The Iron Man 2 Box Office Prediction Thread

[redfirebird2008]

According to her she opted out, according to the studio she was fired. I'm likely to believe the studio.

I'm positive this has to do with her public comments, the studio does not like negative comments about their products, (see Katie Holmes/Batman Begins).


When did Katie Holmes bash Batman Begins? :huh:

[hatebox]

When did Katie Holmes bash Batman Begins? :huh:

She didn't, but her relationship with Cruise, which surfaced a month or two before the filmed opened, was all she talked about and she did little to promote her actual movie on the press circuit. This was particularly annoying for WB as War of the Worlds opened at a similar time.

[redfirebird2008]

She didn't, but her relationship with Cruise, which surfaced a month or two before the filmed opened, was all she talked about and she did little to promote her actual movie on the press circuit. This was particularly annoying for WB as War of the Worlds opened at a similar time.

I do remember this, although WB's own marketing was pathetic as well.

[hatebox]

It was, and the relationship was all the press asked about so she was buggered either way really.

[Tony Stark]

Hatebox is correct. I think it was particularly a slap in the face to WB, because she got the job in the first place because of her relationship with the WB on Dawson's Creek. There were probably more qualified actresses they could have went with.

Pretty much her career acting wise has been in flames since. I realize she's been trying to raise her daughter durring that time and may have put the acting career on the back burner to be a mom, but because she burned her bridges there, I don't see her getting nearly the quality of projects like BB, in the future. She has a few upcoming projects coming up, both are pretty low on the radar.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

As far as WOM on IM2 that's pretty speculative on your part. The documentable evidence is that IM2 has good WOM, it looks like it's not getting as much repeat buisness as the first, and is more front loaded.[QUOTE]

Isnt this a bit of a hypocritical statement? If it aint getting as much repeat business as the first, that indicates the WOM ISNT very good at all.

[QUOTE=Tony Stark;18363499]While Internet reviews are a small sampling, juding from that sampling and my own experience, people thought TF2 was a stupid piece of crap. Hell even Shia LaBeouf is running around saying it was a stupid piece of crap, well ok he was a little more diplomatic about it, but clearly he blamed Bay for the ADD movie of the year.

Now maybe the kiddies thought TF2 was great and they may not be reflected in the reviews, but I think it's safe to say that the 25-55 crowd thought TF2 wasn't very good. I'd be curious to see some exit polling of TF2's demographics.

Even though the first movies did similar numbers, I do not compare TF with IM, because IM was about 10000% more intelligent than any thing Bay has ever done.

Dispite the numbers, I'd say the general public if asked would say Star Trek was the superior movie last summer, and the fact that it was in the discussion for an Oscar nomination for best picture pretty much says it all.

You say all this, but the kiddies alone didnt give the movie the amazing DVD sales it had/has. ROTF only sold $17 million less in DVD sales than TDK, and this was in a year when Blu-ray became a lot more prominent than 2008, so in total on BD and DVD, the movie has surpassed TDK for income.

Transformers 2 was as big as it was because the film was loaded with fights and such, so people kept watching it cause it looked cool. Despite the fact it sucked.

For people saying Transformers 2 wasn't hated, the drops on TF2 were pretty large weekend to weekend (though not catastrophically bad), and we have the stars of the movie openly bashing it. They wouldn't be doing that if the studio didn't give them the okay to bash it. I think Shia's bashing of it is in part a way to sell Transformers 3 and defeat the ill will Transformers 2 created.

Again, see above, the DVD sales were astonishing, and the blu-ray sold well also, those arent the sales of a movie 'hated by everyone' supposedly.

[redfirebird2008]

You say all this, but the kiddies alone didnt give the movie the amazing DVD sales it had/has. ROTF only sold $17 million less in DVD sales than TDK, and this was in a year when Blu-ray became a lot more prominent than 2008, so in total on BD and DVD, the movie has surpassed TDK for income.

Do you actually have a source on this? TDK was much bigger in unit sales than TF2 on home video. I also would not fully trust The-Numbers.com whether it's revenue or unit sales. They've been known to be way off over the years. Heck, they've been known to make drastic changes out of nowhere. They estimate the numbers. They don't have the actual data. There was a guy at Box Office Mojo who had access to the Nielsen Videoscan charts and it was quite a bit different from The-Numbers.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Do you actually have a source on this? Because I've got a couple of sources that directly contradict what you are claiming. TDK was much bigger in unit sales than TF2 on home video. I also would not fully trust The-Numbers.com whether it's revenue or unit sales. They've been known to be way off over the years. Heck, they've been known to make drastic changes out of nowhere. They estimate the numbers. They don't have the actual data. There was a guy at Box Office Mojo who had access to the Nielsen Videoscan charts and it was quite a bit different from The-Numbers.

I was talking about profits rather than units, and The-numbers dont always get it right straight away but eventually they tend to get the correct number once a DVD has been out long enough, and both have. According to that site TF2 made over $216 million on DVD, and TDK made over $233 million, but this doesnt factor in blu-ray's, whose sales were 75% up in 2009 from 2008.

[redfirebird2008]

I was talking about profits rather than units, and The-numbers dont always get it right straight away but eventually they tend to get the correct number once a DVD has been out long enough, and both have. According to that site TF2 made over $216 million on DVD, and TDK made over $233 million, but this doesnt factor in blu-ray's, whose sales were 75% up in 2009 from 2008.

How do you know they "eventually have the correct number"? They've admitted that their numbers are just estimates. The guy I'm talking about has both TDK and TF1 around 19 million units sold. TF2 was considerably smaller than both of them. He has access to the actual Videoscan charts, which are not released to the public. Videoscan is the equivalent of Soundscan. It's run by the same company. It's a shame the movie industry doesn't have a Billboard company to track this stuff officially. I've never trusted The-Numbers because they constantly change things around.

As for your point about Blu-ray, TDK sold more Blu-ray's than any other movie until Avatar came along, so that is an irrelevant point as it relates to TF2.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

How do you know they "eventually have the correct number"? They've admitted that their numbers are just estimates. The guy I'm talking about has both TDK and TF1 around 19 million units sold. TF2 was considerably smaller than both of them. He has access to the actual Videoscan charts, which are not released to the public. Videoscan is the equivalent of Soundscan. It's run by the same company. It's a shame the movie industry doesn't have a Billboard company to track this stuff officially. I've never trusted The-Numbers because they constantly change things around.

As for your point about Blu-ray, TDK sold more Blu-ray's than any other movie until Avatar came along, so that is an irrelevant point as it relates to TF2.

Estimates usually arent far off though are they? Fair enough about Blu-rays, but it was announced everywere that TF2 was the highest selling DVD of 2009 in its first week of release, and The-numbers had the same numbers as all other web-sites did when it was announced, so I dont think they were that far off.

TF1 and TDK did sell more units though.

[redfirebird2008]

Estimates usually arent far off though are they? Fair enough about Blu-rays, but it was announced everywere that TF2 was the highest selling DVD of 2009 in its first week of release, and The-numbers had the same numbers as all other web-sites did when it was announced, so I dont think they were that far off.

TF1 and TDK did sell more units though.

They are at minimum 2 million lower for TF2 and at minimum 4.5 million lower for TDK and 2.5 million lower for TF1. Here's the top 100 in North America as of January 2010. Note that titles in red were new additions to the chart and titles in bold had updated numbers from the previous chart:

Top 100 DVD Sales Of All Time

* as of 10 January 2010


1 1 FINDING NEMO Animated 23.600.000
2 2 PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: THE CURSE OF THE BLACK PEARL J. Depp 21.500.000
3 3 SHREK 2 Animated 20.400.000
4 5 THE DARK KNIGHT Christian Bale, Michael Caine 18.793.000
5 6 TRANSFORMERS Shia LaBoeuf, Tyrese Gibson 18.270.000
6 4 PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: DEAD MAN'S CHEST Johnny Depp 17.383.000
7 9 CARS Animated 16.185.000
8 7 THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING Elijah Wood 16.000.000
9 8 THE INCREDIBLES Animated 15.600.000
10 10 THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE TWO TOWERS Elijah Wood 14.930.000
11 11 SPIDER-MAN Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst 14.769.000
12 12 THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA: THE LION, THE WITCH.. Georgie Henley 14.725.000
13 13 PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: AT WORLD'S END Johnny Depp 14.197.000
14 18 HAPPY FEET Animated 14.180.000
15 21 THE POLAR EXPRESS Tom Hanks 13.932.000
16 14 300 Gerard Butler, Lena Headey 13.900.000
17 15 THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE RETURN OF THE KING Elijah Wood 13.800.000
18 16 RATATOUILLE Animated 13.500.000
19 17 SHREK Animated 13.500.000
20 20 IRON MAN Robert Downey Jr, Terrence Howard 13.300.000
21 23 MONSTERS, INC. Animated 13.272.000
22 19 MADAGASCAR Animated 13.200.000
23 22 SHREK THE THIRD Animated 12.700.000
24 24 HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE Daniel Radcliffe 12.600.000
25 26 HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER'S STONE Daniel Radcliffe 12.400.000
26 25 THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST Jim Caviezel, Luca Lionello 12.040.000
27 27 SPIDER-MAN 2 Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst 11.723.000
28 30 HARRY POTTER AND THE ORDER OF PHOENIX Daniel Radcliffe 11.637.000
29 28 HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN Daniel Radcliffe 11.600.000
30 51 TWILIGHT Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson 11.588.000
31 NE TRANSFORMERS: REVENGE OF THE FALLEN Shia LaBeouf, Megan Fox 11.520.000
32 29 THE MATRIX Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne 11.000.000
33 31 HARRY POTTER AND THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS Daniel Radcliffe 10.900.000
34 32 BATMAN BEGINS Christian Bale, Liam Neeson 10.810.000
35 35 THE NOTEBOOK Ryan Gosling, Rachel McAdams 10.680.000
36 33 STAR WARS: EPISODE II - ATTACK OF THE CLONES Ewan McGregor 10.500.000
37 34 WALL-E Animated 10.400.000
38 36 STAR WARS: EPISODE III - REVENGE OF THE SITH Hayden Christensen 9.850.000
39 37 ICE AGE Animated 9.500.000
40 48 MY BIG FAT GREEK WEDDING Nia Vardalos, John Corbett 9.470.000
41 NE UP Animated 9.433.000
42 38 PEARL HARBOR Ben Affleck, Kate Beckinsale 9.400.000
43 39 SHARK TALE Animated 9.400.000
44 40 KUNG FU PANDA Animated 9.335.000
45 41 NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM Ben Stiller, Carla Gugino 9.300.000
46 44 ICE AGE 2: THE MELTDOWN Animated 9.289.000
47 NE THE HANGOVER Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms 9.121.000
48 42 NATIONAL TREASURE Nicolas Cage, Jon Voight 8.960.000
49 43 THE DEPARTED Leonardo DiCaprio, Matt Damon 8.940.000
50 45 THE MATRIX RELOADED Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne 8.800.000
51 46 ALVIN AND THE CHIPMUNKS Jason Lee, David Cross 8.655.000
52 47 OVER THE HEDGE Animated 8.625.000
53 49 I AM LEGEND Will Smith, Alice Braga 8.600.000
54 50 THE 40 YEAR OLD VIRGIN Steve Carell, Catherine Keener 8.600.000
55 NE HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE Daniel Radcliffe 8.580.000
56 52 SPIDER-MAN 3 Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst 8.400.000
57 61 ELF Will Ferrell, Andy Richter 8.395.000
58 56 THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS Paul Walker, Vin Diesel 8.300.000
59 53 STAR WARS: EPISODE I - THE PHANTOM MENACE Liam Neeson 8.265.000
60 82 MADAGASCAR: ESCAPE 2 AFRICA Animated 8.190.000
61 NE STAR TREK Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto 8.059.000
62 54 THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM Matt Damon, Julia Stiles 8.033.000
63 55 THE LION KING Animated 8.000.000
64 66 MAMMA MIA - THE MOVIE Meryl Streep, Pierce Brosnan 7.970.000
65 NE SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS Animated 7.929.000
66 68 GLADIATOR Russell Crowe 7.800.000
67 57 KING KONG Jack Black, Naomi Watts 7.800.000
68 58 MEET THE FOCKERS Robert De Niro, Ben Stiller 7.800.000
69 60 STAR WARS TRILOGY Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford 7.700.000
70 59 THE BOURNE IDENTITY Matt Damon, Franka Potente 7.700.000
71 63 LILO & STITCH Animated 7.600.000
72 62 THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW Dennis Quaid, Jake Gyllenhaal 7.600.000
73 64 WALK THE LINE Joaquin Phoenix, Reese Witherspoon 7.500.000
74 65 THE BOURNE SUPREMACY Matt Damon 7.350.000
75 93 TROY Brad Pitt, Orlando Bloom 7.346.000
76 69 MR. AND MRS. SMITH Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie 7.300.000
77 70 NAPOLEON DYNAMITE Jon Heder 7.300.000
78 67 THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA Meryl Streep, Anne Hathaway 7.300.000
79 71 THE SIMPSONS MOVIE Animated 7.250.000
80 92 THE DA VINCI CODE Tom Hanks, Audrey Tautou 7.230.000
81 72 WEDDING CRASHERS Owen Wilson, Vince Vaughn 7.210.000
82 75 CASINO ROYALE Daniel Craig, Eva Green 7.200.000
83 74 NATIONAL TREASURE 2: BOOK OF SECRETS Nicolas Cage 7.200.000
84 73 SUPERBAD Jonah Hill, Michael Cera 7.200.000
85 76 FANTASTIC FOUR Chris Evans, Jessica Alba 7.110.000
86 77 INDIANA JONES & THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL Harrison Ford 7.080.000
87 78 AUSTIN POWERS IN GOLDMEMBER Mike Myers, Beyonce Knowles 7.074.000
88 79 THE LITTLE MERMAID Animated 7.030.000
89 81 SEABISCUIT Jeff Bridges, Tobey McGuire 6.900.000
90 80 TALLADEGA NIGHTS: THE BALLAD OF RICKY BOBBY Will Ferrell 6.900.000
91 83 CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY Johnny Depp 6.800.000
92 85 ENCHANTED Patrick Dempsey, Amy Adams 6.800.000
93 84 XXX Vin Diesel 6.800.000
94 91 BEE MOVIE Animated 6.750.000
95 86 WAR OF THE WORLDS Tom Cruise, Dakota Fanning 6.630.000
96 87 RAY Jamie Foxx 6.600.000
97 88 WILD HOGS Tim Allen, John Travolta 6.520.000
98 89 HITCH Will Smith 6.500.000
99 90 THE LION KING 1½ Animated 6.500.000
100 94 OPEN SEASON Animated 6.400.000
100 95 SIGNS Mel Gibson, Joaquin Phoenix 6.400.000
100 96 THE MATRIX REVOLUTIONS Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne 6.400.000


Here is where he posted it under the name "Adam Strange" at Box Office Mojo:

http://boxofficemojo.com/forums/viewtopic.htm?t=81566&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=270


He originally started posting these figures on another forum:

http://www.ukmix.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=60990&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

If you look through that thread, you will see him answering people's requests for numbers on a bunch of different movies.

He eventually got tired of people bugging him about The-Numbers.com, so he stopped posting at Box Office Mojo, although he did post today:

Perhaps the most impressive thing about "Avatar" is that right now it's the longest running #1 DVD hit of the last 10 years (!) :shock:

The last DVD title that spent 4 weeks at #1 on the VideoScan Top 20 Chart was "The Gladiator" back in 2000.

Phenomenon!

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

Hatebox is correct. I think it was particularly a slap in the face to WB, because she got the job in the first place because of her relationship with the WB on Dawson's Creek. There were probably more qualified actresses they could have went with.

Pretty much her career acting wise has been in flames since. I realize she's been trying to raise her daughter durring that time and may have put the acting career on the back burner to be a mom, but because she burned her bridges there, I don't see her getting nearly the quality of projects like BB, in the future. She has a few upcoming projects coming up, both are pretty low on the radar.

yea, she's pretty much done for

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

They are at minimum 2 million lower for TF2 and at minimum 4.5 million lower for TDK and 2.5 million lower for TF1. Here's the top 100 in North America as of January 2010. Note that titles in red were new additions to the chart and titles in bold had updated numbers from the previous chart:

