2012: A Monster Year? (box office predictions) - Part 2

[Bim]

I wont even try giving numbers, but i expect The Avengers to have huge international numbers this weekend. Crowds were crazy here yesterday and word of mouth is really picking up, at least here where i live (i'm basing this on what people are commenting over on facebook, it seems those people i know who have seen it already all have enjoyed it and are recommending others to go watch it). I dont know how it will do in the US, but overseas numbers will be big. I'm really curious to see what the figures will be like on monday t:

 

[Marvin]

I would like nothing more than Joss to sit atop the ow throne. If only to see the look on the fox exec who cancelled his last show. Or the WB execs that consistently turned down his pitches. Or Even the Fox boys that booted him off of Xmen.

That would be a sight.

Man, if only Favreau "wrote and directed" Avengers, I wonder if Feige would be as on top of the world as he appears to be these days. Joe Johnston or even Brannah lol.

"Joss Whedon!
it's no fluke, go read his Astonishing Xmen."
That should be the poster tag line.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

I would like nothing more than Joss to sit atop the ow throne. If only to see the look on the fox exec who cancelled his last show. Or the WB execs that consistently turned down his pitches. Or Even the Fox boys that booted him off of Xmen.

That would be a sight.

To be fair, Joss' last cancelled tv show, Dollhouse, was not that great, he himself said later on that it was a flawed concept.
He also said that he had trouble writing his Wonder Woman proposal, and could not to grip with the character. I don't know what his Batman pitch was, but he said the execs looked at him like he was a 'tv fishbowl' after he pitched it, so god knows what he pitched, he has never disclosed that.

and who knows what his X-Men script was like.

Man, if only Favreau "wrote and directed" Avengers, I wonder if Feige would be as on top of the world as he appears to be these days. Joe Johnston or even Brannah lol.

"Joss Whedon!
it's no fluke, go read his Astonishing Xmen."
That should be the poster tag line.

He landed a great gig here, but we have to remember that it was Favereau who cast RDJ, Branagh who cast Loki(and there is no way on Earth anyone else would have cast TH, no-one else knew who he was) and Thor, Johnson who cast Cap...other directors did a lot of groundwork on that universe before he stepped in. Credit where it is due.

but yes, Joss had the right combination of skills for this ensemble movie, I have always said he was the perfect pick for this film.
I didn't like the Firefly tv series, but i thought he did well with the movie considering the budget constraints. It was not a classic or anything, but it did feel like an actual movie.
So, it is no surprise to me at all that he has pulled off this film.
I have not even seen it yet, but I have faith it will be a good one.
But, let's not get away from ourselves here, and keep a grip on the reality of the situation.

 

[DACrowe]

At the very least, Joss Whedon is an amazing writer. And that is something all the Marvel movies to date have lacked, save for the first IM movie (and even there it had great dialogue but the plotting was the "Raimi Formula"). I haven't seen TA yet, but I think Whedon can bring a freshness to almost anything he writes and does amazingly well in raising stakes. When he can make hours of television seem epic on Buffy or Firefly and make the stakes and tension feel larger on his $40 million-budgeted Serenity than any Michael Bay movie, I'm sure he can do a lot with $200 million and in an ensemble film.

I hope this opens the doors in Hollywood to him that Star Trek opened for JJ Abrams. Of course, I hope the movie also lives up to all this hype and is actually a blast to watch.

 

[DACrowe]

I think you may be underestimating TA a bit and overestimating TDKR. TDK got the milestone not just because of Ledger, but the character Joker who is the most well-known villain in Batman's rogue gallery, and people were willing to go back and rewatch Joker's charisma and insanity over and over. Even if TDKR is the same quality as TDK, neither Bane nor Catwoman can really match Joker's popularity, and for this reason I don't really believe this sequel will outperform its predecessor drastically, not to mention the lack of 3D will impact its overall earning.

I never said TDKR will outperform TDK. TDK hit $533 million domestic, I don't think the TDKR will cross $475 million. However, opening weekend? I guarantee you it will take the OW record and make at least $171 million that weekend. The hype for the sequel/series ender to the Joker movie you previously mentioned is going to make the demand for this movie more insane than HP8.

TA will cross $130 million OW. It may even cross $150 million. I don't know. But I don't think it stands any chance of crossing $170 million, much less $200 million. It's hype an WOM are through the roof, but I don't know. Given how well it's performing overseas my thinking it wouldn't cross $800 million WW is starting to look silly. But I still don't think it will cross $400 million domestic. $350-375 million seems more like it to me.

