MCU Phase 2 Box Office/Budget Prediction Thread

[psylockolussus]

Originally Posted by Edguy

$75M? really?

Unless they fail at marketing, I believe Guardiens are going to do great. That is, as long as it doesn't s**k.

I mean, it's basically superheroes, Star Wars and Pixar in one movie. Kids are gonna eat that s**t up!

What do you say to movies like John Carter, Watchmen and Green Lantern? Guardians of the Galaxy won't be the 1st scifi/action live action to underperform at the box-office and right now, I don't think it will perform really well at the box-office.

[def28]

Its already connected to the biggest comic franchise out there though. Its not a one shot like Carter, Green Lantern or Watchmen. There is also already a strong interest in Thanos. If IM3, Thor 2 or Cap 2 help pave the way up to its release it will for sure break $150 m. If it didnt have those other films to help it out then yeah its success would def be more cloudy.

Isnt it the last MCU film before Avengers 2? That alone will get people to the theatre in anticipation. No one will want to miss anything leading to Avengers 2.

[Edguy]

Technically, wouldn't Green Lantern be the one connected to the biggest comic franchise out there?

Anyways, I agree. If they market it well, and the film is decent or better, I can't really see it failing. carter and GL were both bad and undermarketed, and Watchmen hardly fits in, with it's dark tone and M rating.

[Mr. Dent]

Originally Posted by psylockolussus

What do you say to movies like John Carter, Watchmen and Green Lantern? Guardians of the Galaxy won't be the 1st scifi/action live action to underperform at the box-office and right now, I don't think it will perform really well at the box-office.

Wow, first of all you can't compare this to Watchmen.

Second, John Carter and Green Lantern were just bad movies. The box office takes would have been much better if either had actual inspired storytelling and not just somewhat pretty effects. On top of that they were completely new franchises with virtually nothing backing them up besides WB/Disney marketing.

This movie has the benefit of being a part of one of the highest grossing film franchises of all time, possibly getting pimped at the end of Iron Man 3, and it will actually be a complete space adventure unlike Green Lantern and even Carter to a certain extent. If this movie is not complete ass it is virtually guaranteed AT LEAST $350m. If it knocks it out of the park, which it honestly should with Gunn working on this and the potential that the story itself has with Thanos and a couple other elements, it has the potential to be $600m+ hitter easily.

Don't sleep on this film just because GL and Carter were flops.

[kedrell]

Originally Posted by psylockolussus

What do you say to movies like John Carter, Watchmen and Green Lantern? Guardians of the Galaxy won't be the 1st scifi/action live action to underperform at the box-office and right now, I don't think it will perform really well at the box-office.

Well this does come with the assumption that GotG will be 'good'. All three of those films you listed sucked so it's no wonder they all bombed.

[kedrell]

Originally Posted by Edguy

Technically, wouldn't Green Lantern be the one connected to the biggest comic franchise out there?

I don't see how any franchise is bigger than the MCU/Avengers franchise. Did some other comicbook/superhero movie surpass $1.5B WW?

[Edguy]

Originally Posted by kedrell

I don't see how any franchise is bigger than the MCU/Avengers franchise. Did some other comicbook/superhero movie surpass $1.5B WW?

The post I quoted never said anything about film franchises. I'm not an expert on the field, but I believe the DCU might be "bigger" (depending on how you want to interpret the word) than the Marvel Universe?

[Excelsior.]

I have a feeling Avengers 2 won't make as much money as the first one. Phenomenons like the first Avengers is very hard to replicate on a sequel. Avatar 2 won't make as much money as Avatar 1 either, regardless of quality.

[def28]

Originally Posted by Edguy

Technically, wouldn't Green Lantern be the one connected to the biggest comic franchise out there?

As far as existing comic film franchises, I dont see it that way. Wasnt just talking strictly comics. Comic wise both are huge I wouldnt really argue one is larger in scale then the other. Lantern sales good but if DC has an edge sales wise over Marvel its cause of Batman and Supes. I dont think Iron Man, Thor etc sale close to them. Spidey, X men and Avengers are pretty huge sellers too. Overall I think Marvel comics is currently #1. Could be wrong. Film wise no question MCU leads currently.

Audiences will know that GOTG is connected with Avengers. Lantern wasnt connected to anything really. Possibly down the line but audiences would be completely unaware and it wasnt marketed like that. Right now its left as a stand alone solo film.

[blalex620]

Originally Posted by Excelsior.

I have a feeling Avengers 2 won't make as much money as the first one. Phenomenons like the first Avengers is very hard to replicate on a sequel. Avatar 2 won't make as much money as Avatar 1 either, regardless of quality.

I disagree. If the quality is just as good if not better than the first movie their sequels have a good chance of surpassing them. As far as Avengers 2 goes it has the hype like no other film franchise right now and it's going to stay that way. I mean look at the Harry Potter films. They progressively did better than the films before it.

And Def28 you're correct Marvel is leading in the comics side and in the film side too. Marvel has a bigger brand name than DC by a long shot. The world may have know Superman and Batman better before but the world definitely knows X-Men, Iron Man, and Spider-Man just as much now.

[KangConquers]

Originally Posted by JB-the-Hunter

Green Lantern did suck though.

And I don't understand how you an have a $200M budget and have worse looking effects than a movie with a $140M budget (Captain America).