Top 100 DVD Sales Of All Time

* as of 10 January 2010


1 1 FINDING NEMO Animated 23.600.000
2 2 PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: THE CURSE OF THE BLACK PEARL J. Depp 21.500.000
3 3 SHREK 2 Animated 20.400.000
4 5 THE DARK KNIGHT Christian Bale, Michael Caine 18.793.000
5 6 TRANSFORMERS Shia LaBoeuf, Tyrese Gibson 18.270.000
6 4 PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: DEAD MAN'S CHEST Johnny Depp 17.383.000
7 9 CARS Animated 16.185.000
8 7 THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING Elijah Wood 16.000.000
9 8 THE INCREDIBLES Animated 15.600.000
10 10 THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE TWO TOWERS Elijah Wood 14.930.000
11 11 SPIDER-MAN Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst 14.769.000
12 12 THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA: THE LION, THE WITCH.. Georgie Henley 14.725.000
13 13 PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: AT WORLD'S END Johnny Depp 14.197.000
14 18 HAPPY FEET Animated 14.180.000
15 21 THE POLAR EXPRESS Tom Hanks 13.932.000
16 14 300 Gerard Butler, Lena Headey 13.900.000
17 15 THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE RETURN OF THE KING Elijah Wood 13.800.000
18 16 RATATOUILLE Animated 13.500.000
19 17 SHREK Animated 13.500.000
20 20 IRON MAN Robert Downey Jr, Terrence Howard 13.300.000
21 23 MONSTERS, INC. Animated 13.272.000
22 19 MADAGASCAR Animated 13.200.000
23 22 SHREK THE THIRD Animated 12.700.000
24 24 HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE Daniel Radcliffe 12.600.000
25 26 HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER'S STONE Daniel Radcliffe 12.400.000
26 25 THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST Jim Caviezel, Luca Lionello 12.040.000
27 27 SPIDER-MAN 2 Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst 11.723.000
28 30 HARRY POTTER AND THE ORDER OF PHOENIX Daniel Radcliffe 11.637.000
29 28 HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN Daniel Radcliffe 11.600.000
30 51 TWILIGHT Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson 11.588.000
31 NE TRANSFORMERS: REVENGE OF THE FALLEN Shia LaBeouf, Megan Fox 11.520.000
32 29 THE MATRIX Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne 11.000.000
33 31 HARRY POTTER AND THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS Daniel Radcliffe 10.900.000
34 32 BATMAN BEGINS Christian Bale, Liam Neeson 10.810.000
35 35 THE NOTEBOOK Ryan Gosling, Rachel McAdams 10.680.000
36 33 STAR WARS: EPISODE II - ATTACK OF THE CLONES Ewan McGregor 10.500.000
37 34 WALL-E Animated 10.400.000
38 36 STAR WARS: EPISODE III - REVENGE OF THE SITH Hayden Christensen 9.850.000
39 37 ICE AGE Animated 9.500.000
40 48 MY BIG FAT GREEK WEDDING Nia Vardalos, John Corbett 9.470.000
41 NE UP Animated 9.433.000
42 38 PEARL HARBOR Ben Affleck, Kate Beckinsale 9.400.000
43 39 SHARK TALE Animated 9.400.000
44 40 KUNG FU PANDA Animated 9.335.000
45 41 NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM Ben Stiller, Carla Gugino 9.300.000
46 44 ICE AGE 2: THE MELTDOWN Animated 9.289.000
47 NE THE HANGOVER Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms 9.121.000
48 42 NATIONAL TREASURE Nicolas Cage, Jon Voight 8.960.000
49 43 THE DEPARTED Leonardo DiCaprio, Matt Damon 8.940.000
50 45 THE MATRIX RELOADED Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne 8.800.000
51 46 ALVIN AND THE CHIPMUNKS Jason Lee, David Cross 8.655.000
52 47 OVER THE HEDGE Animated 8.625.000
53 49 I AM LEGEND Will Smith, Alice Braga 8.600.000
54 50 THE 40 YEAR OLD VIRGIN Steve Carell, Catherine Keener 8.600.000
55 NE HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE Daniel Radcliffe 8.580.000
56 52 SPIDER-MAN 3 Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst 8.400.000
57 61 ELF Will Ferrell, Andy Richter 8.395.000
58 56 THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS Paul Walker, Vin Diesel 8.300.000
59 53 STAR WARS: EPISODE I - THE PHANTOM MENACE Liam Neeson 8.265.000
60 82 MADAGASCAR: ESCAPE 2 AFRICA Animated 8.190.000
61 NE STAR TREK Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto 8.059.000
62 54 THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM Matt Damon, Julia Stiles 8.033.000
63 55 THE LION KING Animated 8.000.000
64 66 MAMMA MIA - THE MOVIE Meryl Streep, Pierce Brosnan 7.970.000
65 NE SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS Animated 7.929.000
66 68 GLADIATOR Russell Crowe 7.800.000
67 57 KING KONG Jack Black, Naomi Watts 7.800.000
68 58 MEET THE FOCKERS Robert De Niro, Ben Stiller 7.800.000
69 60 STAR WARS TRILOGY Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford 7.700.000
70 59 THE BOURNE IDENTITY Matt Damon, Franka Potente 7.700.000
71 63 LILO & STITCH Animated 7.600.000
72 62 THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW Dennis Quaid, Jake Gyllenhaal 7.600.000
73 64 WALK THE LINE Joaquin Phoenix, Reese Witherspoon 7.500.000
74 65 THE BOURNE SUPREMACY Matt Damon 7.350.000
75 93 TROY Brad Pitt, Orlando Bloom 7.346.000
76 69 MR. AND MRS. SMITH Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie 7.300.000
77 70 NAPOLEON DYNAMITE Jon Heder 7.300.000
78 67 THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA Meryl Streep, Anne Hathaway 7.300.000
79 71 THE SIMPSONS MOVIE Animated 7.250.000
80 92 THE DA VINCI CODE Tom Hanks, Audrey Tautou 7.230.000
81 72 WEDDING CRASHERS Owen Wilson, Vince Vaughn 7.210.000
82 75 CASINO ROYALE Daniel Craig, Eva Green 7.200.000
83 74 NATIONAL TREASURE 2: BOOK OF SECRETS Nicolas Cage 7.200.000
84 73 SUPERBAD Jonah Hill, Michael Cera 7.200.000
85 76 FANTASTIC FOUR Chris Evans, Jessica Alba 7.110.000
86 77 INDIANA JONES & THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL Harrison Ford 7.080.000
87 78 AUSTIN POWERS IN GOLDMEMBER Mike Myers, Beyonce Knowles 7.074.000
88 79 THE LITTLE MERMAID Animated 7.030.000
89 81 SEABISCUIT Jeff Bridges, Tobey McGuire 6.900.000
90 80 TALLADEGA NIGHTS: THE BALLAD OF RICKY BOBBY Will Ferrell 6.900.000
91 83 CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY Johnny Depp 6.800.000
92 85 ENCHANTED Patrick Dempsey, Amy Adams 6.800.000
93 84 XXX Vin Diesel 6.800.000
94 91 BEE MOVIE Animated 6.750.000
95 86 WAR OF THE WORLDS Tom Cruise, Dakota Fanning 6.630.000
96 87 RAY Jamie Foxx 6.600.000
97 88 WILD HOGS Tim Allen, John Travolta 6.520.000
98 89 HITCH Will Smith 6.500.000
99 90 THE LION KING 1½ Animated 6.500.000
100 94 OPEN SEASON Animated 6.400.000
100 95 SIGNS Mel Gibson, Joaquin Phoenix 6.400.000
100 96 THE MATRIX REVOLUTIONS Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne 6.400.000


Here is where he posted it under the name "Adam Strange" at Box Office Mojo:

http://boxofficemojo.com/forums/viewtopic.htm?t=81566&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=270


He originally started posting these figures on another forum:

http://www.ukmix.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=60990&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

If you look through that thread, you will see him answering people's requests for numbers on a bunch of different movies.

He eventually got tired of people bugging him about The-Numbers.com, so he stopped posting at Box Office Mojo, although he did post today:

Interesting stuff, thanks, but this doesnt disprove my point that the ROTF DVD sold very well, so it wasnt as disliked as people make out, it did very well on BD too I believe. People wouldnt have bought the BD/DVD if they thought the movie was crap.

Back to Iron Man 2 though, I was just checking the screen count on BOmojo and IM2 barely made over $500,000 more than Robin Hood on Wednesday despite having nearly 1000 more screens. This isnt looking good IMO, its just not having the legs of IM1 at all.

[redfirebird2008]

Interesting stuff, thanks, but this doesnt disprove my point that the ROTF DVD sold very well, so it wasnt as disliked as people make out, it did very well on BD too I believe. People wouldnt have bought the BD/DVD if they thought the movie was crap.




TF2 did very well, but it did drop quite a bit in units sold from TF1.



Back to Iron Man 2 though, I was just checking the screen count on BOmojo and IM2 barely made over $500,000 more than Robin Hood on Wednesday despite having nearly 1000 more screens. This isnt looking good IMO, its just not having the legs of IM1 at all.


You mean theater count, not screen count. Screen count is much bigger than that. For instance, IM2 opened in 4,380 theaters on roughly 10,000 screens. Robin Hood opened in 3,503 theaters on 5,700 screens. IM2's theater count went up to 4,390 during its second weekend but the screen count stayed around 10,000:

http://boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=2778&p=.htm

Plunging 59 percent, Iron Man 2 collected $52 million on nearly 10,000 screens at 4,390 theaters.



Marketed as if it were Gladiator 2 albeit with less verve, Robin Hood showed nary a quiver with $36.1 million on approximately 5,700 screens at 3,503 locations.

[Tony Stark]

You say all this, but the kiddies alone didnt give the movie the amazing DVD sales it had/has. ROTF only sold $17 million less in DVD sales than TDK, and this was in a year when Blu-ray became a lot more prominent than 2008, so in total on BD and DVD, the movie has surpassed TDK for income.

I was going to respond to this, but redfirebird beat me to the punch. It's not even close to TDK, and it's not that far ahead of Star Trek considering TF2 had about a month's advance on the DVD release over Star Trek.

Perhaps you were thinking of TF1.

Anyway, I know very few people who liked TF2 and the internet reviews reflect that view. It did make a lot of money. Some times crappy movies make alot of money. I remember that being the case for Independance Day, which at the time was the highest grossing release that year.

[redfirebird2008]

As expected, IM2 made around $3m on Thursday. It lost another $2.1m to Alice in Wonderland. The Thursday-to-Thursday drop of 52% is pretty good compared to some of its other drops this week (high 50% area, even into the 60% area).

[I SEE SPIDEY]

If it has the same weekend multiplier that it had last weekend it will make about 24.6mil this weekend. Which would be a drop of nearly 53% but I'm going to give it a better multiplier with my predictions.

1. Shrek 4: 105mil. It looks like s**t but 3D ticket prices will help, I wouldn't be surprised if it opened higher or lower to be honest.

2. Iron Man 2: 25.5mil-51% The studio could totally lie for it but I still don't think that it's going to be a 40% drop lie. Also I really wouldn't be surprised if it had a 46 to 48% drop, I'm actually expecting it to do better than my prediction. I'm expecting a 7 to 7.7mil friday.

3. Robin Hood: 20.2mil-44% It's an adult movie that opened to lame numbers, I don't see a huge drop off.

4. MacGruber: 12.5mil SNL movie never do big business. This movie is getting good reviews but I just don't see it getting over 15mil. Watch me be wrong after the numbers come out.

[TheVileOne]

I see all these as positive numbers for Iron Man 2. It breaks over $230 million today. After Memorial Day weekend it will draw ever close to $300 million.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Actually another 50+% drop isn't positive but to be fair it wouldn't be surprising either because thats what most think that it will do. 300mil will be hard to get if the movie keeps dropping 50%. Ofcourse it won't keep dropping 50% because most blockbusters eventually stablize and this movie doesn't have Hulk style word of mouth. I'm going to be really curious to see what the early friday estimates are at like 3 to 4am. Under 7mil friday would be bad only because it would be headed for a 54/55% drop most likely and probably an under 300mil close. But again, I just don't don't see that happening as I see 8mil as a more likely number than 6.5mil.

[Tony Stark]

From the way they're talking on teh BOM forums, Shrek looks like it's dropping down to 70 mil. McGruber is tracking at 5m for the weekend! So not a good weekend at all for BO, not sure if this will draw more for IM2, but Shrek looks to be the first bomb of the summer considering it should be doing awesome with the 3D.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Oh totally. After reading those boards I'm totally not confident in my Shrek 4 prediction. I don't think that it will help IM2 too much though because the weekday numbers just seem to point to it dropping in the high 40 percents to the low 50 percents and IM2 dropped 59% when it was going up against 36.1mil Robin Hood, even if Shrek's misses my prediction surely it still opens with twice as much as Robin Hood and that 70mil will still be more comp than it had last weekend.

[Tony Stark]

It seems to be trending ahead of SM3's which was 50.1 % in it's third weekend, so I hope the drop is in the 48% range. I guess we'll see.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

It's not trending ahead in terms of dollars though.

At the same point in their runs:

Spider-Man 3: 253.4

Iron Man 2: 224.7mil

If it follows last weekend's Thrusday to Friday bump it won't be jumping as high as Spider-Man 3 did or Iron Man for that matter. Plus it's Saturday to Sunday drops have been heavier than both Iron Man and Spider-Man 3. It's still tracking behind Alice which made 331.6mil so it making a couple of thousand more than SM3 on a comparable Thrusday doesn't mean that it will outgross it overall.

My opinion will change if the movie went up 165 to 175% on friday. I'm seeing around 160% at best though.

IM2's Thrusday was lower than the first movie's by a couple of 100 thousand BTW. IM2 still has quite the lead over IM which had 191.3mil at the same point but it's lead will start to shrink as the days pass.

[Tony Stark]

I meant percentage drop wise.

[redfirebird2008]

I meant percentage drop wise.

Yep, it's right around 4% ahead of SM3's legs right now, which would mean 96% of SM3's 50% drop. That would be a 48% drop for IM2. I'm hoping it can start pulling further ahead of SM3's legs though.

Meanwhile, it will be interesting to see what happens to Shrek. Sounds like under $90m for sure even with the 25% boost from 3D.

[TheVileOne]

Spider-man 3 made over $330 million and that's more than Iron Man's domestic take a year later.

So basically we are looking at about $275 million after Memorial Day weekend. Following that $300 million will be a cinch. Once again, many people said no chance of $300 million even after the first 2 weekends 2 years ago. Haters and naysayers really need to just be quiet about it. This movie will be pushed over $300 million even if it means Paramount and Marvel keeping it in theatres longer to do so. And studios do make deals with exhibitors every now and again to keep a movie's theatrical run longer, but it means the theatres getting a bigger percentage of the BO in the later weeks.

People really just need to calm down and see that the movie is not doing as bad as you think it is. Also, it's at $255 million overseas right now, so it's poised to surpass Iron Man's overseas take very soon. $600 million worldwide is pretty much guaranteed at this point and puts Iron Man right behind Spider-man in terms of worldwide box office and brand recognition. That sounds pretty marketable to me. It will probably slow down at about $650 million worldwide.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Yeah but it didn't go up as much as SM3 did last weekend and I think that that could negate the 4% lead if it performs the same way this weekend.

We will figure whats what in a few hours but those are my thoughts right now.

Who is calling the movie a flop Vile? I have never called the movie a flop at the boxoffice but if it drops 50+% this weekend it will struggle to make as much as the first and it won't be flying over 300mil either. Also it's not going into Memorial Day in a vacum, Sex And The City and Prince of Persia will both open with a decent chunk of change and are both competition for it.

[TheVileOne]

Percentages schmerentages.

I'm looking at the RAW numbers. The numbers show, approx. $225 million before weekend #3. No matter what it does weekend #3, weekend #4 is HOLIDAY WEEKEND TIME and that gives it another boost. That translates into a higher than usual weekend #4 box office for this type of movie. Another $75 million for this type of movie won't be very hard.

Watch.

I SEE SPIDEY, since we are cool and all, do we care to make a little wager on this since you are so positive? It could be a sig wager.

[redfirebird2008]

VileOne, you are very naive regarding box office. The holiday isn't going to dramatically change the overall amount that the movie will make. All it will do is transfer money that would have been made on other days to the holiday. $300m won't be a "cinch" unless the movie gets its butt in gear. I am 100% confident that it will get to $300m simply because Paramount will not let it fall below that number. Right now it is 4% ahead of SM3's legs, which would give it a $296m total. Paramount will fudge the $4m if they have to. But it will not be a cinch at the pace it's going right now.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Percentages schmerentages.

I'm looking at the RAW numbers. The numbers show, approx. $225 million before weekend #3. No matter what it does weekend #3, weekend #4 is HOLIDAY WEEKEND TIME and that gives it another boost. That translates into a higher than usual weekend #4 box office for this type of movie. Another $75 million for this type of movie won't be very hard.

Watch.

I SEE SPIDEY, since we are cool and all, do we care to make a little wager on this since you are so positive? It could be a sig wager.I lost my first wager and promised to never do it again but...what the hell, you are on my friend. You set the terms.

[Tony Stark]

I see sex and the city doing well, but PoP looks like this years Terminator Salvation, It's already being ripped.

There's alot of talk on BoM about the higher ticket prices driving people away this year. BO is down 8% year over year from 2009 according to BoM.

I think alot of what is happening has nothing to do with word of mouth but just the natural economic prinicpals when prices are increased above market clearing for what demand is, so we have a supply surplus of unsold tickets.

There was some report that Shrek was showing in some large markets only 25% sellouts. On an opening day for a movie series that's been very popular, that's horrible.

[rashad]

POP isn't being ripped as bad as you think.

[Bruce Malone]

Well i think everyone is a little tired with shrek by this point. Ppls interest probably peaked like 4 or 5 years ago.

I really believe word of mouth is hurting this film. I'm telling you i almost never heard anyone say negative things about the first iron man but im hearing quite a bit of stay away for this one.

[Tony Stark]

POP isn't being ripped as bad as you think.

There aren't alot of reviews right now, but the ones that are there it's getting trashed. I have a feeling based on the reviews it will be 30% or so on RT when the final tally is taken.

[rashad]

There aren't alot of reviews right now, but the ones that are there it's getting trashed. I have a feeling based on the reviews it will be 30% or so on RT when the final tally is taken.


There's 67 Positive 16 Negative according to the imdb count.

[TheVileOne]

I lost my first wager and promised to never do it again but...what the hell, you are on my friend. You set the terms.
OK, well you are predicting under $300 million domestic. I'm predicting over $300 million domestic.

The winner gets to alter the loser's signature to a format of their choosing :) . Don't worry, it won't be anything scandalous since this is just a friendly wager.

[Crook]

There's alot of talk on BoM about the higher ticket prices driving people away this year. BO is down 8% year over year from 2009 according to BoM.

I think alot of what is happening has nothing to do with word of mouth but just the natural economic prinicpals when prices are increased above market clearing for what demand is, so we have a supply surplus of unsold tickets.

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j268/eXcella/Gifs/10riikn.gif

[Tony Stark]

There's 67 Positive 16 Negative according to the imdb count.

I'm talking about rotten tomatoes only 54% so far.

[rashad]

I'm talking about rotten tomatoes only 54% so far.

I know. Alot of the reviews haven't been added yet. Still higher % than other video game adaptations.

[TheVileOne]

Just FYI, I'm seeing Prince of Persia on Tuesday at El Capitan.

And they better have that live show I'm hearing about. If I don't get a live show at the El Capitan, automatic F.

[rashad]

http://www.deadline.com/hollywood/
Friday - $7.8M

[Tony Stark]

Shrek bit it pretty bad. I bet without 3D that number would be under 50 mil. other than that 27 put's it at 48% drop.

As for McGruber you have to ask yourself why they didn't pick a February or March release, when it would have done much better. That movie will be out of the theaters completely within weeks, with those numbers, ala Aliens in the Attic.

[Anita18]

Meanwhile, it will be interesting to see what happens to Shrek. Sounds like under $90m for sure even with the 25% boost from 3D.
Good. A 3-D film needs to underperform so the fad train will stop barreling through. And I don't want it to be Toy Story 3! :funny:

[I SEE SPIDEY]

OK, well you are predicting under $300 million domestic. I'm predicting over $300 million domestic.

The winner gets to alter the loser's signature to a format of their choosing :) . Don't worry, it won't be anything scandalous since this is just a friendly wager.I'm not predicting under 300mil though.:huh:

Two weeks in a row Iron Man 2's friday number has been overpredicted by about a mil by Nikki Finke but for now I'm going to go by that number, eventhough I think that it will be more like 7.1 to 7.3mil when Boxoffice Mojo's numbers come out. With that 7.8mil number it should get 27mil. It's friday is lower than Iron Man's comparable 8.9mil though so it's officially running behind Iron Man now.

I'm so glad that awful Shrek 4 movie did s**t numbers compared to 2 and 3. It's not hitting 300mil and it had expense 3D tickets behind it. I haven't seen it but I think that MacGruber looks unfunny, maybe SNL will stop making these movies now? Who am I kidding? Ofcourse they won't!

[Tony Stark]

Two weeks in a row Iron Man 2's friday number has been overpredicted by about a mil

It wasn't Friday it was Sunday

[I SEE SPIDEY]

No, it was Friday too. The first weekend Nikki's early Friday numbers said 52mil and the movie really did 51mil and the week after that she posted that it did 16mil and it really did 15mil.

It might do even more than her estimate for all I know but I'm thinking overestimation because of history.

Seriously Tony, I know exactly what I'm talking about, I've been following the boxoffice for years.

Anyway I think that Shrek 4's massive underperformance and Iron Man 2's (yes it's still a hit but it has been underperforming more than slightly) underperformance could give Prince of Persia a chance to break out. I mean I wouldn't bet on it because I'm still not predicting all that much for it but I still think that it has a chance of breaking out.

It's produced by Jerry Bruckhiemer

It's not a sequel so it could seem like something fresh to the audience

Jake G looks sexy as hell in the previews. That could attract women (it's attracted me)

It could attract kids because it looks like a fun adventure

I still expect Sex to be number one next weekend but if Prince opens decently enough and the audience pulls a National Treasure and likes it way more than the critics it could be a moderate hit. With it's huge budget 220mil would be a moderate hit.

[TheVileOne]

So what? Wow a million overestimated big deal.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

So what? Wow a million overestimated big deal.I didn't say it was a big deal. The 5.5mil overestimation for it's weekend was a big deal but those friday numbers aren't a big deal.

