if all things are equal X2 brough alot of new fans in. Many people saw X2 for the first time on DVD or TV increasing the fans for the 3rd films opening.

I agree. The 1st 2 movies did bring in new fans, which is the whole point. It's made more to pull in more fans, then the faithful comic follower. Spider-Man 1 and 2 broke that mold. I wached Spider-Man, and I felt like I was reading the comic. It was great. It was so faithfull to the source material. There were a few deviations, but they did not take away from the feel of the movie.

Angamb

06-25-2006, 12:36 PM

X3 will end having 235 domestically, 240 at best. I would have loved 300, but it couldn't be.

Carp Man

06-25-2006, 12:39 PM

X3 will end having 235 domestically, 240 at best. I would have loved 300, but it couldn't be.

Fox knew they would have to make their money, before SR, and POTC opened. Why it started like a sky rocket, then fizzled. It was so front loaded. And it worked.

RedIsNotBlue

06-25-2006, 12:41 PM

Fox wasn't even worrying about SR. Why do people keep thinking that?

Advanced Dark

06-25-2006, 12:54 PM

Yeah Supes was too far away. Every studio knows they need to make there money in the first 2 weeks. You'll also notice marketing drops way down after a week or two because they've already made their money and it's not cost effective unless it's showing unusually strong legs at the box office. Fox should start a campaing now that says...Superman sold out? See X-Men again! LOL

Carp Man

06-25-2006, 12:58 PM

Superman sold out? See X-Men again! LOL

I could see that happening. Or I like " If you really want to see a great movie, forget SR, go see X-Men", even better.:p

Advanced Dark

06-25-2006, 01:28 PM

And X3 surpassed that other flop King Kong domestically a few days ago. Though it won't catch it internationally. No way.

Carp Man

06-25-2006, 01:53 PM

And X3 surpassed that other flop King Kong domestically a few days ago. Though it won't catch it internationally. No way.

Yea 60 % of King Kong was overseas, where they dig monster movies. Only did 218 here.

Advanced Dark

06-25-2006, 01:56 PM

^ That's why if they'd get the Hulk movie right for the general audiences out there it would make a killing. Zak will pull it off.

antariksh

06-25-2006, 02:06 PM

And X3 surpassed that other flop King Kong domestically a few days ago. Though it won't catch it internationally. No way.

I wouldn't call king kong flop by any means. It probably made a tiny profit between $5-10 million. It has done a LOT on dvd sales+rentals domestically and overseas.

With the King kong special edition dvd coming out during christmas it will probably make more money.

What was its budget $207 million+around $ 80-90 million in marketing and distribution. That movie got a lot of free publicity from magazines and entertainment channels. So universal did not feel like showing tons of tv spots in north america that is why it did not do $300+ domestically. They started showing the TV spots really late a day or two before in overseas markets too.

Plus there was a lot of merchandising on King kong. So it might have made GOOD amount of money for universal add in DVD sales+rentals. OVERALL it made back its money and by now might have made good profit.

antariksh

06-25-2006, 02:07 PM

^ That's why if they'd get the Hulk movie right for the general audiences out there it would make a killing. Zak will pull it off.

Ya you are right HULK 2 will most probably be awesome if Zak does the script for it.

Advanced Dark

06-25-2006, 02:07 PM

^ I was being sarcastic regarding Kong being a flop because some retards are calling X3 a flop. Though I thought the movie sucked bigtime it did well overseas but was well below expectations domestic...X3 is well above all analyst expectations.

antariksh

06-25-2006, 02:12 PM

Advanced Dark

06-25-2006, 02:18 PM

I thought King Kong was a ruined opportunity. The film was going great until the first came across those dino's and the stamped started. All the action scenes on that Island sucked and were too over the top for the type of film it was. Your only supposed to suspend disbelief that the Island does exist and these animals exist...not that the characters can outrun them and swing from vines shooting brain sucking bugs, and that all dino's are clumsy and stupid when it comes to trying to get at the main characters but lethally agile when it comes to attacking extra's and other dino's. LOL The movie forgot all about physics while it tried to place the story in a real world environment. IN X3 we know it's a comic book film, we understand that the characters are mutants and can do amazing thing and we accept that from frame one.