 

[Tony Stark]

At the very least, Joss Whedon is an amazing writer. And that is something all the Marvel movies to date have lacked, save for the first IM movie (and even there it had great dialogue but the plotting was the "Raimi Formula"). I haven't seen TA yet, but I think Whedon can bring a freshness to almost anything he writes and does amazingly well in raising stakes. When he can make hours of television seem epic on Buffy or Firefly and make the stakes and tension feel larger on his $40 million-budgeted Serenity than any Michael Bay movie, I'm sure he can do a lot with $200 million and in an ensemble film.

I hope this opens the doors in Hollywood to him that Star Trek opened for JJ Abrams. Of course, I hope the movie also lives up to all this hype and is actually a blast to watch.

Plotting was the Raimi formula? WTF????

Iron Man has almost nothing in common with the first Spider-man film.

I agree Whedon is a great writer, but all of the Marvel films save maybe IM2 had pretty good writing. Especially Thor and TIH. IM2 wasn't terrible, but trying to create the same writing on the fly they did in IM1 somewhat blew up in their face.

 

[Iceman]

I never said TDKR will outperform TDK. TDK hit $533 million domestic, I don't think the TDKR will cross $475 million. However, opening weekend? I guarantee you it will take the OW record and make at least $171 million that weekend. The hype for the sequel/series ender to the Joker movie you previously mentioned is going to make the demand for this movie more insane than HP8.

TA will cross $130 million OW. It may even cross $150 million. I don't know. But I don't think it stands any chance of crossing $170 million, much less $200 million. It's hype an WOM are through the roof, but I don't know. Given how well it's performing overseas my thinking it wouldn't cross $800 million WW is starting to look silly. But I still don't think it will cross $400 million domestic. $350-375 million seems more like it to me.

I don't think the market is ready yet for $200m from any film. There is a limit even if every cinema is fully sold out. 4 or 5 years later these same films would possibly have a shot. Also on admitting that on your earlier predictions.

 

[Tony Stark]

I don't think the market is ready yet for $200m from any film. There is a limit even if every cinema is fully sold out. 4 or 5 years later these same films would possibly have a shot. Also on admitting that on your earlier predictions.

Agreed, I think people are pretty turned off by high ticket prices which is why these big opening films have the standard 55-60% drop in week 2.

To me the mark for Avengers crossing 400M domestic assuming it has a 150 or better opening, would only take a 2.7 multiplier. That's doable considering how weak May is. I think either Battleship or Dark Shadows is going to tank. MIB III I'm not sure on. It really depends on the ratings, there has been to big of a gap in the franchise to benefit from carryover audience. For all intents and purposes this is like a brand new movie, maybe with the awareness of a Hollywood remake.

 

[Liam_H]

I believe movies have big drops around 55-60% during Week 2 because most of its target audience that want to see the movie have seen it and because of front loading. Not necessarily due to high ticket prices. A good hold is due to WOM.

 

[rayc1971]

I never said TDKR will outperform TDK. TDK hit $533 million domestic, I don't think the TDKR will cross $475 million. However, opening weekend? I guarantee you it will take the OW record and make at least $171 million that weekend. The hype for the sequel/series ender to the Joker movie you previously mentioned is going to make the demand for this movie more insane than HP8.

TA will cross $130 million OW. It may even cross $150 million. I don't know. But I don't think it stands any chance of crossing $170 million, much less $200 million. It's hype an WOM are through the roof, but I don't know. Given how well it's performing overseas my thinking it wouldn't cross $800 million WW is starting to look silly. But I still don't think it will cross $400 million domestic. $350-375 million seems more like it to me.

avengers will beat 130 million easy its tracking at 150 so it will fall between 150 and 170 opening weekend

 

[Raiden]

I never said TDKR will outperform TDK. TDK hit $533 million domestic, I don't think the TDKR will cross $475 million. However, opening weekend? I guarantee you it will take the OW record and make at least $171 million that weekend. The hype for the sequel/series ender to the Joker movie you previously mentioned is going to make the demand for this movie more insane than HP8.

TA will cross $130 million OW. It may even cross $150 million. I don't know. But I don't think it stands any chance of crossing $170 million, much less $200 million. It's hype an WOM are through the roof, but I don't know. Given how well it's performing overseas my thinking it wouldn't cross $800 million WW is starting to look silly. But I still don't think it will cross $400 million domestic. $350-375 million seems more like it to me.