If it did 7.8mil, then it's in for a 27mil weekend which is about a 48%( or maybe less if todays numbers are good) drop but if it did say 7mil it would most likely drop over 50%. It does matter if you crunch the numbers and like to like I do but it isn't a big deal.

Cut out the snark Vile. I'm not bashing the movie I'm analyzing it's boxoffice and so far it's only doing slightly better than than the much hated Spider-Man 3, those are just the facts.

And nobody should have expected it's legs to be as good as the first but it's doing worse than expected legs wise considering that much touted Cinema Score and Rotten Tomatoes user reviews. And yeah I was being a little snarky myself at the end of this post but my point still stands. The numbers don't lie.

[Tony Stark]

If anyone need to cut the snark Spidey it's you. You say you're not bashing the movie and yet you say "it's only doing slightly better than the much hated Spider-man 3."

If you want to talk BO, fine we can do that. If you're going to use the BO numbers to bash the film then don't go and complain that others are being snarky.

You hate the film, I get that. Alot of people like it. If you want to bash the movie there's a reveiw thread.

This movie is going to make more money than any other superhero film save TDK and the Spider-man movies. So quit pretending like the fact it was front loaded means it's not a well liked film. The critic reviews were not as good as the first, but they were positive. The user reviews are almost as good as the first, and the reviews on SHH are overwhealmingly positive. Some may not like it as much as the first, but the majority still liked it.

You can hate the film all you want, but don't delude yourself into thinking people don't like it.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

My view of the boxoffice has nothing to do with my dislike for the film. It is, as of right now, only doing slightly better than Spider-Man 3. Now I hate Spider-Man 3 with a red hot passion but I think that it's a complete double standard to say that Spider-Man 3's bad legs meant that people hated it but Iron Man 2's bad but slightly better legs mean that everyone loves it.

AND I NEVER CALLED THE MOVIE A FLOP OR A FAILURE OR THE WORSE PERFORMER EVER but like Shrek 3 hurt Shrek 4, this movie's lackluster word of mouth is going to hurt it's sequel and DVD sales. 300mil is nothing to sneeze at but Marvel should think about investing in a screenwriter next time.

And I'd also like to bring up Pirates 3 and The Matrix Reloaded. I liked Pirates 2 but I heard people say that it wasn't that good/wasn't as good as the first one after walking out of the theater and then the 3rd made over 100mil less than the 2nd one. The Matrix Reloaded was hated and the 3rd made less than the first movie. A drop isn't the death of your franchise if the sequel still had good word of mouth (see Spider-Man 3's record opening for details) but so-far I have seen no proof of this good word of mouth for IM2.

This is not sour grapes my friend, this is my observation of it's boxoffice numbers and what they mean.

I'm an Adult, I'm not afraid to admit that people liked something that I didn't.

The only person engaging in hyperbole concerning it's boxoffice is you. You refuse to look at anything else but your love for the film. Any slightly negative thing thats said is me trolling or being a hater. No, I just don't play favorites when looking at the numbers and that just gets some people's goat.

Tough cookies is my response. Get over it and move on.

[hatebox]

Once again the Iron Man franchise seems to have benefited from underperforming competition. I don't think Shrek was the same demographic - even if it did badly - but MaGruber was and has bombed. It was never going to be a big film, but if it had debuted in the high teens or even low twenties that would definitely have taken away from IM.

Prince of Persia's still a hard one to estimate. I think it will perform solidly, rather than amazingly. It's been a while a since we had a big, all out action film (IM2 certainly didn't fit that bill even though it was marketed as such) and audiences will be hungry for some spectacular, dumb fun. On the other hand the trailers look clunky and though I like him as an actor I'm not quite convinced of Jake G's action star credentials quite yet. But either way IM2 is taking a big hit when that comes out and we'll pretty much know where its domestic total is headed by then.

[Iron_Stark]

LOL at people wanting this to fail.

[hatebox]

LOL at people wanting this to fail.

:whatever:

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

It's been a while a since we had a big, all out action film (IM2 certainly didn't fit that bill even though it was marketed as such) and audiences will be hungry for some spectacular, dumb fun.

:whatever:

IM2 had PLENTY of action.....PLENTY

christ, what did you expect, **** blowing up every 5 freaking seconds?

it's true, some people you just can't make happy, regardless what you do.

[hatebox]

:whatever:

IM2 had PLENTY of action.....PLENTY

christ, what did you expect, **** blowing up every 5 freaking seconds?

it's true, some people you just can't make happy, regardless what you do.

What I thought of it is irrelevent - a very common complaint was that there wasn't enough Iron Man action scenes. Even if PoP is crap I doubt a lack of action will be an issue as far as word of mouth goes.

[dark_b]

:whatever:

IM2 had PLENTY of action.....PLENTY

christ, what did you expect, **** blowing up every 5 freaking seconds?

it's true, some people you just can't make happy, regardless what you do.X2 and spiderman 2 had more action then IM2.

what.......what............. :dry:

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

a very common complaint was that there wasn't enough Iron Man action scenes.

Oh I understand that, the same complaint was made about the first movie as well, one of the reason's my cousin didn't like it (not enough action). I argued with him just like I'll argue with you, there was enough action in both films. This isn't Bay, and action movies don't need to be "cluttered" with it every other scene. Favreau went for moderation, which is exactly what you're suppose to do (moderation is the most imporant aspect to life), so yea, it applys to all things, including movies. Too much Iron Man, would've just been overkill

[Iron_Stark]

:whatever:

IM2 had PLENTY of action.....PLENTY

christ, what did you expect, **** blowing up every 5 freaking seconds?

it's true, some people you just can't make happy, regardless what you do.

From what I understand, this is what people want:

- an explosion every time Stark enters the room or replace RDJ's dialog with an explosion
- have Nick Fury come in five minutes into the film explain who he is and hold Stark's hand until the end of the movie
- get rid of Black Widow and leave Pepper being the only female in the whole movie, or recast Black Widow with Judy Dench, Meryl Streep or Daniel Day Lewis
- get rid of Happy Hogan
- get rid of SHIELD
- have captions at the bottom of the screen explaining who each character is and where they come from or have it like Pop-up-Video

[hatebox]

I think people just want a greater sense of spectacle, of a blockbuster being larger than life. They could probably tolerate the corniness of certain scenes in SM2 because they would often be followed up by moments Spidey swinging through New York with Elfman's uplifting score. Ditto for Avatar.

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

From what I understand, this is what people want:

- an explosion every time Stark enters the room or replace RDJ's dialog with an explosion


this is the vibe I'm getting from a lot of comments, yes

too many Pyro-mainiacs on this board

not enough Iron Man? Like Stark needs to be in the suit for 3.5/4 of the movie.

:doh: Jesus H. Christ

[Iron_Stark]

The Spider-Man movies were Peter Parker movies with Spider-Man making a guest appearance.

Spider-Man 2 maybe had just one more action scene than Iron Man 2 and that was the car chase scene that make Parker late to the play. The other action scenes were the bank and the train scene. The end fight with Doc Ock was about as short as the end Whiplash fight, even then it wasn't really a fight because all Spider-Man was trying to do was stop the machine.

So no, Spider-Man 2 wasn't some Micheal Bay spectacle.

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

^exactly

where people are getting this notion that Spiderman 2 had more action than Iron Man is ridiculous. Action is definitley not a word that comes to mind when I think of the Spider Man films

Let's see: The opening scene with Stark making his enterance to the expo, that was just bad ass, the race track scene, the fight between WM and IM, the final battle. ****, there was plenty of action

fanboys here need to quit nitpicking and just enjoy the damn movie for what it was, healthy wholesome fun.

[hatebox]

So no, Spider-Man 2 wasn't some Micheal Bay spectacle.


Who mentioned Michael Bay? In fact who mentioned the need for more 'explosions' for that matter? I'm beginning to see the defensive attitude that was commented on eariler in this thread. 'Spectacle' is a positive cinematic quality, and Bay explosions aren't positive.

My point was SM2 didn't have wall to wall action, but it never felt like it was lacking because the action was placed at good points in the story, were appropriately dramatic, and were often satisfying fun. And few people really felt like we didn't see our masked hero enough because he was in action frequently enough in the narrative.

Notice I haven't said this is what I think is a problem with IM2 but more what the general consensus of the critics and audience could be. Yes, evidence will always be anecdotal but there have been more than enough takes that suggest things slow down too much after 40 minutes for a lot of people. And we're only talking about consensus because this is a BO thread - personal opinions on the movie don't mean an awful lot.

[dark_b]

hatebox those guys are always acting like that. if you dont like IM2 then you are a hater .

if you think IM2 needed more action then you only know Bay movies.

they are desperate because IM2 is not braking boxoffice records. thats why they are always making up in the BO thread how we are bashing the movie.

[Iron_Stark]

hatebox those guys are always acting like that. if you dont like IM2 then you are a hater .

if you think IM2 needed more action then you only know Bay movies.

they are desperate because IM2 is not braking boxoffice records. thats why they are always making up in the BO thread how we are bashing the movie.


Who's calling you a hater? I was just pointing out that Spider-Man 2 had just about the same action as Iron Man 2.

I could give a damn about it breaking BO records I'm getting Iron Man in the Avengers and Iron Man 3, I get a trip from all the armchair film makers that think they could've done a better job and think they know what's best for the franchise and think they know what characters belong or don't belong in the movie.

[JeetKuneDo]

From what I understand, this is what people want:

- an explosion every time Stark enters the room or replace RDJ's dialog with an explosion
- have Nick Fury come in five minutes into the film explain who he is and hold Stark's hand until the end of the movie
- get rid of Black Widow and leave Pepper being the only female in the whole movie, or recast Black Widow with Judy Dench, Meryl Streep or Daniel Day Lewis
- get rid of Happy Hogan
- get rid of SHIELD
- have captions at the bottom of the screen explaining who each character is and where they come from or have it like Pop-up-Video

:hehe:

I'm starting to take "not enough action" as a positive on the internet. If having enough action means being like Transformers, I'll pass. I'm getting a little tired of movies trying to be like an Xbox game. If you have to make a little less at the box office, so be it. At least I'll have a movie I can watch 10 years from now instead of a temporary thrill ride that ages like cheese.

Some of my favorite parts of this movie are NON action. Sam Rockwell's interaction with RDJ and with Rourke. RDJ and Paltrow's interaction. Favreau's one-liner after the action scene ("I got him!")....hee hee...

Apparently IM2 is going to make plenty of money, so they did well. All I need personally is enough money to be made to go forward with Thor, IM3, Capt America, and the Avengers movie. Mission accomplished so far.

[dark_b]

:hehe:

I'm starting to take "not enough action" as a positive on the internet. If having enough action means being like Transformers, I'll pass. I'm getting a little tired of movies trying to be like an Xbox game. If you have to make a little less at the box office, so be it. At least I'll have a movie I can watch 10 years from now instead of a temporary thrill ride that ages like cheese.

Apparently IM2 is going to make plenty of money, so they did well. All I need personally is enough money to be made to go forward with Thor, IM3, Capt America, and the Avengers movie. Mission accomplished so far.isnt it cute you are trying to twist it around? :awesome:

X2,spiderman 2 and TDK had a lot action. all sequels.

:twisted:

[Iron_Stark]

isnt it cute you are trying to twist it around? :awesome:

X2,spiderman 2 and TDK had a lot action. all sequels.

:twisted:

Seriously, is there a different cut of Spider-Man 2 out there that has more action than Iron Man 2?

The car chase scene, the bank robbery scene and the train scene.

Oh wait saving a baby from a burning building again. That right there does it.

[ElMariachi]

LOL at people wanting this to fail.

yeah, it sure seems like it when the same few forumers keep on jumping on the people who are content with the box office.

Some have even said Marvel should be worried. About what? This being no. 3 in movie superheroes? Which to me is still astonishing considering Iron Man was a lower tier hero on the Marvel totempole. This movie is going to make probally $600 million, sell a bunch of DVDs/Blu-Ray, make a decent amount of money on merchandise/videogames, and collect some bank from all the sponsors who jumped on board to use Iron Man to promote their products (Norton, Reeses, Dr. Pepper, Burger King, etc.). I really don't think they are at all concerned about this franchise.

[TheVileOne]

Looks like Iron Man 2 is on tap to cross over $250 milliont his weekend as I predicted. Next weekend say hello to $275+ million.

[JeetKuneDo]

isnt it cute you are trying to twist it around? :awesome:

X2,spiderman 2 and TDK had a lot action. all sequels.

:twisted:

Apparently they didn't from what I'm hearing about IM2.

[hatebox]

About a 50% drop for a 26.6m weekend.

The only point of interest now for IM2's box office is whether it'll beat its predecesor. While its drops should even out (just about) allowing for this, it's got PoP coming out in a couple of weeks which could hurt its chances.

Not sure what else there is to talk about on the matter really.

[rashad]

POP comes out this Friday.

[hatebox]

Oh. Well, it might struggle more than I thought then.

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

:hehe:

I'm starting to take "not enough action" as a positive on the internet. If having enough action means being like Transformers, I'll pass. I'm getting a little tired of movies trying to be like an Xbox game. If you have to make a little less at the box office, so be it. At least I'll have a movie I can watch 10 years from now instead of a temporary thrill ride that ages like cheese.

Some of my favorite parts of this movie are NON action. Sam Rockwell's interaction with RDJ and with Rourke. RDJ and Paltrow's interaction. Favreau's one-liner after the action scene ("I got him!")....hee hee...

Apparently IM2 is going to make plenty of money, so they did well. All I need personally is enough money to be made to go forward with Thor, IM3, Capt America, and the Avengers movie. Mission accomplished so far.

exactly

[FaT_tONle]

I don't know how anyone at Marvel is thrilled with this box office. I don't think anyone on here, spare haters and trolls, were predicting that this thing would be limping over its predecessor. I am a little shocked since I found the movie to be pretty decent. Obviously not everyone else did and its business is getting cut short. No one is going to be up in arms about a 330/600 finish, but it's still well below expectations. I don't know if it's over saturation of the genre, or the typically front loaded May release, or the economy, but people are staying home for some reason.

Edit: I just saw the Shrek/McGruber estimates, and they were putrid. 70 million for Shrek with a 3-D release? That's atrocious. Franchise on the decline, or whatever the case is, looks like it will indeed be the final chapter. McGruber bombed in case you didn't know. We'll see how PoP pans out, but I expect underwhelming numbers for some reason. If the year holds to form, I can't expect anywhere near a 100 million dollar weekend for that.

That said, there has to be at least one runaway hit this year. I think we can put away all the "June release dates suck" if we get another strong showing that month. Hangover and TF2 dominated in June. Keep an eye out on the A-Team and Airbender. I can see 200/300 grosses for those respectively. I think Inception will be huge... if it's good. Seems to have the most intrigue outside of Airbender.

Here is the weekend wrap at a website I found:

It was a down weekend at the box office with both new openings coming in way under industry expectations. Though the Shrek brand had been tarnished by the last release it was still thought to be strong enough especially considering a lack of competition and the opportunity to be buoyed by 3D ticket prices (http://www.pastapadre.com/2010/05/23/shrek-4-and-macgruber-severely-disappoint-at-the-box-office#). Industry projections were were mostly in the $100 million range though some believed it could reach $130 million. It ended up taking in only $71.3 million.
It almost sounds unreasonable to say a moviehttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/2_bing.gif (http://www.pastapadre.com/2010/05/23/shrek-4-and-macgruber-severely-disappoint-at-the-box-office#) that opens to $71 million is a huge disappointment but in the case of Shrek Forever After it is absolutely the case. The opening weekend ended up being $50 million less than Shrek The Third. The movie had a budget of $200 million and domestically it is unlikely that it will make that all back, though its prospects are still solid for when it hits DVD (http://www.pastapadre.com/2010/05/23/shrek-4-and-macgruber-severely-disappoint-at-the-box-office#).
It is just shocking that even with the boost of higher ticket sales, most of which come from 3D screens and IMAX, it didn’t do better. Accounting for those higher ticket costs (http://www.pastapadre.com/2010/05/23/shrek-4-and-macgruber-severely-disappoint-at-the-box-office#) basically only half the number of people that went to the third Shrek went to this one. It was also the broadest animated release in history playing on 4359 screens with over 2300 of them being 3D. The franchise was already dead after this release anyway but it could be a sign of trouble for the spin-offs that are planned such as Puss in Boots (November 2011).
MacGruber is a certified bomb after opening to just $4.1 million. Most expectations were in the $10-15 million range. Despite this it isn’t a catastrophe as the movie was made on a modest $10 million budget. It might not even hit $10 million while in theaters and will see a quick shift to DVD where it may be able to pick up a cult-like following.
For the holdovers it was Iron Man 2 finishing in second place in its third weekend falling 48% to $26.6 million. The movie has totaled $251 million domestically. In its second weekend Robin Hood fell 48% to $18.7 million to total $66 million. It doesn’t appear it will even make back half of its $200 million budget.

[Blade X]

:whatever:

IM2 had PLENTY of action.....PLENTY

No it didn't. There was only 3 fight scenes involving Iron Man, and 2 of them were very short.

christ, what did you expect, **** blowing up every 5 freaking seconds?

No, about 5 or 6 long fight scenes involving Iron Man scattered throughout the movie. As bad as TRANSFORMERS 2:ROTF was, at least the movie had ore then 3 fight scenes showing Autobots fighting Decepticans, and lasted more then 4 minutes.


it's true, some people you just can't make happy, regardless what you do.

True, but in the case of IM2, they didn't do that much to make people (like myself) who likes and expects lots of action from these type of movies, happy at all.

[hatebox]

PoP's still a hard one to call. I don't know what the budget was but I think if it gets anything over $60m OW the studio will probably be happy. It is a new movie franchise after all.

Whatever it gets, it's the first serious threat to IM2's takings and is aimed squarely at its demographic.

Incidentally I do think Marvel will be re-evaluating their expectations for the Avengers movie given Iron Man was always going to be its centerpiece. At this point there's absolutely nothing to suggest Thor or Cap Am will be monster hits, as much as I'm rooting for the former.

[FaT_tONle]

PoP's still a hard one to call. I don't know what the budget was but I think if it gets anything over $60m OW the studio will probably be happy. It is a new movie franchise after all.

Whatever it gets, it's the first serious threat to IM2's takings and is aimed squarely at its demographic.

Incidentally I do think Marvel will be re-evaluating their expectations for the Avengers movie given Iron Man was always going to be its centerpiece. At this point there's absolutely nothing to suggest Thor or Cap Am will be monster hits, as much as I'm rooting for the former.

You can't re-think at this point. You can be more humbled and reserved, but if it doesn't break records, at least for Marvel movies, it's a serious issue. Now Avengers can't make that much more than IM because Thor and Cap aren't as popular? Being the first major 'crossover' movie, it's an event in of itself. Obviously it depends on what happens in 2011, but this is supposed to be Marvel's crowning achievement. If it just a little more than IM, that's terrible.

[Superhero 101]

so is there a chance that this will make atleast 600 million worldwide?

[Excelsior.]

Why do people have to take everything to the extreme. Suggesting IM2 needed more action does not equal wanting explosions every five minutes.

[Figs]

Apparently IM2 is going to make plenty of money, so they did well. All I need personally is enough money to be made to go forward with Thor, IM3, Capt America, and the Avengers movie. Mission accomplished so far.