crappymovie

06-25-2006, 02:35 PM

I could see that happening. Or I like " If you really want to see a great movie, forget SR, go see X-Men", even better.:p

It's actually very likely. The marketing of mediocre movies often resorts to extremes: case in point, the commercials of Nacho Libre which proclaim "The number one best reviewed comedy in America!" (I wish I was joking.) So I guess X3 could proclaim "The former number one second best reviewed comic book film of the summer!", not that anyone will remember what "X-Men: The Last Stand" when Superman Returns opens....

:O

crappymovie

06-25-2006, 02:36 PM

I thought King Kong was a ruined opportunity.

Funny, many feel the same way about X3.

Theweepeople

06-25-2006, 02:39 PM

RedIsNotBlue

06-25-2006, 02:40 PM

Stop the trolling.

Theweepeople

06-25-2006, 02:44 PM

People are morons! How can a movie that has grossed more than 200 million dollars domestically and god knows how much abroad be considered a flop? To me these are just whiners that didn't like the movie and were hoping to see it fail and want to put any negative spin on it.

Some of you simple minded people obviously need to read my posts more slowly before you say idiotic things like this. All I said was this movie is a box office disappointment for Fox domestically. Based on your logic a movie that costs 300 million and makes 320 million domestically is an amazing hit.

Theweepeople

06-25-2006, 02:48 PM

Theweepeople

06-25-2006, 02:52 PM

danoyse

06-25-2006, 02:55 PM

So the action sequences that didn't impress you didn't cost anything? :confused:

Theweepeople

06-25-2006, 02:56 PM

How many want to bet me Ebert will give SR 4 stars, and 2 thumbs up ? I was stunned he gave X3 3 stars.

I have a hard time excepting the validity of a review by someone who used to direct porno movies. Ebert also liked Daredevil, The Crying Game, and Toys.

blurb23

06-25-2006, 02:57 PM

Since we are comparing King Kong and X-Men 3 could someone explain to me why X-Men 3 cost 3 million more to make. The only action sequences in X-Men 3 that impressed me were 50% of the danger room scenes and Magneto's attack on the caravan.

Because of the other action sequences. During the Jean vs Xavier battle, almost the entire room (if not the whole thing) was entirely CGI.

RedIsNotBlue

06-25-2006, 02:58 PM

I have a hard time excepting the validity of a review by someone who used to direct porno movies. Ebert also liked Daredevil, The Crying Game, and Toys.

So if someone likes movies that you don't that makes their opinion less valid? Makes sense.

danoyse

06-25-2006, 03:00 PM

How many want to bet me Ebert will give SR 4 stars, and 2 thumbs up ? I was stunned he gave X3 3 stars.

Ebert gave SR a thumbs down. Roeper gave it the thumbs up.

Theweepeople

06-25-2006, 03:05 PM

So the action sequences that didn't impress you didn't cost anything? :confused:

Never said this. But, thanks for adding more fuel to the fire. I just never understood until now how much money a studio could waste on action scenes.

The action sequences in Daredevil also cost money. That did not make them good.

Daredevil's budget=80 million
X-Men's Budget=75 million

You tell me which movie had better action sequences.

Theweepeople

06-25-2006, 03:09 PM

So if someone likes movies that you don't that makes their opinion less valid? Makes sense.

Never said this. Funny how you fail to mention the porno aspect of my quote but, oh well. The point of my last post was to show that Ebert's credibility is shady at best. I'm sorry you were unable to grasp that concept.

danoyse

06-25-2006, 03:11 PM

Never said this. But, thanks for adding more fuel to the fire. I just never understood until now how much money a studio could waste on action scenes.

What fire? Are you that mad??

This was your quote: Since we are comparing King Kong and X-Men 3 could someone explain to me why X-Men 3 cost 3 million more to make. The only action sequences in X-Men 3 that impressed me were 50% of the danger room scenes and Magneto's attack on the caravan.