I think if TA can make 150 mil OW, then it has a great chance of crossing the 400 mil milestone. From the reviews and feedbacks I've read, The Avengers is also a movie that people will probably want to see multiple times of, and when that combines with WOM I think 400 mil domestic isn't out of the realm of possibility.

 

[Infinity9999x]

The one thing I've always said a movie has to have if it's going to be huge is essentially:

1.) A solid story and enjoyable performances.
2.)SPECTACLE.

If you have those two things, people will want to return to the cinema multiple times to see it. If you have a good story and characters that people enjoy, then they'll want to come back and see it. If you combine that with jaw-dropping visuals, people will want to see it multiple times. Jurassic Park had it, Titanic had it, Avatar had it (okay, in Avatars case, more the former then the latter, but none of the acting was what I would consider bad), and yes, even TDK had it. A lot of people forget how friggin awesome it was to see some of the visuals in TDK. The car chase in particular had me on the edge of my seat, and I kept coming back to the theater not only for Ledger's performance, but to see that action on the big screen while I still could.

Avengers is looking like it may meet this criteria, and I think it has a legitimate shot at being a giant. Am I going to say I think it'll do a Billion WW? No, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did.

 

[DACrowe]

Plotting was the Raimi formula? WTF????

Iron Man has almost nothing in common with the first Spider-man film.

I agree Whedon is a great writer, but all of the Marvel films save maybe IM2 had pretty good writing. Especially Thor and TIH. IM2 wasn't terrible, but trying to create the same writing on the fly they did in IM1 somewhat blew up in their face.

I think almost all the Marvel movies suffer the problem of following the "origin formula." Even the best one, IM1, is guilty of that.

Ahem: Introduce hero (Tony/Peter) who has a lot of responsibility (wealth/powers) that he doesn't care about. He is inspired by an old mentor to use his great power with great responsibility (Uncle Ben/Yoren or whatever his name was) before the said old mentor dies. The hero feels responsible for his mentor's death and decides to dedicate his life at using his power responsibly in the mentor's memory at the end of Act One. He must have a training montage where he learns to use his new gifts (web-shooting and swinging, laser beams and flying armor). He also finds himself closer to the girl who has always been there, but there is nothing romantic about it. Meanwhile his other father figure (Norman Osborn/Obediah Stane) hates one of his alter-egos and develops his own powers he uses for gain and maliciousness. In the third act, the potential love interest is in danger of being killed by the false father figure and the hero must confront him to save the girl, defeat the former-mentor and prove to himself he is a hero like his true mentor thought and not like Osborn/Stane.

It's the same formula just told with different characters in a different setting.

 

[Tony Stark]

I think almost all the Marvel movies suffer the problem of following the "origin formula." Even the best one, IM1, is guilty of that.

Ahem: Introduce hero (Tony/Peter) who has a lot of responsibility (wealth/powers) that he doesn't care about. He is inspired by an old mentor to use his great power with great responsibility (Uncle Ben/Yoren or whatever his name was) before the said old mentor dies. The hero feels responsible for his mentor's death and decides to dedicate his life at using his power responsibly in the mentor's memory at the end of Act One. He must have a training montage where he learns to use his new gifts (web-shooting and swinging, laser beams and flying armor). He also finds himself closer to the girl who has always been there, but there is nothing romantic about it. Meanwhile his other father figure (Norman Osborn/Obediah Stane) hates one of his alter-egos and develops his own powers he uses for gain and maliciousness. In the third act, the potential love interest is in danger of being killed by the false father figure and the hero must confront him to save the girl, defeat the former-mentor and prove to himself he is a hero like his true mentor thought and not like Osborn/Stane.

It's the same formula just told with different characters in a different setting.

All superhero movies are guilty of that, including Batman. "Boo Hooo my parents died, now I will become a Bat and put fear into others"

You are putting down a film for following the origins of the comics!

So by Osbourne/Stane, I assume you mean Liam Neeson/Ras Al Ghul?

 

[Infinity9999x]

I think almost all the Marvel movies suffer the problem of following the "origin formula." Even the best one, IM1, is guilty of that.