That's all I care about. As long as each film makes enough money for Avengers and IM3 to be made(Thor and Cap are a lock obviously since Thor is almost finished and Cap is going to start filming very soon)as well as any other possible cool films like Namor and Black Panther that's fine by me. So far i've liked IM, IM2 and TIH. If I really like Thor, Captain American, The Avengers and the possible IM3 then i'll be one incredibly happy Marvel fan. That's all I care about is for these films to do well enough and not bomb. I enjoyed IM2 so despite what it does BO wise at the end of it's run doesn't bother me, especially when it's a lock to beat the first one with WW gross.

From BO mojo the first film made $585,174,222 WW
IM2 is currently at $506,265,000 WW

:yay:

[Blade X]

Now Avengers can't make that much more than IM because Thor and Cap aren't as popular?

Remember, before the first movie, Iron Man wasn't that popular either. So just because Thor and Cap aren't currently as popular (or known) as Iron Man in the eyes of the general non comic book reading public, does not mean that this will still be the case after the release of their movies.

The only way that the AVENGERS movie would make less then either of the IRON MAN movies, is if Marvel makes the same bone headed mistake that they did with IM2 and skimp on the action/fight scenes. Again, most people who pay to see these type of movies (especially kids) want and expect lots of cool and long action/fight scenes. This is why TF:ROTF was such a huge hit at the box office last year. Marvel needs to stop trying to appeal to and win accolades from those non comic book reading adults who enjoy the "character and personality" of Tony Stark, and to try and appeal more to those kids and adults who want to see more Iron Man action/fight scenes.

[Superhero 101]

Why do people have to take everything to the extreme. Suggesting IM2 needed more action does not equal wanting explosions every five minutes.

totally agree with you look at Transformers 2 and X3 and XO: Wolverine all those movies suffered because it was all out action and no developement of the characters and this is exactly what IM2 did which i believe it did so well it developed the characters in the movie.

[Tony Stark]

No it didn't. There was only 3 fight scenes involving Iron Man, and 2 of them were very short.

Do you have ADD? The fight scenes weren't any longer/shorter than the first film and in the case of the final fight it was much longer.



No, about 5 or 6 long fight scenes involving Iron Man scattered throughout the movie. As bad as TRANSFORMERS 2:ROTF was, at least the movie had ore then 3 fight scenes showing Autobots fighting Decepticans, and lasted more then 4 minutes.

You should have stopped at "as bad as Transformers 2 was".

True, but in the case of IM2, they didn't do that much to make people (like myself) who likes and expects lots of action from these type of movies, happy at all.

If you wanted it to be like TF2 and are not happy, then I'm glad.

[Tony Stark]

I don't know how anyone at Marvel is thrilled with this box office. I don't think anyone on here, spare haters and trolls, were predicting that this thing would be limping over its predecessor. I am a little shocked since I found the movie to be pretty decent. Obviously not everyone else did and its business is getting cut short. No one is going to be up in arms about a 330/600 finish, but it's still well below expectations. I don't know if it's over saturation of the genre, or the typically front loaded May release, or the economy, but people are staying home for some reason.

Edit: I just saw the Shrek/McGruber estimates, and they were putrid. 70 million for Shrek with a 3-D release? That's atrocious. Franchise on the decline, or whatever the case is, looks like it will indeed be the final chapter. McGruber bombed in case you didn't know. We'll see how PoP pans out, but I expect underwhelming numbers for some reason. If the year holds to form, I can't expect anywhere near a 100 million dollar weekend for that.

That said, there has to be at least one runaway hit this year. I think we can put away all the "June release dates suck" if we get another strong showing that month. Hangover and TF2 dominated in June. Keep an eye out on the A-Team and Airbender. I can see 200/300 grosses for those respectively. I think Inception will be huge... if it's good. Seems to have the most intrigue outside of Airbender.

Here is the weekend wrap at a website I found:




I think people are staying home, and it's hurting IM2 a little which probably in any other year would have been a 400 mil picuture. I just thing with ticket prices on the rise compounded with the stock market being off in May, people are being more frugal with their dollars, which meant IM2 was front loaded and not as many repeat vewings as the last.

[FaT_tONle]

Remember, before the first movie, Iron Man wasn't that popular either. So just because Thor and Cap aren't currently as popular (or known) as Iron Man in the eyes of the general non comic book reading public, does not mean that this will still be the case after the release of their movies.

The only way that the AVENGERS movie would make less then either of the IRON MAN movies, is if Marvel makes the same bone headed mistake that they did with IM2 and skimp on the action/fight scenes. Again, most people who pay to see these type of movies (especially kids) want and expect lots of cool and long action/fight scenes. This is why TF:ROTF was such a huge hit at the box office last year. Marvel needs to stop trying to appeal to and win accolades from those non comic book reading adults who enjoy the "character and personality" of Tony Stark, and to try and appeal more to those kids and adults who want to see more Iron Man action/fight scenes.

I don't disagree with anything here, but TIH was non stop action and it didn't do anything financially. Obviously if it was the first Hulk movie to come out, I think it would have done at least 200 domestic, but it still would have been the same movie critically. It's cliched to say that we need to find the right balance, but it's never been more important. Those IM trailers were pretty action packed. Yeah they could have done another set piece, but are parents really watching the movies, then deciding if is appropriate for their kids to watch again next Saturday afternoon? Are they reading reviews beforehand to make sure it is kid friendly enough? Maybe it's the marketing, which also doomed TIH. Maybe they should have attached more kid friendly TV spots on Nick or Disney. The TV spot with the kid was pretty kid friendly. Maybe IM2 didn't garner a repeat viewing with the kids, but I am not sure how many parents are willing to see a movie a second time anyway, one with the spouse, another with the nieces/nephews or kids. Maybe I am dead wrong, but a lot of movies have made a heck of a lot more without necessarily being kid friendly.

[Ace of Knaves]

What was it's OW then? And what is it at WW now? Thanks.

[danoyse]

Do you have ADD? The fight scenes weren't any longer/shorter than the first film and in the case of the final fight it was much longer.

Can you post something without the name-calling?

Reminder everyone - this is the box office thread, not the compare how many action scenes there were thread. Start another thread for that discussion if you would like it to continue.

[FaT_tONle]

Kind of defeats the purpose when the discussion is was there enough action for a summer blockbuster, which is the current debate. I don't think it is unrelated... at all.

[Anita18]

I don't disagree with anything here, but TIH was non stop action and it didn't do anything financially. Obviously if it was the first Hulk movie to come out, I think it would have done at least 200 domestic, but it still would have been the same movie critically. It's cliched to say that we need to find the right balance, but it's never been more important. Those IM trailers were pretty action packed. Yeah they could have done another set piece, but are parents really watching the movies, then deciding if is appropriate for their kids to watch again next Saturday afternoon? Are they reading reviews beforehand to make sure it is kid friendly enough? Maybe it's the marketing, which also doomed TIH. Maybe they should have attached more kid friendly TV spots on Nick or Disney. The TV spot with the kid was pretty kid friendly. Maybe IM2 didn't garner a repeat viewing with the kids, but I am not sure how many parents are willing to see a movie a second time anyway, one with the spouse, another with the nieces/nephews or kids. Maybe I am dead wrong, but a lot of movies have made a heck of a lot more without necessarily being kid friendly.
Mmm, yeah. Avatar, Titanic, and TDK were TOTALLY kid friendly. Everybody put down their guns, talked through their differences, held hands and sang kumbayah together at the end. Bring on the Happy Meals! :hehe:

Kids are a good reliable demographic, but they won't make a blockbuster, since they don't bring in a ton of repeat business. Their parents have to take them, so the parents have to want to watch it again too. :funny:

The marketing for IM2 didn't make it out to be an event, and unlike Avatar, the WOM didn't make it out to be an event either.

[FaT_tONle]

Mmm, yeah. Avatar, Titanic, and TDK were TOTALLY kid friendly. Everybody put down their guns, talked through their differences, held hands and sang kumbayah together at the end. Bring on the Happy Meals! :hehe:

Kids are a good reliable demographic, but they won't make a blockbuster, since they don't bring in a ton of repeat business. Their parents have to take them, so the parents have to want to watch it again too. :funny:

The marketing for IM2 didn't make it out to be an event, and unlike Avatar, the WOM didn't make it out to be an event either.

Yeah... it's as if IM ended with a to be continued... and IM2 picks up with, "previously, on IM..." They even started with the Stark dialogue from the end of film one. Basically if you didn't see season 1, you missed season 2. As much as Favreau stated he wanted to avoid it feeling like a TV show, it sort of was just that.

[Tony Stark]

Yeah... it's as if IM ended with a to be continued... and IM2 picks up with, "previously, on IM..." They even started with the Stark dialogue from the end of film one. Basically if you didn't see season 1, you missed season 2. As much as Favreau stated he wanted to avoid it feeling like a TV show, it sort of was just that.

I don't think it's unrealistic to expect in a sequel that the audience has seen the first movie. Jeez on the very first Star Wars movie (episode IV) starts out just like you're saying, and it didn't make a bit of difference.

It wasn't a TV series, but it very much was issue 2 of a comic book.

[dark_b]

the sequel needs to work as a seperate movie.

[jmc]

^ And that's where most sequels get it wrong, they basically just do a copy and paste job from the last movie. Really, every sequel should be treated as if it's the first film in a series.

[danoyse]

I don't think it's unrealistic to expect in a sequel that the audience has seen the first movie. Jeez on the very first Star Wars movie (episode IV) starts out just like you're saying, and it didn't make a bit of difference.

Episode IV wasn't there when Star Wars was first released in 1977. It was added in when it was re-released in 1978, and by then audiences knew there was a sequel underway and fans knew it was part of a much bigger story.

I didn't see an issue with IM2 opening with the end of IM1, plenty of sequels do that.

I've also read at least a half-dozen box office wrapups for this weekend and have yet to find the kind of naysaying regarding IM2 that I see around here. It seems to be doing very well, even though it's below where IM1 was at this point.

[hatebox]

It seems to be doing very well, even though it's below where IM1 was at this point.

Some might say that's a contradiction in terms though. Box office is always about expectations rather than viewing the figures in a vacuum. But again, no-one's saying IM2 is doing badly because, of course, it isn't.

[danoyse]

Some might say that's a contradiction in terms though. Box office is always about expectations rather than viewing the figures in a vacuum. But again, no-one's saying IM2 is doing badly because, of course, it isn't.

Maybe everyone sets their expectations too high. :cwink:

[jmc]

In terms of this film I don't think expectation where ridiculously fantastical. If someone were to have said to me a month ago IM2 would fail to out gross IM1 I would have called them nuts.

[Tony Stark]

Episode IV wasn't there when Star Wars was first released in 1977. It was added in when it was re-released in 1978, and by then audiences knew there was a sequel underway and fans knew it was part of a much bigger story.

I didn't see an issue with IM2 opening with the end of IM1, plenty of sequels do that.

I've also read at least a half-dozen box office wrapups for this weekend and have yet to find the kind of naysaying regarding IM2 that I see around here. It seems to be doing very well, even though it's below where IM1 was at this point.


You're right the "episode IV" title wasn't there until a re-relase just before Empire came out.

What I was getting at is Star Wars opened with the scrollng Flash Gordon style summary of what's going on, as if you're coming in the middle of a story.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

The Spider-Man movies were Peter Parker movies with Spider-Man making a guest appearance.

Spider-Man 2 maybe had just one more action scene than Iron Man 2 and that was the car chase scene that make Parker late to the play. The other action scenes were the bank and the train scene. The end fight with Doc Ock was about as short as the end Whiplash fight, even then it wasn't really a fight because all Spider-Man was trying to do was stop the machine.

So no, Spider-Man 2 wasn't some Micheal Bay spectacle.

The big difference is though, the action scene's in Spiderman 2 were WHOLLY satisfying, in fact, the 2 main fights are both considered 2 of the better ever to be put on screen, and they lasted for more than 30 seconds, THATS the big difference.

People dont want explosions every 5 minutes, thats just taking peoples comments out of proportion, but they want satisfying action scene's which make the character moments all worth it, IM2 didnt have those IMO.

[Tony Stark]

I agree that the train scene in SM2 is by far the best Superhero battle. The action in Begins and TDK were widely criticized as not being satisfying, yet people liked both movies. I'd put the action in both IM movies above Nolan's Batman movies and a notch above the X-men movies.

Secondly the Monaco scene the fight starts with Tony in the car, and part of the brilliance of that scene is how Tony uses his smarts and athleticism to fight Vanko without the suit.

A long battle with the suit could have the same problem SM2 had in that Doc Ock had no superpowers outside of the arms, yet Spider-man with superior strength hits him in the face several times and Ock is fine.

The use of the suitcase armor was brilliant because in the suit he only has his repulsors for weapons, and no flight capability. He did have incredible strength as shown by him kicking the car back, and a long fight sequence with Iron Man hitting Vanko several times with his repulsors on bare skin and/or punching him multiple times would have looked rediculous. Vanko used the whips to deflect the repulsors, but once Tony got in close it was over.

[ElMariachi]

Mmm, yeah. Avatar, Titanic, and TDK were TOTALLY kid friendly. Everybody put down their guns, talked through their differences, held hands and sang kumbayah together at the end. Bring on the Happy Meals! :hehe:

Kids are a good reliable demographic, but they won't make a blockbuster, since they don't bring in a ton of repeat business. Their parents have to take them, so the parents have to want to watch it again too. :funny:

The marketing for IM2 didn't make it out to be an event, and unlike Avatar, the WOM didn't make it out to be an event either.

I don't really buy this. Avatar was very kid friendly. It was a borderline CGI cartoon in the same vein as Toy Story, Wall-E, or Alvin and the Chipmunks, with a simple story no less. Titanic was also somewhat kid friendly. I recall when that movie came out, people my age were seeing it in droves---especially younger girls (future Twlight fans) there for the romance and Di Caprio. As for TDK, it was just a popular movie where everybody went to see it. It was good, good word of mouth, it came out in mid-summer, everything that followed it's release date were garbage/adult comedies (aside from Tropic Thunder), the Heath Ledger effect, and it had enough action to please the kiddies/teens. All three of these movies of course are phenoms and make a billion dollars.

People are being way to critical of Iron Man 2's box office here. Let's all be honest here. TDK was unique compared to all Batman movies. So far, it is a one-hit wonder (by one-hit wonder, I mean that big of money) as it has blown every other Batman movie out of the water by what, $600 million dollars? The only consistent box office giant is Spider Man. Each one of those movies grossed over $800 million. It has been said earlier, Iron Man is third when it comes to box office. One of the most loved/famous heroes, Batman, has only beat Iron Man once and only the much loved, kid loved Spider Man has crushed all. Iron Man has toppled Superman, X-Men, Hulk, and the rest of the "A-List". Seriously, to quote Tony Stark in IM2, "What more do you want?". To say that Marvel should reevaulate The Avengers is silly unless they are going to make the budget for it so enormous that it must make $800-1 billion dollars. Arguing these true points is really just an indicator of those who secetly want Iron Man/Avengers to fail. Saying that they should be worried is like saying that Warner Brothers should have been worried about the Harry Potter franchise after Prisoner of Azakaban made 180 million dollars less then the first movie.

And all this talk about the action and quality of movie. Look at the highest grossing films list. Most of them are existing popular franchises, utter crap, kids movies/cartoons, and a few unique suprises/phenoms (Avatar, Titanic, Alice in Wonderland, Passion of the Christ, TDK). There aren't any superhero movies on there aside from TDK and the Spider Man movies.

[FaT_tONle]

^ And that's where most sequels get it wrong, they basically just do a copy and paste job from the last movie. Really, every sequel should be treated as if it's the first film in a series.

I actually agree with that, but you can get away with it when you fast track that quick sequel just to carry over what you did in film one. At least from a business point, it would make sense. SM2 was essentially a carry over. People would be wondering why Harry was explicitly out for Spidey had they not seen the original, at least until a flashback scene or whenever it was explained. But hey, it also didn't gross more than the first either. At the very least, they are taking some time off with IM3 so hopefully it won't feel like the same old with a non-tech based villain. Repeating armor wars made perfect sense IMO.

And all this talk about the action and quality of movie. Look at the highest grossing films list. Most of them are existing popular franchises, utter crap, kids movies/cartoons, and a few unique suprises/phenoms (Avatar, Titanic, Alice in Wonderland, Passion of the Christ, TDK). There aren't any superhero movies on there aside from TDK and the Spider Man movies.

People just figured it was going to top 400. "Oh TF2 did that so IM2, being the only huge franchise (I don't count Twilight) next year is going to blow it out of the water, or at least match it". No one would be complaining if you add a few dozen million to whatever the final number will end up being.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I agree that the train scene in SM2 is by far the best Superhero battle. The action in Begins and TDK were widely criticized as not being satisfying, yet people liked both movies. I'd put the action in both IM movies above Nolan's Batman movies and a notch above the X-men movies.

Secondly the Monaco scene the fight starts with Tony in the car, and part of the brilliance of that scene is how Tony uses his smarts and athleticism to fight Vanko without the suit.

A long battle with the suit could have the same problem SM2 had in that Doc Ock had no superpowers outside of the arms, yet Spider-man with superior strength hits him in the face several times and Ock is fine.

The use of the suitcase armor was brilliant because in the suit he only has his repulsors for weapons, and no flight capability. He did have incredible strength as shown by him kicking the car back, and a long fight sequence with Iron Man hitting Vanko several times with his repulsors on bare skin and/or punching him multiple times would have looked rediculous. Vanko used the whips to deflect the repulsors, but once Tony got in close it was over.

See, I didnt mind that scene being over so quickly because it was only early in the movie, but the finale just wasnt a showpiece at all, the action in BB and TDK werent spectacular no, but they both had one showcase action scene's which went on for a good while and in both movies it was the car chase. IM2 just didnt have that, the finale fight just wasnt satisfying at all, fighting the drones especially wasnt because they were faceless, but when Vanko arrived I thought, 'here we go, some proper stuff now' and 30 secons later I was just 'is that it?' Thats not the response to an action scene a summer blockbuster should be getting.

As for the bolded part about Spidey 2, I always thought the arms kept Ock conscience, and several added parts in 2.1 confirmed this to me.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Although I think that IM2 needed more action/the action spread out in different places that wasn't my number one problem with the film.

Anyway, IM2 is doing great internationally, for a comicbook movie, and thats good news but it's clear that unless it develops some late legs that the word of mouth is killing it's chances of hitting the first one's total domestically. That still means 600mil wordwide and another sequel that I think will be hurt by the reception of this film.

Like last weekend I expect that it's being slightly overestimated and will hit the 50% mark when all is said and done. Who knows though?

Shrek domestic numbers are just a disaster, a complete disaster and nobody wants to see SNL movies but lucky for the studio it only cost 10mil to make.

Sex And The City will be number one next weekend but I expect POP to do decently enough. It's going to have to have legs to be successful though.

Regarding the end fight in Iron Man 2, I agree with you Jamon. I would have perfered a 5 minute fight with Vanko over 15minutes of the drone battle.

It just seemed like they were on to something with Vanko and then they just stuck him in the lab for an hour. I would have always hated that Bird nonesense but Vanko would have been a pretty cool villain if the movie would have followed through on the opening scenes promise and been a revenge story.

[ElMariachi]

People dont want explosions every 5 minutes, thats just taking peoples comments out of proportion, but they want satisfying action scene's which make the character moments all worth it, IM2 didnt have those IMO.

what wasn't satisfying about it? I hate to keep asking this, but what more did you people want? There is seriously a fine line of length of fight scenes and being enjoying to the audience. I will take short and sweet over long and drawn out. And to be quite honest, it wasn't that short. You had the drone chase, Black Widow/Happy fight, ending with an epic beatdown delivered by IM/WM. And then you had Whiplash, which was pretty cool while it lasted---ending with an escape from a bunch of explosions. And this is beside the fact that the Monaco scene was pretty epic and the IM/WM fight was pretty decent.