There was also a battle scene at the end, the destruction at Jean's house, Angel's escape from the lab, Pyro's destruction of the clinic, Wolverine getting tossed through the woods, the Golden Gate Bridge sequence.

You're quote indicated that you were only impressed with some of the sequences, that has nothing to do with the budget.

The action sequences in Daredevil also cost money. That did not make them good.

I've never even seen Daredevil.

RedIsNotBlue

06-25-2006, 03:12 PM

Never said this. Funny how you fail to mention the porno aspect of my quote but, oh well. The point of my last post was to show that Ebert's credibility is shady at best. I'm sorry you were unable to grasp that concept.

Actually I get your concept quite well. And I myself don't pay attention to critics opinions much. But you brought up 3 movies which you PERSONALLY dislike that Ebert didn't and try to spin that into him being a moron who doesn't know ****.

danoyse

06-25-2006, 03:13 PM

Exactly...I don't always agree with him, but Roger Ebert has been a respected critic for a long time. I was shocked he didn't like "Superman Returns."

RedIsNotBlue

06-25-2006, 03:15 PM

Well people just have different tastes. I can understand someone not liking SR even though I think I will love it.

danoyse

06-25-2006, 03:16 PM

Me too...I watched the HBO First Look this morning for SR, it really looks great. :up:

Theweepeople

06-25-2006, 03:39 PM

What fire? Are you that mad??

This was your quote: Since we are comparing King Kong and X-Men 3 could someone explain to me why X-Men 3 cost 3 million more to make. The only action sequences in X-Men 3 that impressed me were 50% of the danger room scenes and Magneto's attack on the caravan.

There was also a battle scene at the end, the destruction at Jean's house, Angel's escape from the lab, Pyro's destruction of the clinic, Wolverine getting tossed through the woods, the Golden Gate Bridge sequence.

You're quote indicated that you were only impressed with some of the sequences, that has nothing to do with the budget.

I've never even seen Daredevil.

Okay everyone. I am really not that upset about how X-Men 3 turned out. Also, I am not trying to piss anyone off with my posts. I'm suprised that most people in this thread who disagree with me resort to trying to insult me. We all have opinions. Is showing respect for an opinion too much to ask for.

By the way I thought X-Men 3 was a fun movie to watch. But, I thought it could have been much better had Fox taken it's time to develop the film.

CaptainStacy

06-25-2006, 04:11 PM

All I said was this movie is a box office disappointment for Fox domestically.

Indeed?

Prove it.

Show me a link to an interview with a single Fox executive that claims to be disappointed by this movie.

Universal admitted disappointment in the Hulk's box office, so dont even TRY and come at me with "a studio wouldnt admit it publicly..."

I'll wait. (but i wont hold my breath)

RedIsNotBlue

06-25-2006, 04:13 PM

Fox has A LOT of problems but financially they own you.

superion

06-25-2006, 04:18 PM

I have a hard time excepting the validity of a review by someone who used to direct porno movies. Ebert also liked Daredevil, The Crying Game, and Toys.

Ebert never directed porno movies. He wrote the screen play for Beyond the Valley of the Dolls which was directed by Russ Meyer. It wasn't a porno movie either though there was probably plenty of nudity.

The Crying Game was an Oscar nominated film most critics liked it so I don't see how that counts against him. Toys don't know what that is. As for liking Daredevil there are probably plenty of marginal films out there Ebert gave a thumbs up to like the new Garfield movie that others did not like. Its not liked he raved about the film.

Theweepeople

06-25-2006, 04:19 PM

Indeed?

Prove it.

Show me a link to an interview with a single Fox executive that claims to be disappointed by this movie.

Universal admitted disappointment in the Hulk's box office, so dont even TRY and come at me with "a studio wouldnt admit it publicly..."

I'll wait. (but i wont hold my breath)

Oh please. Like every single studio that makes a disappointing movie publicly admits their disappointment. Maybe Fox will admit their disappointment or maybe not. Just because they have not admitted it yet does not mean it won't happen.