Ahem: Introduce hero (Tony/Peter) who has a lot of responsibility (wealth/powers) that he doesn't care about. He is inspired by an old mentor to use his great power with great responsibility (Uncle Ben/Yoren or whatever his name was) before the said old mentor dies. The hero feels responsible for his mentor's death and decides to dedicate his life at using his power responsibly in the mentor's memory at the end of Act One. He must have a training montage where he learns to use his new gifts (web-shooting and swinging, laser beams and flying armor). He also finds himself closer to the girl who has always been there, but there is nothing romantic about it. Meanwhile his other father figure (Norman Osborn/Obediah Stane) hates one of his alter-egos and develops his own powers he uses for gain and maliciousness. In the third act, the potential love interest is in danger of being killed by the false father figure and the hero must confront him to save the girl, defeat the former-mentor and prove to himself he is a hero like his true mentor thought and not like Osborn/Stane.

It's the same formula just told with different characters in a different setting.

And by Raimi formula you mean the Donner formula. Since SM1's origin hit pretty much the same beats that S:TM did. The only difference is that Luthor wasn't a mentor. Though I'd argue that in SM1 Norman/Pete didn't have enough screen time together for Norman to ever feel like a father figure to Pete, even though that's clearly what they wanted to have happen. (Which is why I hope that they introduce Norman in TASM2 and have him become Gobby in TASM3).

Most of the origin films have hit those beats. B89 was the one that deviated from it, but even though it was the first time Batman was acknowledged in that world it wasn't really an "origin" per say. As in, we didn't see him become Batman. We saw the event that inspired him to become Batman, but not the journey itself like the other origins.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

At the very least, Joss Whedon is an amazing writer. And that is something all the Marvel movies to date have lacked, save for the first IM movie (and even there it had great dialogue but the plotting was the "Raimi Formula"). I haven't seen TA yet, but I think Whedon can bring a freshness to almost anything he writes and does amazingly well in raising stakes. When he can make hours of television seem epic on Buffy or Firefly and make the stakes and tension feel larger on his $40 million-budgeted Serenity than any Michael Bay movie, I'm sure he can do a lot with $200 million and in an ensemble film.

I hope this opens the doors in Hollywood to him that Star Trek opened for JJ Abrams. Of course, I hope the movie also lives up to all this hype and is actually a blast to watch.

Aye, that is what I meant by him having all the requisite skills for that movie... writing, directing superhero material of the ensemble variety, making a movie's budget go further than some would...
but there is not that much time for him to do anything *that* different writing wise with this movie, it will be funny, and he will get all the personalities right, but the plot and beats were all there waiting for him, he doesn't have much wriggle room to go full blast with the writing on this one.
One review said the drama in the film is essentially over once the heroes stop arguing, haha.

I just hope he doesn't try to write a frickin musical movie after this or something, he was kind of talking about that possibility on his aicn interview...I hope he does another movie for Marvel, just give him the next avengers film, but let him plot it this time, as well as writing the characterisation.
If he wants ot make some whacky muscial someday, great, but i wanna see him make more superhero material, that is what he is best at. Buffy is still by far the best thing he ever did, that was his superhero masterpiece, the first sh tv show that was as good as the best of ongoing superhero comics.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Aye, that is what I meant by him having all the requisite skills for that movie... writing, directing superhero material of the ensemble variety, making a movie's budget go further than some would...
but there is not that much time for him to do anything *that* different writing wise with this movie, it will be funny, and he will get all the personalities right, but the plot and beats were all there waiting for him, he doesn't have much wriggle room to go full blast with the writing on this one.
One review said the drama in the film is essentially over once the heroes stop arguing, haha.

I just hope he doesn't try to write a frickin musical movie after this or something, he was kind of talking about that possibility on his aicn interview...I hope he does another movie for Marvel, just give him the next avengers film, but let him plot it this time, as well as writing the characterisation.
If he wants ot make some whacky muscial someday, great, but i wanna see him make more superhero material, that is what he is best at. Buffy is still by far the best thing he ever did, that was his superhero masterpiece, the first sh tv show that was as good as the best of ongoing superhero comics.

Heck, if he wants to do a musical tv series in between this and the next Avengers, let him. Especially if it's as gold as Dr. Horrible. Keep him happy. Nolan's done a film in between each Batman movie and it's suited him fine. I don't want Joss to feel like he's forced to do something. And honestly...I've never been that into Buffy. Firefly was far and away ten times better in my opinion, in terms of writing/characters/and characterization.