[ElMariachi]

People just figured it was going to top 400. "Oh TF2 did that so IM2, being the only huge franchise (I don't count Twilight) next year is going to blow it out of the water, or at least match it". No one would be complaining if you add a few dozen million to whatever the final number will end up being.

well, thats the problem. Based on nothing, these people expected Iron Man 2 to make $100-300 million dollars more domestically. It's ridiculous and like I said earlier (when I was jumped), at this point it's nothing more then a d--k measuring contest with the other nerd fanbases (Transformers, Spidey, Batman, etc.). Iron Man 2 is a success and will undoubtably make more money then the first. Avengers is guranteed, so is Iron Man 3. I have a hard time believing either of those movies will bomb. And you know what? If they ever were to truly bomb, I don't care because I applaud Marvel for essentially making these movies for the comic book fans. Most people don't know anything about the Avengers, Nick Fury, SHIELD, Thor, or the plot points with Howard Stark and the various easter eggs. This whole Avengers lead up (through 5 movies) is for the fans. So, if they don't make a billion dollars on each film, but make me happy as a comic book fan----hats off to them for making this fun for us to follow their development. At least we aren't mired down in pointless reboots, crappy sequels, lame orgin stories, and flagship heroes doing battle with landmasses and rock formations. :hehe:

Oh, and Twilight is a major franchise at this point.

[Iron_Stark]

So now the action sequences aren't satisfying? lmao

If there are too many action scenes people complain(Transformers), if they're too short people complain (Iron Man), if they're too long people complain (Revenge of the Sith)

God bless SHH.

Speaking of Star Wars, Empire Strikes Back had the least amount of action sequences in the entire saga, I wonder if people cry and moan about that as well.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

My main problem with the movie was the terrible script. The movie had one of the best casts around and they had to work with a s**t script. That was tremendously disappointing to me.

Why can't the lovers of the movie just talk about the actual movie and stop deflicting attention to those terrible Transformers movies and that awful Spider-Man 3?

[Iron_Stark]

My main problem with the movie was the terrible script. The movie had one of the best casts around and they had to work with a s**t script. That was tremendously disappointing to me.

Why can't the lovers of the movie just talk about the actual movie and stop deflicting attention to those terrible Transformers movies and that awful Spider-Man 3?

Please, it was hardly a terrible script, terrible is when you're talking about Fantastic Four 1 & 2, now those were putrid, rancid scripts.

[ElMariachi]

My main problem with the movie was the terrible script. The movie had one of the best casts around and they had to work with a s**t script. That was tremendously disappointing to me.

Why can't the lovers of the movie just talk about the actual movie and stop deflicting attention to those terrible Transformers movies and that awful Spider-Man 3?

cmon now. A s--t script? You people are looking for reasons to hate this movie now. The writing on this movie was brilliant in many of its scenes and the plot was clear to anybody who was paying attention.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Stop comparing it to other movies and just realize that I refuse to like every single comicbook movie that comes out just because it's a comicbook movie staring a good actor who has a huge nerd following.

I still like RDJ but I just don't care for the movie. It's not personal.

[FaT_tONle]

Stop comparing it to other movies and just realize that I refuse to like every single comicbook movie that comes out just because it's a comicbook movie staring a good actor who has a huge nerd following.

I still like RDJ but I just don't care for the movie. It's not personal.

Spidey... you praise character moments in films like FF, yet you think IM2 had an inferior script to that? We all have our tastes, but it's the **** like that that boggles the mind.

at this point it's nothing more then a d--k measuring contest with the other nerd fanbases (Transformers, Spidey, Batman, etc.).

I'm sorry but I take my d*** seriously. Wouldn't be a fanboy without one.

[Iron_Stark]

well, thats the problem. Based on nothing, these people expected Iron Man 2 to make $100-300 million dollars more domestically. It's ridiculous and like I said earlier (when I was jumped), at this point it's nothing more then a d--k measuring contest with the other nerd fanbases (Transformers, Spidey, Batman, etc.). Iron Man 2 is a success and will undoubtably make more money then the first. Avengers is guranteed, so is Iron Man 3. I have a hard time believing either of those movies will bomb. And you know what? If they ever were to truly bomb, I don't care because I applaud Marvel for essentially making these movies for the comic book fans. Most people don't know anything about the Avengers, Nick Fury, SHIELD, Thor, or the plot points with Howard Stark and the various easter eggs. This whole Avengers lead up (through 5 movies) is for the fans. So, if they don't make a billion dollars on each film, but make me happy as a comic book fan----hats off to them for making this fun for us to follow their development. At least we aren't mired down in pointless reboots, crappy sequels, lame orgin stories, and flagship heroes doing battle with landmasses and rock formations. :hehe:

Oh, and Twilight is a major franchise at this point.

This.

I really doubt Iron Man 3 is in any kind of jeopardy of being made or if Marvel is even having second thoughts. The only thought going through their head is when can we get the third one released.

At least I know they will break the bad threequel curse because they're saving Iron Man's baddest villain for last and not shooting their load with the second one.

[Anita18]

I don't really buy this. Avatar was very kid friendly. It was a borderline CGI cartoon in the same vein as Toy Story, Wall-E, or Alvin and the Chipmunks, with a simple story no less. Titanic was also somewhat kid friendly. I recall when that movie came out, people my age were seeing it in droves---especially younger girls (future Twlight fans) there for the romance and Di Caprio. As for TDK, it was just a popular movie where everybody went to see it. It was good, good word of mouth, it came out in mid-summer, everything that followed it's release date were garbage/adult comedies (aside from Tropic Thunder), the Heath Ledger effect, and it had enough action to please the kiddies/teens. All three of these movies of course are phenoms and make a billion dollars.
Avatar the same level of kid-friendly as Pixar's movies? Uhh, I don't recall seeing genocide by firebombing in any Pixar film. Or people being eaten by dragons with big teeth. Or being run through with arrows or riddled with bullets. Avatar was very much PG-13, while Pixar has only gone G or PG.

But that's just me. A simple story does NOT automatically mean kid-friendly. And when I'm thinking "kid" I'm thinking under 10. Pre-teen and teen girls definitely went to Titanic for Leo, but I don't think anyone under 10 would have the kind of obsessive crushes that the 13-16-y-o have nowadays. :funny:

[Leenie]

At least I know they will break the bad threequel curse because they're saving Iron Man's baddest villain for last and not shooting their load with the second one.

Well, nothing 100% guaranteed, but I strongly believe that the odds are stacked in Iron Man's favor with this. :yay:

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

what wasn't satisfying about it? I hate to keep asking this, but what more did you people want? There is seriously a fine line of length of fight scenes and being enjoying to the audience. I will take short and sweet over long and drawn out. And to be quite honest, it wasn't that short. You had the drone chase, Black Widow/Happy fight, ending with an epic beatdown delivered by IM/WM. And then you had Whiplash, which was pretty cool while it lasted---ending with an escape from a bunch of explosions. And this is beside the fact that the Monaco scene was pretty epic and the IM/WM fight was pretty decent.


As I said earlier, the done sequence was wholly unsatisfying, they were faceless and hardly provided any kind of threat, then Vanko arrives and you think its on, but after 30 seconds its over, sorry but it just wasnt a satisfying conclusion to their rivalry. You ask what more did I want? I didnt want to come out of that fight thinking 'is that it?' Spiderman 2 and X2 had some of the best action sequences ever in a CB movie, TDK had the awesome Japan and chase scene's, not one moment of Iron Man 2 made me say 'woah', thats the big difference.

And how can you say I am looking for reasons to hate the movie when I liked it, you can clearly see in my sig I gave it a 9/10, but it wasnt the sequel it could have been, thats what was dissapointing.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Spidey... you praise character moments in films like FF, yet you think IM2 had an inferior script to that? We all have our tastes, but it's the **** like that that boggles the mind..S**t like people saying that Iron Man 2 had a good script and that the middle part was wholely satisfying boggles my mind. It boggles my mind that anyone likes Hellboy 2, Spider-Man 3, GhostRider, The Spirit, all of the Punisher movies, Wolverine, Batman Returns, Superman, Superman 2, Superman 3, Superman 4, Superman Returns and DareDevil. I mean, alot of s**t boggles my mind.

I liked FF in general but I've never pretended that it was a great movie. As a matter of fact it's probably a pretty bad movie that I like for some unknown reason. I'm sorry that I had higher hopes for Iron Man 2, I didn't know that I should have been expecting something of the FF movie's quality, especially when the first movie was better than those films.



I'm sorry but I take my d*** seriously. Wouldn't be a fanboy without one.Will people stop quoting that guy, he is on my ignore list for a reason.:awesome:

And I'm not apart of a d**k measuring contest because I don't have a d**k.:oldrazz:

[Chris B]

Despite the criticism that the action scenes in IM1 get, I've always loved them. The Gulmera fight is hands down my favorite fight out of all the CBM's I've seen hands down. And I like what we got in IM2. The only things I would've wanted added would be Iron Man on a peacekeeping mission, another Iron Man/Whiplash fight between Monaco and the climax, and a longer IM/WM/WL fight at the end.

[Chris B]

My main problem with the movie was the terrible script. The movie had one of the best casts around and they had to work with a s**t script. That was tremendously disappointing to me.

While I wouldn't agree that the script was terrible, I would agree that I do think they droped the ball on a few things, though I still love IM2. I hope Favreau and co. ditch Theroux when its time to get to work on IM3.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Well atleast we can agree on that, Theroux should be given his walking papers...eventhough I blame Marvel just as much as him because they rushed the film into production.

[Chris B]

I don't understand why they didn't bring back any of the writers from the first film. Like I said, I still liked the movie and I think it had all the right ingredients, but they needed a better writer to bring it all together.

[Blade X]

Do you have ADD? The fight scenes weren't any longer/shorter than the first film and in the case of the final fight it was much longer.

It's OK to have less action in an origin movie (which is what IM1 was) because you have to introduce all of the characters and the universe to those unfamiliar with it. It's not OK to have very little action in a sequel, since most people who are going to see the movie are already familiar with the main characters and the world they live in.


You should have stopped at "as bad as Transformers 2 was".

It still doesn't make it any less true that TF:ROTF, not only had more longer and exciting action/fight scenes then IM2, but did better at the box office then IM2 after being out at the same amount of time.

If you wanted it to be like TF2 and are not happy, then I'm glad.

I'm happy that you are glad.:oldrazz:

[I SEE SPIDEY]

So how about them boxoffice numbers? This thread is slightly off topic now.

My parting word until the final numbers is what I said before, I think that the movie is going to drop 50% after the actuals come out.

Right now I think that the movie ends with 315mil tops. I'm predicting 308mil.

[Spider-Fan]

48% drop isn't that bad, and it has Memorial Day coming up. I think it will definitely get over IM's budget, but probably not by as much as we all thought it would. But, it should make it. However, the international numbers are so much higher than IM1's, I think Marvel has to be happy.

[Iceman]

Got to say I'm a bit disappointed with IM2's domestic numbers. Before I saw the film I was expecting $400m. For some reason I don't think it has as much replay value as similar blockbusters.

[lespaul59]

I'll be surprised if IM2 can't at least tie IM at $318mil. I mean COTT scratched and clawed it's way to $160mil and that mvoie got not love at all. I know it had the added 3D money but stilll IM2 should have no problem reaching $320mil. Plus I still think IM2 has had some stiff compitition it's second and third weekend and will have some pretty tuff compition next week. I don't know what kind compition IM had other than Indy4.

[Blade X]

I don't disagree with anything here, but TIH was non stop action and it didn't do anything financially. Obviously if it was the first Hulk movie to come out, I think it would have done at least 200 domestic, but it still would have been the same movie critically. It's cliched to say that we need to find the right balance, but it's never been more important. Those IM trailers were pretty action packed. Yeah they could have done another set piece, but are parents really watching the movies, then deciding if is appropriate for their kids to watch again next Saturday afternoon? Are they reading reviews beforehand to make sure it is kid friendly enough? Maybe it's the marketing, which also doomed TIH. Maybe they should have attached more kid friendly TV spots on Nick or Disney. The TV spot with the kid was pretty kid friendly. Maybe IM2 didn't garner a repeat viewing with the kids, but I am not sure how many parents are willing to see a movie a second time anyway, one with the spouse, another with the nieces/nephews or kids. Maybe I am dead wrong, but a lot of movies have made a heck of a lot more without necessarily being kid friendly.

I wouldn't exactly say that TIH had non stop action. It had the exact same number of action/fight scenes as IM2. However, on average, most of the fight/action scenes in TIH were longer then the fight/action scenes in IM2, with the possible exception of the last fight/action scene in IM2 (which was about the same length, or greater then the last action/fight scene in TIH).

I think that the main reason why TIH didn't do well at the box office is because the movie makers decided to go with the dumb snarling non verbal (except for "Hulk smash" in the last fight scene) savage Hulk. This version of the Hulk is boring (personality wise) and is seen mostly as nothing more then a raging good monster/animal similar to Mighty Joe Young. Most people have a hard time relating to a non verbal snarling monster character. I strongly believe that if the movie makers had used the original angry grumpy and intelligent talking version of the Hulk (the version of the Hulk that was used in the PLANET HULK animated movie), that TIH would have done much better at the box office.

[lespaul59]

I wouldn't exactly say that TIH had non stop action. It had the exact same number of action/fight scenes as IM2. However, on average, most of the fight/action scenes in TIH were longer then the fight/action scenes in IM2, with the possible exception of the last fight/action scene in IM2 (which was about the same length, or greater then the last action/fight scene in TIH).

I think that the main reason why TIH didn't do well at the box office is because the movie makers decided to go with the dumb snarling non verbal (except for "Hulk smash" in the last fight scene) savage Hulk. This version of the Hulk is boring (personality wise) and is seen mostly as nothing more then a raging good monster/animal similar to Mighty Joe Young. Most people have a hard time relating to a non verbal snarling monster character. I strongly believe that if the movie makers had used the original angry grumpy and intelligent talking version of the Hulk (the version of the Hulk that was used in the PLANET HULK animated movie), that TIH would have done much better at the box office.

I've never seen Planet Hulk but I've always felt that going with a more intelligent Hulk would have been better than either Hulk we have gotten so far.

[ElMariachi]

I'm sorry but I take my d*** seriously. Wouldn't be a fanboy without one.

I don't like to attach my d--k to a movie franchise or a particular superhero. :hehe:

[ElMariachi]

This.

I really doubt Iron Man 3 is in any kind of jeopardy of being made or if Marvel is even having second thoughts. The only thought going through their head is when can we get the third one released.

At least I know they will break the bad threequel curse because they're saving Iron Man's baddest villain for last and not shooting their load with the second one.

exactly. Thats why I find these disapointed forumers to be a bit silly. You are going to get sequels. They are being planned as we speak. It to would be one thing if I had money invested in this, hoping to get more. But that doesn't apply to anybody here. Our only concern should be future movies. SM3 made bank, but look at how their fanbase is worrying about which Disney Channel star is going to be the next Peter Parker. :hehe:

[ElMariachi]

Avatar the same level of kid-friendly as Pixar's movies? Uhh, I don't recall seeing genocide by firebombing in any Pixar film. Or people being eaten by dragons with big teeth. Or being run through with arrows or riddled with bullets. Avatar was very much PG-13, while Pixar has only gone G or PG.

But that's just me. A simple story does NOT automatically mean kid-friendly. And when I'm thinking "kid" I'm thinking under 10. Pre-teen and teen girls definitely went to Titanic for Leo, but I don't think anyone under 10 would have the kind of obsessive crushes that the 13-16-y-o have nowadays. :funny:

sure, Avatar had some violence and adult themes----but it was advertised as being kid friendly. And in my opinion, in this day in age (with violent games/tv/movies) it is a kid friendly movie. Its kind of like Star Wars, which was somewhat mature in places but overall was child friendly. Oh, and by kids I mean 8-14. I think Avatar is in that wheelhouse. IM2 is a bit too political and has too much adult humor for theme in my opinion.

Maybe we can get Justin Bieber to play Tony Starks adopted son. :hehe:

[FaT_tONle]

S**t like people saying that Iron Man 2 had a good script and that the middle part was wholely satisfying boggles my mind. It boggles my mind that anyone likes Hellboy 2, Spider-Man 3, GhostRider, The Spirit, all of the Punisher movies, Wolverine, Batman Returns, Superman, Superman 2, Superman 3, Superman 4, Superman Returns and DareDevil. I mean, alot of s**t boggles my mind.

I don't know a lot of people that liked most of those films...


I liked FF in general but I've never pretended that it was a great movie. As a matter of fact it's probably a pretty bad movie that I like for some unknown reason. I'm sorry that I had higher hopes for Iron Man 2, I didn't know that I should have been expecting something of the FF movie's quality, especially when the first movie was better than those films.FF movies don't compare with IM first two installments. Maybe they met your expectations. That's fine. Why you want to bring down your expectations for that franchise and defend the movies, yet be overly critical of a superior franchise is your business. Just be fair. You can't tell me Vanko was underutilized and then say Doom wasn't as bad as was made out to be... just as an example.


Will people stop quoting that guy, he is on my ignore list for a reason.:awesome:

And I'm not apart of a d**k measuring contest because I don't have a d**k.:oldrazz:Well, what he said on the issue made a lot of sense, especially the d*** comment.

[ElMariachi]

As I said earlier, the done sequence was wholly unsatisfying, they were faceless and hardly provided any kind of threat, then Vanko arrives and you think its on, but after 30 seconds its over, sorry but it just wasnt a satisfying conclusion to their rivalry. You ask what more did I want? I didnt want to come out of that fight thinking 'is that it?' Spiderman 2 and X2 had some of the best action sequences ever in a CB movie, TDK had the awesome Japan and chase scene's, not one moment of Iron Man 2 made me say 'woah', thats the big difference.

And how can you say I am looking for reasons to hate the movie when I liked it, you can clearly see in my sig I gave it a 9/10, but it wasnt the sequel it could have been, thats what was dissapointing.

Sure, they were faceless---but is this any different from goons in Batman or any other action movie? Iron Man is sci-fi, so faceless robots go with the territory. Sure, Whiplash could be a minute or so longer, but this doesn't really break the movie for me.

[ElMariachi]

Will people stop quoting that guy, he is on my ignore list for a reason.:awesome:

And I'm not apart of a d**k measuring contest because I don't have a d**k.:oldrazz:

you ignored me!? Talk about trying to avoid opinions you don't agree with! Cough cough politics cough cough.

[Iron_Stark]

S**t like people saying that Iron Man 2 had a good script and that the middle part was wholely satisfying boggles my mind. It boggles my mind that anyone likes Fantastic Four and Fantastic Four 2. I mean, alot of s**t boggles my mind.

I liked FF in general but I've never pretended that it was a great movie. As a matter of fact it's probably a pretty bad movie that I like for some unknown reason. I'm sorry that I had higher hopes for Iron Man 2, I didn't know that I should have been expecting something of the FF movie's quality, especially when the first movie was better than those films.
.

Fixed.

Those two movies were hot garbage. THE worst that has ever come out of Marvel. The idiot director should never be let into a studio lot again.

[Tony Stark]

Stop comparing it to other movies and just realize that I refuse to like every single comicbook movie that comes out just because it's a comicbook movie staring a good actor who has a huge nerd following.

I still like RDJ but I just don't care for the movie. It's not personal.