Because it had a $150 M budget and the extra $50 M was a "CGI budget injection" trying to polish a turd.

[T"Challa]

Iron man 3: 850 mill
Thor 2: 620 mill
Cap 2: 550 mill
GOTG: 300 mill
Avengers 2: 1.65 billion

[kedrell]

Originally Posted by Excelsior.

I have a feeling Avengers 2 won't make as much money as the first one. Phenomenons like the first Avengers is very hard to replicate on a sequel. Avatar 2 won't make as much money as Avatar 1 either, regardless of quality.

I agree, but then it also doesn't need to. Those films exceeded the bar by which they became profitable to such an extent that even if their sequels just broke even they'd still be some of the most profitable franchises ever created.

[TheVileOne]

Calling for ban hammer of El Mayimbe if he hasn't gotten it already.

[blalex620]

Originally Posted by TheVileOne

Calling for ban hammer of El Mayimbe if he hasn't gotten it already.

This is the box office/budget prediction thread so Huh??

[Mr. Dent]

Originally Posted by TheVileOne

Calling for ban hammer of El Mayimbe if he hasn't gotten it already.

Why are you posting this here? Take it to an admin or something.

[Liam_H]

Originally Posted by blalex620

I disagree. If the quality is just as good if not better than the first movie their sequels have a good chance of surpassing them. As far as Avengers 2 goes it has the hype like no other film franchise right now and it's going to stay that way. I mean look at the Harry Potter films. They progressively did better than the films before it.

And Def28 you're correct Marvel is leading in the comics side and in the film side too. Marvel has a bigger brand name than DC by a long shot. The world may have know Superman and Batman better before but the world definitely knows X-Men, Iron Man, and Spider-Man just as much now.

Uhh no. The very first film was the biggest and the future movies had varied drops until the last movie. But a big part of that was due to 3D so the increase wasn't quite as much.

[Edguy]

Originally Posted by Liam_H

Uhh no. The very first film was the biggest and the future movies had varied drops until the last movie. But a big part of that was due to 3D so the increase wasn't quite as much.

Also, none of the HP movies were mega hits like Avengers and Avatar. Avengers 2 will struggle to come near the first one and Avatar was a one-time phenomenon. No way the sequel comes close to $2G.

[Liam_H]

I'm a huge Potter fan but I'll easily admit most of the movies just don't have the same impact as the source material. They are mostly driven by the fans of the books, and wouldn't make nearly as much money if the franchise were just films.

[rayc1971]

it seems everyone is going low on antman budget wise and gross.i have more faith in antman vs gaurdians of the galaxy.galaxy could do poor like watchmen people might not get it

[Mr. Dent]

Again, Watchmen is an extremely poor comparison to this. Not to mention there's not a whole lot to not get...it's a space adventure with a team of rag tag heroes. If people can get Star Wars and Star Trek they can get Guardians.

I'm very high on Guardians potential gross but low on Ant-Man because I don't see what type of angle or story they can approach it from to make it stand out and give it as much potential. I have as much faith in Guardians as I do because of not only the great oppurtunity for amazing spectacle and several likable characters but because of how crazy the story can be, in a good way. If they can bring in stuff like the Universal Church of Truth and Magus, you're looking at a crazy ass story that has Thanos as a potential protagonist/anti-hero for most of the film. And they have the perfect guy in Gunn adapting that crazy story.

Ant-Man, on the other hand, is pretty effing boring. You have either Hank Pym or Scott Lang to choose from, neither of which are particularly likable characters. They're not bad, but they just don't stand out like a Tony Stark, Thor, Star Lord, Rocket Raccoon, Thanos, etc. Then none of his villains are even memorable...and tbh he doesn't really have villains of his own. The most he's contributed to the Marvel U is creating Ultron. And of course the spectacle doesn't have near the potential of a Guardians film.

I'm sure Edgar Wright will deliver an entertaining and humorous story about Ant-Man's origin and it will work as a film in its own right, I just don't see it being in the same league as Guardians or even Captain America. $350-370m is all I can see, which is very respectable on a $120m budget.

[kedrell]

If it was being released by another studio, I would have zero faith in GotG. Never read the comic and space adventure films just turn me off(I've never cared for Star Wars or Star Trek for the same reason). I'm more interested in Ant-Man since as someone who read quite a few Avengers comics over the years, I'm at least familiar with him.

But since GotG is a MS film then I have much better hopes for it. In Feige I trust....at least so far.

[Mr. Dent]

I'm still not totally sure why you have no faith in GotG exactly. Unless you're talking about only in terms of your personal taste and not the box office, n which case I understand.

[Edguy]

Like I said, Star Wars + Superheroes + DreamWorks/Pixar; kids will eat it up, as long as it's marketed well and doesn't s**k.

[kedrell]

Originally Posted by Mr. Dent

I'm still not totally sure why you have no faith in GotG exactly. Unless you're talking about only in terms of your personal taste and not the box office, n which case I understand.

Yes, I'm going off my own personal taste. Also I was more meaning I'd have zero faith in it being a good quality movie, not whether it would be a box office hit since those 2 very different things. I have no idea what I'd rate the box office chances as if this was another studio doing it. But I think since it's tied to The Avengers/MCU that it can only benefit box office-wise from that.