I understand Buffy was a product of the 90's and the time it was written in, so some of the cheese in intentional...but yeah, watching it again today it just is very, very, very dated. Firefly has that timeless quality to it's writing. The only thing that will date it is the CGI it has, and there wasn't that much CGI in the series, so it wasn't too bad.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

Heck, if he wants to do a musical tv series in between this and the next Avengers, let him. Especially if it's as gold as Dr. Horrible. Keep him happy. Nolan's done a film in between each Batman movie and it's suited him fine. I don't want Joss to feel like he's forced to do something. And honestly...I've never been that into Buffy. Firefly was far and away ten times better in my opinion, in terms of writing/characters/and characterization.

I understand Buffy was a product of the 90's and the time it was written in, so some of the cheese in intentional...but yeah, watching it again today it just is very, very, very dated. Firefly has that timeless quality to it's writing. The only thing that will date it is the CGI it has, and there wasn't that much CGI in the series, so it wasn't too bad.

No, I don't think it's a good idea for him to do a musical movie inbetween Avengers movies, far too ambitious if he has not even begun writing one yet. He will most likely have something else on the go though, even if it just writing another movie.

As for the 'dated' part of your comparison of Firefly to Buffy, I think the quality of writing in Buffy is such that it is not at all dated, it is packed with real themes that will always mean something to people. Unlike Firefly, which which was more of a niche sci-fi adventure. It never really had a chance to get started, and I'm not sure if it would have been able to explore as many varied and universal themes as Buffy did, given it's set up.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I think almost all the Marvel movies suffer the problem of following the "origin formula." Even the best one, IM1, is guilty of that.

Ahem: Introduce hero (Tony/Peter) who has a lot of responsibility (wealth/powers) that he doesn't care about. He is inspired by an old mentor to use his great power with great responsibility (Uncle Ben/Yoren or whatever his name was) before the said old mentor dies. The hero feels responsible for his mentor's death and decides to dedicate his life at using his power responsibly in the mentor's memory at the end of Act One. He must have a training montage where he learns to use his new gifts (web-shooting and swinging, laser beams and flying armor). He also finds himself closer to the girl who has always been there, but there is nothing romantic about it. Meanwhile his other father figure (Norman Osborn/Obediah Stane) hates one of his alter-egos and develops his own powers he uses for gain and maliciousness. In the third act, the potential love interest is in danger of being killed by the false father figure and the hero must confront him to save the girl, defeat the former-mentor and prove to himself he is a hero like his true mentor thought and not like Osborn/Stane.

It's the same formula just told with different characters in a different setting.

You are absolutely right. Of the four characters that have gotten their own film in the Marvel film universe, the only one that doesn't follow the same formula is Incredible Hulk.

 

[dark_b]

You are absolutely right. Of the four characters that have gotten their own film in the Marvel film universe, the only one that doesn't follow the same formula is Incredible Hulk.

and thy didnt like the BO from TIH. so they will use the same formula t:

 

[Infinity9999x]

You are absolutely right. Of the four characters that have gotten their own film in the Marvel film universe, the only one that doesn't follow the same formula is Incredible Hulk.

Well, honestly, the only Superhero films I can think of that didn't do the origin that way were TIH and B89. (Off the top of my head).

Ever since Superman:The Movie came out back in the 70's, most Superhero films have followed that origin formula. And granted, if done well I don't think there's a problem with that at all. It's a solid way to set up the story. But it does get repetitive after a while.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

And to be fair, a lot of it goes all the way back to the comics. Raimi certainly didn't invent it, but he popularized it for a modern film audience.

 

[Infinity9999x]

And to be fair, a lot of it goes all the way back to the comics. Raimi certainly didn't invent it, but he popularized it for a modern film audience.

Well, as I said before, it wasn't even Raimi who did it first, but Donnor. Raimi's Spider-man 1 heavily followed Donnors outline in S:TM. And Raimi has admitted to being a huge fan of the original SM movies.

 

[Tony Stark]

Well, as I said before, it wasn't even Raimi who did it first, but Donnor. Raimi's Spider-man 1 heavily followed Donnors outline in S:TM. And Raimi has admitted to being a huge fan of the original SM movies.

The origins came from the comics. It's pretty simple actually.

Sure there were alot of influences by Donner, like pulling open the shirt to reveal the spider-man logo.

The origin of Spider-man, and Iron Man, Cap, etc. straight out of the comics.

You're right that Batman '89 didn't follow the exact path (although it was revealed in flashbacks), Batman Begins did follow that formula though.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Donner was 35 years ago though, which is why I said modern.