LOL! you compare the movies all the time, but we aren't able to do that? You're a total hypocrite. You were the one who said these movies were as bad as the Fantastic Four, but no we can't compare it to Spider-man 3, or whatever.

Also if it's not personal, then why on earth is it bothering you that people compare this movie to other comic films? That's something that's happened with every comic movie that comes out. Heck every "top 10" list on SHH is a comparison.

If you don't like the movie fine, but if you don't like people comparing the film to others, I suggest you either use the "ignore" feature, or find another message board that doesn't allow people to do this.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Sure, they were faceless---but is this any different from goons in Batman or any other action movie? Iron Man is sci-fi, so faceless robots go with the territory. Sure, Whiplash could be a minute or so longer, but this doesn't really break the movie for me.

Of course its different, goons have faces and can talk, the drones couldnt, goons arent faceless, we see their reactions, faces, etc, its totally different than faceless drones who have no reactions.

At the end of the day, I just dont expect to walk out of a $200 million movie unsatisfied with the action.

[Ace of Knaves]

I thought the action was bad ass personally. Could there have been more? Sure. But i liked the character moments too. I mean, more action could of resulted in less Sam Rockwell, and that would just be an utter travesty in my book.

[Iron_Stark]

The fights scenes were fine and the money is fine, nothing to worry about.

Look at Star Wars, Empire Strikes Back made 100 mill less domestically than the original, and had the least action of the entire saga, yet it's arguably the greatest sequel ever and it was never in danger of more movies getting made.

Of course if there was internet back then, I'm sure people would've been complaining and panicking.

[JeetKuneDo]

I think that the main reason why TIH didn't do well at the box office is because the movie makers decided to go with the dumb snarling non verbal (except for "Hulk smash" in the last fight scene) savage Hulk. This version of the Hulk is boring (personality wise) and is seen mostly as nothing more then a raging good monster/animal similar to Mighty Joe Young. Most people have a hard time relating to a non verbal snarling monster character. I strongly believe that if the movie makers had used the original angry grumpy and intelligent talking version of the Hulk (the version of the Hulk that was used in the PLANET HULK animated movie), that TIH would have done much better at the box office.

I'll second all this. This "Harpo Marx Hulk" stuff has to stop. Your title character must have a personality. That horrible TV show somehow planted the idea that (David?) Banner loses his vocal cords when he transforms and Hollywood just can't get away from that.

[danoyse]

S**t like people saying that Iron Man 2 had a good script and that the middle part was wholely satisfying boggles my mind. It boggles my mind that anyone likes Hellboy 2, Spider-Man 3, GhostRider, The Spirit, all of the Punisher movies, Wolverine, Batman Returns, Superman, Superman 2, Superman 3, Superman 4, Superman Returns and DareDevil. I mean, alot of s**t boggles my mind.

Superman and Superman 2 are bad now? OK, that boggles my mind.

Will people stop quoting that guy, he is on my ignore list for a reason.:awesome:

Your ignore list is not everyone else's problem. :cwink:

[JeetKuneDo]

I thought the action was bad ass personally. Could there have been more? Sure. But i liked the character moments too. I mean, more action could of resulted in less Sam Rockwell, and that would just be an utter travesty in my book.

Same here. I would hate to see reactions from some to the first Die Hard movie if it came out this week. "Not enough action!". Good lord....we play too many Xbox games.

I think the fact this movie got an A CinemaScore speaks to how well it was balanced. 5th biggest OW ever and about 450 million so far in the coffers means all sequel plans are on track. If something happens to jeopardize the Avenger storyline, then I'll get upset.

[JeetKuneDo]

Superman and Superman 2 are bad now? OK, that boggles my mind.

I was thinking the same thing.

Personally I wouldn't put Batman Returns and the first Punisher on the list either. I also liked the Daredevil DC.

[Ace of Knaves]

What was the opening weekend then?

[hatebox]

$128m

It's currently on $251m domestically

[Superhero 101]

I just hope it gets to 300 million domestically

[hatebox]

I just hope it gets to 300 million domestically

It will. Whether it gets past $320m is a more interesting matter.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

So how about them boxoffice numbers? This thread is slightly off topic now.

My parting word until the final numbers is what I said before, I think that the movie is going to drop 50% after the actuals come out.

Right now I think that the movie ends with 315mil tops. I'm predicting 308mil.Well, looks like I was wrong.

Well those movies are bad to me and I wasn't speaking for anyone else but myself. I've never liked the original Superman movies. Thats not a cool opinion but it's my opinion.

As for that A Cinema Score it hasn't stopped the movie from dropping almost as badly as Spider-Man 3 which I don't remember having an A Cinema Score. Like Superman Returns this movie's word of mouth is obviously lackluster which doesn't mean anything this time because it's still going to hit 600mil but next time it won't be that lucky. This movies legs have been bad so far and thats what I'm looking at.

[ElMariachi]

Of course its different, goons have faces and can talk, the drones couldnt, goons arent faceless, we see their reactions, faces, etc, its totally different than faceless drones who have no reactions.

At the end of the day, I just dont expect to walk out of a $200 million movie unsatisfied with the action.

The goons in TDK were all faceless wearing clown masks. Do you recall what any of the goons in Begins looked like? Or any of the Golmira terrorists in IM aside from the leader? Goons and faceless drones are equivalent in my book. They are cannon fodder for the hero to waste. And in my opinion, the ending to TDK and IM2 were really no different. Batman fought a bunch of faceless men and had a really short, uneventful fight with the Joker. Pretty much the same as Iron Man fighting a bunch of drones and then a quick fight with the main villian.

I really think you people expect too much. Did you really want the Whiplash fight to drag on and on? He pretty much beat War Machine in seconds and had the upper hand in the fight. How much longer should it drag before it ends?

[Tony Stark]

Well, looks like I was wrong.

Well those movies are bad to me and I wasn't speaking for anyone else but myself. I've never liked the original Superman movies. Thats not a cool opinion but it's my opinion.

As for that A Cinema Score it hasn't stopped the movie from dropping almost as badly as Spider-Man 3 which I don't remember having an A Cinema Score. Like Superman Returns this movie's word of mouth is obviously lackluster which doesn't mean anything this time because it's still going to hit 600mil but next time it won't be that lucky. This movies legs have been bad so far and thats what I'm looking at.

Yet again, you complain about others comparing this movie to other superhero movies, but then you just do the same.

Honestly I don't know what your agenda is, but you've contantly failed to add anything worthwhile to the discussion.

[hatebox]

The goons in TDK were all faceless wearing clown masks. Do you recall what any of the goons in Begins looked like? Or any of the Golmira terrorists in IM aside from the leader? Goons and faceless drones are equivalent in my book. They are cannon fodder for the hero to waste. And in my opinion, the ending to TDK and IM2 were really no different. Batman fought a bunch of faceless men and had a really short, uneventful fight with the Joker.

Physically Batman's fight with the Joker was uneventful, but psychologically a lot more was going on with their skyscraper sequence. I don't blame Iron Man for not having that because the Batman/Joker dynamic is an endless well of riches, but likewise I don't think the hero/villain climaxes of the two films are comparable either.

Hate to turn this into a TDK debate, but you started it. :cwink:

[ElMariachi]

Physically Batman's fight with the Joker was uneventful, but psychologically a lot more was going on with their skyscraper sequence. I don't blame Iron Man for not having that because the Batman/Joker dynamic is an endless well of riches, but likewise I don't think the hero/villain climaxes of the two films are comparable either.

Hate to turn this into a TDK debate, but you started it. :cwink:

thats true, but it still was roughly the same set up. Nobody demanded an epic Batman/Joker brawl last 8 minutes. It was quick and got to the point. Thats all we needed with Iron Man 2. :cwink:

[danoyse]

Yet again, you complain about others comparing this movie to other superhero movies, but then you just do the same.

Honestly I don't know what your agenda is, but you've contantly failed to add anything worthwhile to the discussion.

Neither do you when you post things like that. Put someone on ignore if you don't want to listen to them.

[danoyse]

As for that A Cinema Score it hasn't stopped the movie from dropping almost as badly as Spider-Man 3 which I don't remember having an A Cinema Score. Like Superman Returns this movie's word of mouth is obviously lackluster which doesn't mean anything this time because it's still going to hit 600mil but next time it won't be that lucky. This movies legs have been bad so far and thats what I'm looking at.

Yet, Spiderman 3 was still the highest grossing movie of 2007.

Iron Man 2 is not doing badly. At all.

[Marvin]

My main problem with the movie was the terrible script. The movie had one of the best casts around and they had to work with a s**t script. That was tremendously disappointing to me.

Why can't the lovers of the movie just talk about the actual movie and stop deflicting attention to those terrible Transformers movies and that awful Spider-Man 3?

there's been alot of talk about the IM2 script. Many of the reviews are going on and on about it.
when the Transformers "critiques" roll in every year the script (which is by all right "really bad") seems to never get mentioned...

Iron mans performance is a surprise to say the least. Those commercials were really selling it to be a strong contender, moreover, just like 2008 it's being followed by dissapointing competition.

IMO it just boils down the lack of tonal energy the film has.
Both (the first) TF, Ironman, Spidy and TDK have this, whereas Ironman 2, hulk and SR don't. they just fall flat where they should soar.

IM one has the dude captured by terrorists with no way out, he uses his supersmarts and fights overcomes the situation no jokes about it. IM2 opens with the jokey pepper pots suit case "fight" then moves onto a tonally off kilter fight with his friend complete with background music, and then the big finale is against faceless drones with IM just standing around shooting and flying around et vanko part deux.

gone is the strong dangerous villian of the first and here we have a wannabe that dances around and couldn't hurt a fly, Vanko is all bark. If you ask most people what the strongest thing in TDK was it's an obvious answer. It's pretty much the difference between the first and second film.

lastly Tony isn't doing super amazing things anymore, he's almost in nolan batmans level of not being a special person and being handed things and answers. Not only did shield show up and hand him the materials and answers he needed but that new element "he" created in the film was actually concieved by his dad during lesser times.

that was a long ramble in a nut shell

1. lack of tonal consistency
2. lack of spectacle
3. lack of compelling villian
4. lack of super hero being super

equates to a film that's going to crawl it's way to to matching the first's numbers.

and judging by the way that hammer looked and joe johnstons track record, I'm expeting more TIH duds from marvel. I'm hoping for better.

bring on Peter Berg and Francis Lawrence.

[Marvin]

still it's not doing as bad as wolverine or DD

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I thought the action was bad ass personally. Could there have been more? Sure. But i liked the character moments too. I mean, more action could of resulted in less Sam Rockwell, and that would just be an utter travesty in my book.

They could have just made the movie longer, I would never ask for less Sam Rockwell, if anything I wanted more of him, as well as the action :yay:.

Same here. I would hate to see reactions from some to the first Die Hard movie if it came out this week. "Not enough action!". Good lord....we play too many Xbox games.
I think the fact this movie got an A CinemaScore speaks to how well it was balanced. 5th biggest OW ever and about 450 million so far in the coffers means all sequel plans are on track. If something happens to jeopardize the Avenger storyline, then I'll get upset.

I thought the movie didnt have enough action and have never owned an XBox or Playstation 3 in my life, last console I owned was the PS1 10 years ago, so your observation is ******** my friend, why cant people accept that some were just a little dissapointed with what we got?

The goons in TDK were all faceless wearing clown masks. Do you recall what any of the goons in Begins looked like? Or any of the Golmira terrorists in IM aside from the leader? Goons and faceless drones are equivalent in my book. They are cannon fodder for the hero to waste. And in my opinion, the ending to TDK and IM2 were really no different. Batman fought a bunch of faceless men and had a really short, uneventful fight with the Joker. Pretty much the same as Iron Man fighting a bunch of drones and then a quick fight with the main villian.

I really think you people expect too much. Did you really want the Whiplash fight to drag on and on? He pretty much beat War Machine in seconds and had the upper hand in the fight. How much longer should it drag before it ends?

Actually, I remember a lot of the faces of the goons in BB, TDK and IM1, so that puts your theory to bed, I remember their reactions to the heroes and what they did and they made the scene's all the better for me, I would prefer the cannon fodder to have a face and be able to react, the drones couldnt, not to mention they werent a viable threat.

As for the ending of TDK, The Joker wasnt a physical match for Batman at all, he knew this, he even mentions it, so no one was expecting a physical confrontation and thankfully we never got one, as someone else said it was psychological, which has always been the dynamic between the two.

Iron Man and Whiplash have never really had a dynamic, at least when you compare them to Batman and The Joker, so it was movies job to create one and in this it did a pretty good job, but the climax of their rivalry was just totally unsatisfactory, you ask me what more do I want? The fights in X2, Spiderman 2 and even Hellboy II and ROTF are always talked about as being amoung the best ever, will that ever happen with IM2? No, what I want is to be satisfied, I wasnt, the whole movie built up to their confrontation only for it to last about a minute, as I said earlier, I dont expect to be walking out of a $200 million movie not satisfied with the action and I did.

[Immortalfire]

Yet, Spiderman 3 was still the highest grossing movie of 2007.

Iron Man 2 is not doing badly. At all.

A lot of movies would kill to do as "bad" as Spidey 3.

[Spider-Vader]

Damn, people will ***** about anything. Iron Man 2 IS a good movie, hell it was better than any movie from last year save Inglorious Basterds, District 9 & Up.

[Anita18]

Yet, Spiderman 3 was still the highest grossing movie of 2007.

Iron Man 2 is not doing badly. At all.
Of course not. It's just that people expected it to do better.

And SM3-like drops aren't going to help Avengers or IM3. IM2 isn't NEARLY as cringe-inducing as SM3, so hopefully the momentum won't be as thwarted.

[Iron_Stark]

A lot of movies would kill to do as "bad" as Spidey 3.

A lot of movies would kill to have the same numbers Iron Man 2 is having right now. A LOT.

[Figs]

there's been alot of talk about the IM2 script. Many of the reviews are going on and on about it.
when the Transformers "critiques" roll in every year the script (which is by all right "really bad") seems to never get mentioned.

Over the years i've noticed that with most, yes most critics whether they're "professional" or not. If you read a lot of reviews from some of the same critics you'll notice that some aspects they comment on about one film they won't for another. I think it has to do with a lot of them not wanting to use a boring checklist of what to comment on for every film. I don't necessarily consider it being biased but sort of forgetful. When I get off my lazy ass to do an amateur review just for fun I tend to do the same thing at times.

I do think movies should be reviewed fair across the board but when certain things about a movie(whether they're positive or negative)really grab your attention other elements can get lost amongst your other thoughts.

[Iron_Stark]

Of course not. It's just that people expected it to do better.

And SM3-like drops aren't going to help Avengers or IM3. IM2 isn't NEARLY as cringe-inducing as SM3, so hopefully the momentum won't be as thwarted.

Seriously, how is this not going to help the Avengers or Iron Man 3? Please

[Anita18]

Seriously, how is this not going to help the Avengers or Iron Man 3? Please
SM3's drops were pretty bad. (Warning, I'm going to bring up TDK again :o ) Its opening weekend was pretty much on par with TDK but it fell short of TDK's total by almost $200 million. That's a HUGE chunk of change, and although TDK's multiplier was pretty impressive for a blockbuster that opened to $100 million+, it wasn't as good as SM1's multiplier, or obviously Avatar's. That meant that SM3's WOM wasn't getting people into the theater. Or back into the theater. Whichever.

WOM means momentum, which is something you want when you're in the middle of a series. You want people coming back for more. If the momentum isn't there, it's going to be harder to get people into the theater. If the momentum IS there, it'll be easier to get people into the theater. It's the difference between BB and SR. Whose sequel was insanely successful? Heck, which movie got a sequel at all?

Of course, weak momentum from your previous film can be overcome with a really great current movie and great marketing. Momentum helps though, for sure. It makes the filmmakers' and studio's jobs easier.

[topdog1]

No matter how you cut it, breaking $250 million domestic in 16 days under these economic conditions is simply amazing. Past year's numbers may not be a good indicator. Despite certain claims, I think word of mouth is very good for this film.

[Anita18]

No matter how you cut it, breaking $250 million domestic in 16 days under these economic conditions is simply amazing. Past year's numbers may not be a good indicator. Despite certain claims, I think word of mouth is very good for this film.
People keep mentioning the bad economic conditions, but I'm pretty sure that the economy was crap mere months ago when Avatar passed Titanic. By almost $150 million. :o Heck, Avatar is STILL making money in theaters and it was released on DVD a month ago!

If people want to see a movie, almost nothing is going to stop them. You just have to convince them that it's going to be worth their time and money.

[lespaul59]

No matter how you cut it, breaking $250 million domestic in 16 days under these economic conditions is simply amazing. Past year's numbers may not be a good indicator. Despite certain claims, I think word of mouth is very good for this film.

I don't get how $250 million is bad either. Somebody correct me but other than Avatar, How To Train Your Dragon and Alice in Wonderland have any movies been consitently strong? And those three have had extra 3D money where as IM2 has already made more money than HTTYD and might even have a chance of topping AIWL with out the added 3D money. I just don't get the IM2 is doing good attitude when it's only been out for going on it's third week and is already $50mil over it's budget.

[TheVileOne]

So what if Avatar passed Titanic. It's a freaking James Cameron movie. Only a movie like Avatar could do that.

Iron Man's current numbers put it above just about every other superhero franchise EXCEPT Spider-man.

The movie is doing great business and people are being whiney haters and naysayers. It figures.

What did you all say when Spider-man 2 did not even surpass Spider-man?

[Tony Stark]

People keep mentioning the bad economic conditions, but I'm pretty sure that the economy was crap mere months ago when Avatar passed Titanic. By almost $150 million. :o Heck, Avatar is STILL making money in theaters and it was released on DVD a month ago!

If people want to see a movie, almost nothing is going to stop them. You just have to convince them that it's going to be worth their time and money.

Actually the economy is worse now, there was a 1000 point drop in the Dow the week of the US release date, and the situation in Greece threatens to break the EU.

Second of all adjusted for inflation Avatar did not pass Titanic, and is behind by 250 million, and even more if you calculate 3D costs.

[hatebox]

I don't buy the economy argument at all. Pizza Hut's revenues actually went up in the last couple of years because people wanted a cheap instead of expensive restaurant. Despite price rises, movies are still seen as cheap entertainment (not to mention escapism), and that's recession proof. Avatar proves it, and that had 3D prices. If people want to see it, they'll see it.

[Ipodman]

So what if Avatar passed Titanic. It's a freaking James Cameron movie. Only a movie like Avatar could do that.

Iron Man's current numbers put it above just about every other superhero franchise EXCEPT Spider-man.

The movie is doing great business and people are being whiney haters and naysayers. It figures.

What did you all say when Spider-man 2 did not even surpass Spider-man?



That is something I've always been puzzled with ever since.

Spider-man 2 was much more well received than Sm1, but lesser people saw it? :huh:

[hatebox]

On paper it's odd, but SM1 was a genuine phenomenon. It's hard to follow up a beast like that, just like no-one expects Batman 3 to beat TDK.

IM1 was not a phenomoenon, it was just a big, pleasant surprise. So for IM2 the studio absolutely would have expected/still do expect it to pass its predecessor.

[Excelsior.]

Stop mentioning the economy. The movie industry thrives in a bad economy.

[Iron_Stark]

SM3's drops were pretty bad. (Warning, I'm going to bring up TDK again :o ) Its opening weekend was pretty much on par with TDK but it fell short of TDK's total by almost $200 million. That's a HUGE chunk of change, and although TDK's multiplier was pretty impressive for a blockbuster that opened to $100 million+, it wasn't as good as SM1's multiplier, or obviously Avatar's. That meant that SM3's WOM wasn't getting people into the theater. Or back into the theater. Whichever.

WOM means momentum, which is something you want when you're in the middle of a series. You want people coming back for more. If the momentum isn't there, it's going to be harder to get people into the theater. If the momentum IS there, it'll be easier to get people into the theater. It's the difference between BB and SR. Whose sequel was insanely successful? Heck, which movie got a sequel at all?

Of course, weak momentum from your previous film can be overcome with a really great current movie and great marketing. Momentum helps though, for sure. It makes the filmmakers' and studio's jobs easier.

Again, did people come back for more when Empire Strikes Back did less than the original? Lets see, YES they did, ROTJ made 50 million more than Empire.

Did people come back for more when everyone bashed The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones even worse? (adjusted for inflation AotC did the worse of the entire saga) Again, YES they did, in fact Revenge of the Sith was the #1 movie in 2005.

[hatebox]

Not sure that's an entirely fair comparison though - the hook of seeing Anakin turn into Vader was a pretty enticing one even for people who hated the prequels. Plus the reivews were much kinder.

[Iron_Stark]

Not sure that's an entirely fair comparison though - the hook of seeing Anakin turn into Vader was a pretty enticing one even for people who hated the prequels. Plus the reivews were much kinder.

:whatever: lmao

Indiana Jones, the Temple of Doom made less than than the original then the Last Crusade came back and made more than it's predecessor.

What was the hook there?

And what about Empire, it made 100 million less than the original and 50 million less than Jedi. Did it under perform? Was it a failure? Did they have second thoughts about continuing the series?

[hatebox]

Ah, the old rolly eyes.

As I suggested eariler, following up a genuine phenomenon like Star Wars (or Spiderman) is very hard. Empire still made a ton of cash for its day, just like SM2 did. IM1 wasn't a box office phenomenon, so the comparison is already on rocky foundations.

The 'hook' for the Indiana Jones frachise was that Temple of Doon sucked and Last Crusade didn't.

[Ipodman]

I don't even understand where this discussion is going..lol

Sure some sequels made less money then the first in the franchise, but Iron Man 2's fate is yet to be seen

[Iron_Stark]

Ah, the old rolly eyes.

As I suggested eariler, following up a genuine phenomenon like Star Wars (or Spiderman) is very hard. Empire still made a ton of cash for its day, just like SM2 did. IM1 wasn't a box office phenomenon, so the comparison is already on rocky foundations.

The 'hook' for the Indiana Jones frachise was that Temple of Doon sucked and Last Crusade didn't.

Ah the "not really answering the question because I don't have an answer" answer.

"it sucked" that's the best answer you have? Indiana Jones wasn't some kind of phenomenon, yet the second one wasn't able to hurt part 3.

Earlier people were saying the Avengers 3 and IM3 aren't going to have momentum (with it destined to make +300 mill, I'm still trying to figure that one out) I've given 3 examples of with figures to back it up and still don't get my questions answered.

Like I said a while back, if this was mid July and IM2's numbers were at 200-250, then there may some be concern but this being only the 3rd week, nah.

[hatebox]

I don't even know what your hypothesis is. You're comparing Iron Man to all these franchises whose first films were cultural phenomenons of their era, and I'm saying Iron Man wasn't so the comparison is dodgy.

If IM3 is really good then it can make more money than the first. Sure it can. The less than great reception of the second won't help, but I've never suggested that a 3rd would find it impossible to still come out top. All I've said is that Paramount will be disappointed in IM2 not beating IM1 for its own sake.

[Iron_Stark]

I don't even know what your hypothesis is. You're comparing Iron Man to all these franchises whose first films were cultural phenomenons of their era, and I'm saying Iron Man wasn't so the comparison is dodgy.

If IM3 is really good then it can make more money than the first. Sure it can. The less than great reception of the second won't help, but I've never suggested that a 3rd would find it impossible to still come out top. All I've said is that Paramount will be disappointed in IM2 not beating IM1 for its own sake.

Iron Man my not be on Star Wars level, but I sure when it's all said and done, he'll be on Indiana Jones level. And Indy wasn't as big as Star Wars, so how is that not a fair comparison?

So 300+ dom and 600+ WW doesn't pass for great reception these days? Or are we just talking about the few critics and the very few armchair analysts that didn't like the movie?

The only disappointment Marvel/Paramount would've had is if it would've failed to crack 200 million domestically. This one is on course to make about as much as the first or even beat it, no disappointment whatsoever.

[ddddeeee]

You don't put in $50M extra for a film in the hope of it grossing the same as the original. The movie is going to make a lot of money, but Marvel/Paramount were definitely expecting better results, domestically at least.

I'm 100% certain they were expecting RotF numbers as opposed to Iron Man numbers.

[Spider-Fan]

Yes, they put more money into IM2. IM2 is also going to beat IM1's gross domestically, and annihilate it overseas. That is a win for Marvel IMO. Marvel's brand name has more international recognition, which could help their other projects. Iron Man might not be Spider-Man, but Sony invested the extra money into SM2, and it made less. Then they invested even more into SM3. The point is I think everyone is trying to make this film which is a success a failure just because its BO wasn't on par with Transformers, and I feel this is flawed. Iron Man is a sure thing BO hit for Marvel, and they know it will net them over 300 mil. That gives Marvel something to build around. It's not like this is TIH. while Marvel might have been hoping for ROFT numbers, I highly doubt they're unhappy with the results. This is their 3rd film, and it is doing well and growing the brand.

[Ace of Knaves]

So wait... people are actually questioning whether Marvel will continue to push forward with their other films because of IM2s B.O?

Errr... 600 million WW and counting is not peanuts.

[hatebox]

So wait... people are actually questioning whether Marvel will continue to push forward with their other films because of IM2s B.O?

No. No-one has suggested that.

Anyway, the 'weekend warrior' predicts a very small drop for IM2 this weekend, but with PoP out I do wonder...

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/weekendwarriornews.php?id=66302

[Spider-Fan]

It's a holiday weekend, though. That will boost BO.

[TheVileOne]

On paper it's odd, but SM1 was a genuine phenomenon. It's hard to follow up a beast like that, just like no-one expects Batman 3 to beat TDK.

IM1 was not a phenomoenon, it was just a big, pleasant surprise. So for IM2 the studio absolutely would have expected/still do expect it to pass its predecessor.
I'd say it was a phenomenon at the time. But this is one of the lamest excuses I've ever heard.

No one believed a movie about a more unknown character like Iron Man could do as well as it did.

As for what people are suggesting, people are suggesting this movie being a disappointment is going to hurt the momentum of future movies. First of all that's a fosh because Incredible Hulk which was a LEGIT disappointment did not ruin the momentum of Iron Man 2.

Second of all this movie is probably going to surpass $650 million worldwide. People really need to be quiet. No other comic book movie franchise has been as successful as Iron Man besides the Spider-man franchise.

You want to know what a disappointment was? WATCHMEN.

[TheVileOne]

No. No-one has suggested that.

Anyway, the 'weekend warrior' predicts a very small drop for IM2 this weekend, but with PoP out I do wonder...

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/weekendwarriornews.php?id=66302
Smaller drop is accurate because of the holiday weekend.

Also the buzz on Prince of Persia is not that huge.

Iron Man 2 has been pretty consistent and impressive while movies Robin Hood and Shrek 4 are legit disappointments.

Iron Man 2 is surpassing Iron Man and Shrek 4 is like borderline the dregs of the franchise unless Memorial Day can save it.

[Anita18]

So wait... people are actually questioning whether Marvel will continue to push forward with their other films because of IM2s B.O?

Errr... 600 million WW and counting is not peanuts.
Of course not. We "naysayers" are just saying that Marvel/Paramount's job would be easier if IM2 had been TF2-big instead of not being as big as the original. IM1 was a pleasant surprise, but its box office wasn't mind-blowing. It still had room to grow, as TF2 showed. I mean, it was a movie about a bunch of cars that turn into robots. :oldrazz: Although, IM1's box office may turn out to seem more more impressive over time, depending on how Thor, Cap, and Avengers do. (See below example re: Watchmen.)

It has nothing to do with "quality," since quality is subjective. We're talking about hype and momentum.

You want to know what a disappointment was? WATCHMEN.
And considering how poorly Kick-Ass did this year, maybe the expectations on Watchmen WERE completely overblown to begin with. And Kick-Ass was marketed more fun than Watchmen certainly was.

We'll see if this is the case with IM1 and 2 a few years into the future. Right now, with the current movies available to us to compare it with, (especially TF2) people are just saying they thought it would do better than it's doing. Almost nobody (official peeps, people on BOM and WoKJ) predicted that IM2 would earn less than IM1, but it's looking very very likely.

[souvlaki]

I'd say it was a phenomenon at the time. But this is one of the lamest excuses I've ever heard.

No one believed a movie about a more unknown character like Iron Man could do as well as it did.

As for what people are suggesting, people are suggesting this movie being a disappointment is going to hurt the momentum of future movies. First of all that's a fosh because Incredible Hulk which was a LEGIT disappointment did not ruin the momentum of Iron Man 2.

Second of all this movie is probably going to surpass $650 million worldwide. People really need to be quiet. No other comic book movie franchise has been as successful as Iron Man besides the Spider-man franchise.

You want to know what a disappointment was? WATCHMEN.

I've missed a few pages of arguments here but I'm pretty sure all anyone was implying is that if Thor and Captain America are disappointments that Iron Man may not be strong enough to sell the entire Avengers film by himself like previously thought, and it may cause Marvel to rethink their approach to the film... especially considering how high the budget may end up being for an Avengers film. Most people expected record opening weekend numbers, and a domestic take higher than $400 million for Iron Man 2. If anyone had tried to suggest even a month ago that Iron Man 2 would struggle to make even as much money as it's predecessor would have been laughed at. Is Iron Man 2 a failure? Not even close. Did it under perform? If you look at what most peoples' expectations were for the movie, including many people in this thread that are now trying to say that it didn't under perform, the answer is yes.

[TheVileOne]

1. People are wrong.

2. **** Transformers 2. Seriously I am sick and ****ing tired of hearing Transformers 2. If any of these movies are ever like Transformers 2 and make even more money then **** these movies. Transformers 2 was a mind-numbing and horrendous piece of pop-garbage. So it didn't make like $800 billion, so freaking what? Not every movie can do that. Stop freaking measuring movies by the standard of Transformers freaking 2. Dammit.

3. And for that matter freak TDK as well. I love TDK but few movies will ever get that high. Guess what else? The third Nolan Batman movie won't even get that high so stop dreaming. Batman franchise started out decent then took a rocket ship to the top. It's got no place else to go back down. There's no way another movie can surpass the expectations set by TDK.

4. Stop the naysaying and hating on Iron Man 2 and all it's success.

[Tony Stark]

I'm pretty sure PoP is going to bomb. It just looks like it has way too much riding on it. And movies based on video games never seem to do well. I would not be suprised if SATC2 is the no. 1 movie this weekend.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I don't buy the economy argument at all. Pizza Hut's revenues actually went up in the last couple of years because people wanted a cheap instead of expensive restaurant. Despite price rises, movies are still seen as cheap entertainment (not to mention escapism), and that's recession proof. Avatar proves it, and that had 3D prices. If people want to see it, they'll see it.

Time and again the economy argument has been proven to be bull, revenues for movies were up in 2008 from 2007, up in 2009 from 2008 and so far look to be up in 2010 from 2009, the economy is actually helping cinema thrive.

[TheVileOne]

If this movie surpasses the first Transformers worldwide, what will you all have to say then?

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

1. People are wrong.

2. **** Transformers 2. Seriously I am sick and ****ing tired of hearing Transformers 2. If any of these movies are ever like Transformers 2 and make even more money then **** these movies. Transformers 2 was a mind-numbing and horrendous piece of pop-garbage. So it didn't make like $800 billion, so freaking what? Not every movie can do that. Stop freaking measuring movies by the standard of Transformers freaking 2. Dammit.

3. And for that matter freak TDK as well. I love TDK but few movies will ever get that high. Guess what else? The third Nolan Batman movie won't even get that high so stop dreaming. Batman franchise started out decent then took a rocket ship to the top. It's got no place else to go back down. There's no way another movie can surpass the expectations set by TDK.

TDK was an excellent movie, but I saw nothing to suggest it cant be topped, hell, I saw better movies last year than TDK and IMO Inception looks better than it, so if Batman 3 is better than TDK, I can see it making more money, we'll see I guess.

4. Stop the naysaying and hating on Iron Man 2 and all it's success.

I havent seen anyone hating on the movie, I have seen people discussing that maybe its flaws are preventing it from a better BO, I really liked IM2, but I was very dissapointed with certain aspects of it.

Also, you cant argue that the movie isnt doing as well as people thought it would, a few weeks ago SHH posted an article saying IM2 was tracking better than TDK was on its first weekend.

If this movie surpasses the first Transformers worldwide, what will you all have to say then?

That it should have? IM2 is a sequel to a popular movie, Transformers was the first ever attempt at a live action movie based on those characters, there isnt really a comparison IMO.

[LostSon88]

I'm pretty sure SATC is gonna be #1 but I seriously doubt PoP is going to 'bomb'. Its geared towards taking the kids, very lighthearted counter option for those headin to the theater this weeken and is being prepped as the successor to the PoTC franchise for Disney. It'll do fine.

[S.A.A.D.]

http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=ironman2.htm


Total Lifetime Grosses
Domestic: $253,241,439 48.5% + Foreign: (http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=intl&id=ironman2.htm) $269,000,000 51.5% = Worldwide: $522,241,439

[lespaul59]

I've missed a few pages of arguments here but I'm pretty sure all anyone was implying is that if Thor and Captain America are disappointments that Iron Man may not be strong enough to sell the entire Avengers film by himself like previously thought, and it may cause Marvel to rethink their approach to the film... especially considering how high the budget may end up being for an Avengers film. Most people expected record opening weekend numbers, and a domestic take higher than $400 million for Iron Man 2. If anyone had tried to suggest even a month ago that Iron Man 2 would struggle to make even as much money as it's predecessor would have been laughed at. Is Iron Man 2 a failure? Not even close. Did it under perform? If you look at what most peoples' expectations were for the movie, including many people in this thread that are now trying to say that it didn't under perform, the answer is yes.

Arguing it like this makes way more sense than most of the post I've read. And if IM actually was a surprise and made more than everybody thought it would, could it be that IM2 is not underpreforming but rather preforming just as it should. I hope you guys get what I'm saying.

[rashad]

I'm pretty sure PoP is going to bomb. It just looks like it has way too much riding on it. And movies based on video games never seem to do well.

I wouldn't say never. More times than not maybe. POP isn't like a typical VGA.
http://boxofficemojo.com/genres/chart/?id=videogameadaptation.htm

[Tony Stark]

Of course not. We "naysayers" are just saying that Marvel/Paramount's job would be easier if IM2 had been TF2-big instead of not being as big as the original. IM1 was a pleasant surprise, but its box office wasn't mind-blowing. It still had room to grow, as TF2 showed. I mean, it was a movie about a bunch of cars that turn into robots. :oldrazz: Although, IM1's box office may turn out to seem more more impressive over time, depending on how Thor, Cap, and Avengers do. (See below example re: Watchmen.)

It has nothing to do with "quality," since quality is subjective. We're talking about hype and momentum.


And considering how poorly Kick-Ass did this year, maybe the expectations on Watchmen WERE completely overblown to begin with. And Kick-Ass was marketed more fun than Watchmen certainly was.

We'll see if this is the case with IM1 and 2 a few years into the future. Right now, with the current movies available to us to compare it with, (especially TF2) people are just saying they thought it would do better than it's doing. Almost nobody (official peeps, people on BOM and WoKJ) predicted that IM2 would earn less than IM1, but it's looking very very likely.


The problem is with your logic then Star Trek was a total bomb and won't garner a sequel. I don't know anyone who thinks that TF2 was better than Star Trek.

[Ipodman]

The problem is with your logic then Star Trek was a total bomb and won't garner a sequel. I don't know anyone who thinks that TF2 was better than Star Trek.

True. I love TF2 but Star Trek was better :woot:

[Anita18]

The problem is with your logic then Star Trek was a total bomb and won't garner a sequel. I don't know anyone who thinks that TF2 was better than Star Trek.
No, with my logic Star Trek = BB. The hype is there, the momentum is there. Star Trek is not a sequel that didn't surpass its predecessor. It's the stepping stone to greater things.

Star Trek's sequel will be expected to do better than Star Trek. Just as IM2 was expected to do better than IM1, and it may not do that.

[TheVileOne]

No, with my logic Star Trek = BB. The hype is there, the momentum is there. Star Trek is not a sequel that didn't surpass its predecessor. It's the stepping stone to greater things.

Star Trek's sequel will be expected to do better than Star Trek. Just as IM2 was expected to do better than IM1, and it may not do that.
Too bad for you it already has.

[Anita18]

Too bad for you it already has.
Er, you're not talking about box office, are you? Because IM2 is about $60 million behind IM1 right now, counting both domestic and overseas markets.

It's ahead in foreign box office though, is that what you meant? :oldrazz:

[baerrtt]

Someone asked earlier regarding how the reaction to SM2 was like when it overall didn't make as much as SM1 and if ppl were as gloomy as some are regarding IM2's performance and I think the difference was SM2 was so critically well received that most fanboys, at the time, didn't really care that it didn't outperform or match the first movie.

I think what's ultimately both disappointed some and caused others to get very defensive as regards to the numbers is the fact that the response isn't as wholly enthusiastic as it was for the first movie and, though some may deny it, that's coloured and influenced the debate/arguments.

[marcvader]

Do people here realistically think this movie won't surpass the first? The first movie made its total over a period of 5 months and this movie is only 60 mil behind after only 1 month. I don't get it.

[Iron_Stark]

Do people here realistically think this movie won't surpass the first? The first movie made its total over a period of 5 months and this movie is only 60 mil behind after only 1 month. I don't get it.

This is SHH. duh.


:oldrazz:

[ddddeeee]

Do people here realistically think this movie won't surpass the first? The first movie made its total over a period of 5 months and this movie is only 60 mil behind after only 1 month. I don't get it.

It's percentage drops are much worse than the first. I don't think it'll come close to the first but it should cross $300M easily enough.

[hatebox]

Do people here realistically think this movie won't surpass the first? The first movie made its total over a period of 5 months and this movie is only 60 mil behind after only 1 month. I don't get it.

Its drops are harder. What's not to get?

[Anita18]

Do people here realistically think this movie won't surpass the first? The first movie made its total over a period of 5 months and this movie is only 60 mil behind after only 1 month. I don't get it.
$60 million is actually a bigger and bigger number the longer the movie is in theaters. Unless the movie is called Avatar or Titanic. :funny:

[rashad]

Tuesday $1,810,492 -18.3%

[Evil Twin]

Do people here realistically think this movie won't surpass the first? The first movie made its total over a period of 5 months and this movie is only 60 mil behind after only 1 month. I don't get it.

IM2 is ahead of IM but showing steeper dropoffs. We'll know more after the weekend, but it still has a long ways to go.

See
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=daily&id=ironman.htm
and
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=daily&id=ironman2.htm


What's going to make it tougher is that it's almost certainly going to start to lose screens soon.

[terry78]

Yo mama is showing steeper dropoffs!!!! :argh:

[marcvader]

Thanks Evil Twin

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

IM2 is ahead of IM but showing steeper dropoffs. We'll know more after the weekend, but it still has a long ways to go.

See
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=daily&id=ironman.htm
and
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=daily&id=ironman2.htm


What's going to make it tougher is that it's almost certainly going to start to lose screens soon.

Its drop offs are not only bigger, but I just dont see IM2 having the legs of IM1, in fact its already showing that it hasnt.

[FaT_tONle]

Yeah the dailys are going under a million starting next week. Oh well... had a good run.

[Evil Twin]

Its drop offs are not only bigger, but I just dont see IM2 having the legs of IM1, in fact its already showing that it hasnt.

Yeah, IM1 grossed $60 million after the Memorial Day weekend. I don't see IM2 doing that, although it will be ahead of IM1 due to a faster start.

I don't put it completely past IM2 exceeding the domestic gross of IM1, although it surely won't hit the milestone of $350 million. It will do more than $300 million and it may do more than IM1's $318 million. It's basically behaving like a popular, frontloaded sequel.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

This weekend is a holiday so it will get a boost but after that it's back to the same drops it's been having.

Spider-Man 3 dropped 50.9% for it's M-Day 3day and 37.6% for it's 4day since IM2 is following it so closely I can surmise that IM2 should drop about 1 to 3% better for it's 3 and 4day M-Day weekend. I got to crunch the numbers to be sure though and I have to take into account what the competition will do in comparasion to what it did when SM3 came out.

And too respond to the over emotional; I never said that IM2 was a failure money wise I said that it had lukewarm word of mouth judging by it's drops and what the first movie did legs wise. And I said that it was a disappointment based on what everybody thought that it would do. You can not like what I'm saying but atleast get it right before you moan about it.

As I said the overseas is good (eventhough it's dropping like a mother overseas too) but domestically it's still in danger of not doing as well as the first and all of the defliction about SM2 grossing less that it's 400million dollar predecessor doesn't change that fact.

There were alot of people talking about how disappointing SM2's gross was by the way but I never thought that it was going to do better than the first because the first made 400mil so it wasn't disappointing to me. And the 151mil opening weekend for SM3 showed that not too many people hated SM2. SM3 would have easily outgrossed SM2 if it didn't suck so hard, that massive opening was proof of that. It's not just about the gross it's about the word of mouth.

If Paramount comes out with some halfbaked sequel to Star Trek it might gross more than the first based on a big opening but it damn sure is going to hurt the franchise in the long run. I'm so glad they are giving JJ 3 years to do it right, hopefully the script is far better than the first because that was easily the worst part of that film. Anyway I sort of went off topic. Oh well.

BTW My posts make perfect sense Tony because I am talking about the actual numbers and not letting my feelings get in the way. Read my take on Avatar's boxoffice run to see how unbiased I am when it comes to movies boxoffice numbers. I thought that that movie was as pointless as Iron Man 2 but I talked about it's fantastic legs and word of mouth. I didn't and still don't understand the love for that movie but it's there and I'm not going to be silly enough to ignore that and pretend that it disappointed.

My posts about IM2's boxoffice are thoughtful and researched. I look at the numbers for what they are, not what I want them to be. I'm fine with you not liking my fact based postings regarding the boxoffice but you aren't any different than the posters in the The Incredible Hulk boxoffice thread or the Kick-Ass thread. They claimed that the numbers were great for those movies and that they were raving success and they were wrong and are still wrong if they think that. Ofcourse the difference with Iron Man 2 is that it has actually made a s**tload of money but it's domestic numbers are still a disappointment and I will point that out because it's apart of it's boxoffice story.

Man do I hate when people who know nothing about the boxoffice talk about it.

[redfirebird2008]

IM2 made $12m more during opening weekend than Alice In Wonderland. It is now more than $15m behind Alice in total gross. If you subtract that $15m from Alice's total of $332m, you get $317m. That is the absolute ceiling for IM2 right now, but sadly it continues losing money each day to Alice. It will be very fortunate to reach $310m. Most likely total will be around $305m though.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

IM2 made $12m more during opening weekend than Alice In Wonderland. It is now more than $15m behind Alice in total gross. If you subtract that $15m from Alice's total of $332m, you get $317m. That is the absolute ceiling for IM2 right now, but sadly it continues losing money each day to Alice. It will be very fortunate to reach $310m. Most likely total will be around $305m though.It's going to look better because of the M-day weekend but after that it's harsh drop city again. I'm still thinking 308mil for it's total but that all depends on how well it does in the weeks to come. I don't think that POP and Sex are going to be as much comp as Pirates 3 and Shrek 3 were for Spider-Man 3 so I'm open to it dropping 28-30% for its four day as opposed to the 34 to 36% drop I'm predicting right now.

[MessiahDecoy123]

Honestly I don't think IM2 has enough momentum to cross 300 million let alone match the first Iron Man's final gross.

[ElMariachi]

No, with my logic Star Trek = BB. The hype is there, the momentum is there. Star Trek is not a sequel that didn't surpass its predecessor. It's the stepping stone to greater things.

Star Trek's sequel will be expected to do better than Star Trek. Just as IM2 was expected to do better than IM1, and it may not do that.

I doubt it. Star Trek isn't Batman and you forget that it's coming out in the battle royale that is 2012. It is going to be followed by Batman 3, Spider Man reboot, and another Ice Age movie. When it comes out, Avengers, Men in Black 3, Twilight 4 part II, and Madagascar 3 are still going to be in theaters. I have a hard time believing it's going to --wait for it---jump to lightspeed---like TDK did.

[Spider-Fan]

Comparing IM2 to Alice in Wonderland is a bad comparison because Alice in Wonderland is a kids film. Kids films like that tend to have more longterm success, even if Shrek is right now doing poorly.

[Anita18]

I doubt it. Star Trek isn't Batman and you forget that it's coming out in the battle royale that is 2012. It is going to be followed by Batman 3, Spider Man reboot, and another Ice Age movie. When it comes out, Avengers, Men in Black 3, Twilight 4 part II, and Madagascar 3 are still going to be in theaters. I have a hard time believing it's going to --wait for it---jump to lightspeed---like TDK did.
Sure we won't know if Star Trek's sequel will be a box office phenomenon like TDK was. But my point is that you can't compare Star Trek to TF2, for Pete's sake. :oldrazz:

Right now they're in IM1's position, pre-IM2. Or BB's position, pre-TDK. There's all kinds of possibilities as to which direction the franchise will go.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Honestly I don't think IM2 has enough momentum to cross 300 million let alone match the first Iron Man's final gross.I'm pretty sure it's going to scrap pass 300mil, even if the studio has to lie about it.

The Alice comparasion is just brillaint though because it pretty much shows that this movie has very little chance of making as much as the first one. If it's running behind Alice the way it is 330mil is out of the question and 320mil is going to be pretty damn hard to get. I'm still sticking to 308mil with an outside chance of 315mil if it has some late legs. I would be more than a little surprised if this movie outgrosses the first one no matter how it performs this holliday weekend.

[lespaul59]

If IM2 gets to 258mil before the weekend, which I think it should because that means that Wedensday and Thursday needs to only be 1.5mil on average. So lets say it makes the same thins weekend as last which would be 26mil that mean it should hit 285 mil on it's fourth weekend. I think the only way it doesn't tie IM is if it drops below last weekends total or it just loses steam after this weekend. I'll also add that it looks like it took Clash of the Titans till it's eighth week to drop below one mil. I'm not expert but I ahve a hard time seeing IM2 droping below 5mil a week ny it's 8th week. But with as little as I follow this stuff I really don't know what I'm talking about and I'm just guessing.

[Tony Stark]

I'm pretty sure it's going to scrap pass 300mil, even if the studio has to lie about it.

The Alice comparasion is just brillaint though because it pretty much shows that this movie has very little chance of making as much as the first one. If it's running behind Alice the way it is 330mil is out of the question and 320mil is going to be pretty damn hard to get. I'm still sticking to 308mil with an outside chance of 315mil if it has some late legs. I would be more than a little surprised if this movie outgrosses the first one no matter how it performs this holliday weekend.

You do understand that IM2 is selling more tickets than Alice? You can hate the movie all you want, but since you are the only one who is using the box office to say people don't like the film, I really hope you understand that IM2 will have sold more tickets than Alice.

[dark_b]

You do understand that IM2 is selling more tickets than Alice? You can hate the movie all you want, but since you are the only one who is using the box office to say people don't like the film, I really hope you understand that IM2 will have sold more tickets than Alice.can you copy/paste her post where she wrotte that?

:yay:

[Evil Twin]

IM2 made $12m more during opening weekend than Alice In Wonderland. It is now more than $15m behind Alice in total gross. If you subtract that $15m from Alice's total of $332m, you get $317m. That is the absolute ceiling for IM2 right now, but sadly it continues losing money each day to Alice. It will be very fortunate to reach $310m. Most likely total will be around $305m though.

IM2 will close the gap a bit on Monday, but who knows after that. And, Alice hasn't quite quit playing yet, as it's very possible that Alice's final total could be around $340 million.

It will be interesting to see how many screens IM2 loses in the next few weeks. SATC2 and POP are opening on nearly 7,000 screens this weekend. And Get Him to the Greek, Marmaduke, Splice, and Killers the following weekend will probably have just as big a roll out combined. Those screens aren't all coming out of Letters to Juliet, Macgruber, Date Night, The Backup Plan, How to Train Your Dragon, Just Wright, and Nightmare on Elm Street.

[Evil Twin]

You do understand that IM2 is selling more tickets than Alice? You can hate the movie all you want, but since you are the only one who is using the box office to say people don't like the film, I really hope you understand that IM2 will have sold more tickets than Alice.

You do understand that the purpose of that comparison was to estimate box office ceiling, right? And that IM2 running behind a recent hit movie near the end of its run helps in that matter?

[hatebox]

Alice could very well overtake the Dark Knight's WW haul very soon. I don't really mind TDK being beaten, but of all the top 5 WW grossing films ever it's by far the biggest nonentity, and paves the way for more garbage, gimmicky 3D films.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

^To be honest I had no desire to see it at all and everyone I know who was severly dissapointed with it.

[hatebox]

It seems to be one of those bizarre cases of 'fairly big in the US but randomly huge internationally'.

[Spider-X]

^To be honest I had no desire to see it at all and everyone I know who was severly dissapointed with it.

Alice in Wonderland isn't that great at all. There isn't much soul to it...the story just kinda happens and then the movie is over. The atmosphere is the only interesting thing about it. None of the characters are memorable at all. It's unfortunate it's made as much money as it has because, on the grand scale of things, it really doesn't deserve it.

[Tony Stark]

You do understand that the purpose of that comparison was to estimate box office ceiling, right? And that IM2 running behind a recent hit movie near the end of its run helps in that matter?

That's cool, no problem with that. I was mainly responding to ISS's agenda.

[JeetKuneDo]

Oh man...I kinda liked Alice in Wonderland. I even bought the book afterward (of course the book is 100 times better...but still).

[souvlaki]

That's cool, no problem with that. I was mainly responding to ISS's agenda.

I'm really confused as to what agenda you are speaking of in the post you quoted. Their post was pretty straightforward. It's $17 million behind where Alice was at this same point during it's run, which gives it a ceiling of $317 million. Given that it's falling more and more every day saying that it may barely scrape by with $300 million is just as realistic (if not more so at this point) than saying it's going to catch up to the first film.

[ElMariachi]

Sure we won't know if Star Trek's sequel will be a box office phenomenon like TDK was. But my point is that you can't compare Star Trek to TF2, for Pete's sake. :oldrazz:

Right now they're in IM1's position, pre-IM2. Or BB's position, pre-TDK. There's all kinds of possibilities as to which direction the franchise will go.

It's hard to say, but I don't see them making a huge leap like TDK did. Star Trek is still second fiddle to Star Wars in the minds of people. Which is sad because this last Star Trek movie was far better then any of the Star Wars prequels. I can see it doing Sherlock Holmes kind of money. Which is good. Like I have been saying all along, all we should want is for these movies to make enough money for them to make sequels. I don't care if these studios rake in the money like they did for Avatar, Alice in Wonderland, or TDK.

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I'm really confused as to what agenda you are speaking of in the post you quoted. Their post was pretty straightforward. It's $17 million behind where Alice was at this same point during it's run, which gives it a ceiling of $317 million. Given that it's falling more and more every day saying that it may barely scrape by with $300 million is just as realistic (if not more so at this point) than saying it's going to catch up to the first film.

Exactly, its a very good point to make, at this point I think its difficult to predict its final domestic gross, but it wont stay in theatre's as long as IM1 did, thats for sure.

[Tony Stark]

I'm really confused as to what agenda you are speaking of in the post you quoted. Their post was pretty straightforward. It's $17 million behind where Alice was at this same point during it's run, which gives it a ceiling of $317 million. Given that it's falling more and more every day saying that it may barely scrape by with $300 million is just as realistic (if not more so at this point) than saying it's going to catch up to the first film.

I'm not talking about the box office. Wheather it will pass the first or not, we'll see.

As for ISS's posts, I'll let them speak for themselves.

[lespaul59]

Personaly I think AIW is a bad comparison to IM2 because of the extra 3D money. I would also guess that AIW is gonna start dropping pretty good because the dvd/BR this Tuesday.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Posting ridiculous things about me having an agenda only makes you look silly Tony. My take on the numbers is perfectly sound and you have not once proven that you know anything about the boxoffice so excuse me if I don't listen to you.

Pointing out that IM2 is moving more tickets than Alice In Wonderland is pointless to my ultimate goal of guessing what IM2 might end with it. And thats all I'm doing right now Tony, I'm guessing/estimating what the movie will end with. I don't have some magic time machine to tell me the exact numbers so I'm following the movie's trend and other simular films trends. You are free to believe that the movie is still going to make 350 or 400mil but I'm just going to look at the facts. It's not reaching those goals because it's running behind a movie that has grossed 331+mil so far. It's also still running behind the 336.5mil Spider-Man 3 if you want a comicbook movie comparasion. It is slightly ahead of SM3 in the dailes though. Right now it still has quite a few dollars on Iron Man but it's drops are harsher so it's losing that lead everyday. IM2 obviously still has a chance of beating it's predecessor but it's going to be close because it's dropping much faster. Those aren't made up facts, just check boxoffice mojo. Hell, it's running behind Iron Man in the dailes again and it's weekends are millions lower than Iron Man's.

[TheVileOne]

LOL more stupid illegitimate, invalid, and irrelevant comparisons.

Iron Man 2 isn't touching $1 billion worldwide.

It's going to far surpass Iron Man in terms of worldwide gross. And it will be probably the second most popular comic book superhero franchise of all time only second to Spider-man.

I don't get all this conspiracy theory ****. Yes the movie was way more frontloaded than Iron Man. But I mean, most sequels behave this way.

Look at Wolverine. Look at the Fantastic Four movies. Don't make me laugh. Iron Man is clearly a cut above all of that. This is a billion dollar franchise. Wolverine can't pull these numbers.

I'll be shocked if X-men First Class does better than $140 million.

[Tony Stark]

It's hard to say, but I don't see them making a huge leap like TDK did. Star Trek is still second fiddle to Star Wars in the minds of people. Which is sad because this last Star Trek movie was far better then any of the Star Wars prequels. I can see it doing Sherlock Holmes kind of money. Which is good. Like I have been saying all along, all we should want is for these movies to make enough money for them to make sequels. I don't care if these studios rake in the money like they did for Avatar, Alice in Wonderland, or TDK.

Star Wars is definitely more of an international hit than Stark Trek. Star Trek did very poorly world wide, which is odd, because Star Trek is the one series that shows all races and ethnic groups in a positive light. I'm not sure Star Wars really did that. Maybe Billy Dee Williams, but that's about all I can think of.

I think any new Star Trek film will do terrific domestically and horrible internationally.

I also agree with you that Star Trek was lightyears beyone any of the Star Wars prequels, no pun intended.

[Tony Stark]

Posting ridiculous things about me having an agenda only makes you look silly Tony. My take on the numbers is perfectly sound and you have not once proven that you know anything about the boxoffice so excuse me if I don't listen to you.

Pointing out that IM2 is moving more tickets than Alice In Wonderland is pointless to my ultimate goal of guessing what IM2 might end with it. And thats all I'm doing right now Tony, I'm guessing/estimating what the movie will end with. I don't have some magic time machine to tell me the exact numbers so I'm following the movie's trend and other simular films trends. You are free to believe that the movie is still going to make 350 or 400mil but I'm just going to look at the facts. It's not reaching those goals because it's running behind a movie that has grossed 331+mil so far. It's also still running behind the 336.5mil Spider-Man 3 if you want a comicbook movie comparasion. It is slightly ahead of SM3 in the dailes though. Right now it still has quite a few dollars on Iron Man but it's drops are harsher so it's losing that lead everyday. IM2 obviously still has a chance of beating it's predecessor but it's going to be close because it's dropping much faster. Those aren't made up facts, just check boxoffice mojo. Hell, it's running behind Iron Man in the dailes again and it's weekends are millions lower than Iron Man's.


I know what it's making. The point is, that you've been using the BO numbers as your battle axe to bash the film, and that's pretty well documented from your posts.

Like I sad on the review thread. No one cares that you don't like the movie, but when you complain when people make positive comparisons to other movies you complain, but it's perfectly OK for you to compare to other movies in a negative light.

[TheVileOne]

The movie is doing well and people for some reason are upset and saying all sorts of nonsense. Not all movies perform the say way.

Dead Man's Chest was pretty reviled yet look how it did. Does that invalidate Curse of the Black Pearl?

[Anita18]

Jesus H Christ on a pogo stick, will y'all please lay off of ISS and anyone who's supposedly "bashing" the film through its somewhat-disappointing box office performance?

Here are the facts: IM2 was officially tracking for a $150-$160 million OW, and it was obvious that Paramount was gunning for the record because it opened in the most theaters ever. It missed that by almost $30 million.

People everywhere (the trades, the BO forums) were predicting that it would make $400 million easy. It's been having to work to get to $300 million. Absolutely nobody thought that it would go under IM1 domestically, but that's pretty much a given now.

So....that there be the background and the expectations of what we're working with here. Nobody's saying that IM2 is a bomb. It isn't. It's doing very well in absolute numbers, but everyone simply expected more out of it.

[I SEE SPIDEY]

And please point to the post in which I called Iron Man 2 a flop. I'm waiting...

Nobody was expecting a billion dollars so thats just hyperbole. Anyway I've already said that I doubt that Marvel is crying over a movie that is going to make over 600mil but it's still having bad legs and it's word of mouth still isn't as good as Iron Man's and that will undoubtedly hurt Iron Man 3 at the boxoffice.

My boxoffice projections/comparasions are completely sound and anybody who says otherwise doesn't know what the hell they are talking about.

I never had respect for Tony Stark, because frankly I don't even remember any of my run ins with him but I'm definitely begining to lose respect for some other poster(s) I know. I mean, I understand if a complete non entity like Tony Stark believes I'm some evil harpy who doesn't know what I'm talking about but the other guy who've I ran into before suddenly believing that I have some evil intentions is just confusing.

I understand disagreeing with me and I'm fine with that but to question my intentions when I've always fairly assessed (well, my Watchmen assessment left alot to be desired) the boxoffice regardless of my like or dislike is just more than a little surprising. Oh well. It sounds like I'm whining about being picked on so I'm going to stop. I'm a big girl, I can take the heat.

EDIT: Thanks Anita but you aren't going to get through to them. I'm the evil she-witch who has called Iron Man 2 the biggest bomb of all time!