2012: A Monster Year? (box office predictions)

[I SEE SPIDEY]

It looks like Transformers with goofy costumes and if you don't see that then that is your business. I still said it looked solid and it has my money but I'm not going to pretend that it looks groundbreaking.

 

[DACrowe]

No, the main draw is that it's a disaster movie, which 9 times out of 10 make big money. It's a disaster movie with superheroes, including Iron Man, fighting alien invaders.

The last major disaster movies:

2012: $166 million domestic/$769 million WW
Poseidan: $60 million domestic/$181 million WW
War of the Worlds: $234 million domestic/$591 million WW
The Day After Tomorrow: $186 million domestic/$544 million WW

None of those crossed $800 million. And I bet most of their audiences already went and saw Iron Man 1 and 2 as well.

It's nothing like your average superhero movie, going by the trailer anyway.

My view is, if a piece of **** like Dark of the Moon can make a billion, Avengers, which seems to deliver that level of "shock and awe" plus actual, you know, characters and a story, can make 800 million.

I see the counter argument that the Dark of the Moon was the third in a successful trilogy that had robots blowing crap up. Yea well, Avengers is the fifth in a successful franchise that features superheroes blowing crap up.

It's a teenagers wet dream.

But it's the fifth of a successful franchise that has only crossed $300 million domestic twice and has never crossed $600 million WW. It's last two entries, two of the most successful ones, didn't cross $180 million domestic.

And they have mostly the same audience. I think the GA will show up more to TA as it looks "bigger" than Thor and CA, but only as much as the ones who showed up for Iron Man. Factor in a novelty team-up factor, 3D and inflation I could see it crossing $600 million WW--better than IM2--but the franchise doesn't show room for such massive growth.

$600 or $700 million WW will be a hit too. I don't know why fans think it has to be the biggest movie of the year.

 

[dark_b]

back to BO.

i wonder which movie will be the underdog.

 

[The Morningstar]

It looks like Transformers with goofy costumes and if you don't see that then that is your business.

No, it looks like an Avengers comic brought to life, iconic and distinctive imagery and all. If you can't see that then that is your business.

It is indeed marketed in the same vein as Transformers though, because Transformers makes big money. Difference is, you can see even in the trailer that the writing is vastly superior.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

back to BO.

i wonder which movie will be the underdog.

Yes back to the box office. Personally I think that the other Transformers ripoff, Battleship will do far better than expected. I'm not saying 300mil domestic or anything but maybe like 150 to 180mil?

I also think that Huntsman could be a hit. Again not 300mil or anything but maybe 175 to 200mil?

 

[The Morningstar]

The last major disaster movies:

2012: $166 million domestic/$769 million WW
Poseidan: $60 million domestic/$181 million WW
War of the Worlds: $234 million domestic/$591 million WW
The Day After Tomorrow: $186 million domestic/$544 million WW

None of those crossed $800 million. And I bet most of their audiences already went and saw Iron Man 1 and 2 as well.

None of those had superheroes. Or 3D tickets.

But it's the fifth of a successful franchise that has only crossed $300 million domestic twice and has never crossed $600 million WW. It's last two entries, two of the most successful ones, didn't cross $180 million domestic.

And they have mostly the same audience. I think the GA will show up more to TA as it looks "bigger" than Thor and CA, but only as much as the ones who showed up for Iron Man. Factor in a novelty team-up factor, 3D and inflation I could see it crossing $600 million WW--better than IM2--but the franchise doesn't show room for such massive growth.

$600 or $700 million WW will be a hit too. I don't know why fans think it has to be the biggest movie of the year.

Who says it will be the biggest of the year? The Hobbit will clearly be the biggest of the year.

My point is, I don't think the audience of this film will just be your superhero fans. Because it doesn't look like your typical superhero movie. The scale and imagery is something not seen before in this genre. I think it's appeal, for better or worse, will be the same as Dark of the Moon's appeal. Big American city getting destroyed by aliens. Only instead of robots fighting them, it's superheroes.

Hopefully though, the quality isn't like the TF films. Which i'm confident it won't be, seeing as the trailer had better character moments than the entire TF franchise combined.

 

[DACrowe]

Where have you seen it all before? I want to know where you've seen a live action Iron Man dog fighting in a 10 second long tracking shot through NYCs streets. I want to know where you've seen a live action Hulk catching a falling Iron Man and sliding down a building. I want to know where you've seen a live action Thor and Iron Man beating the **** out of each other. I want to know where you've seen a live action Captain America sky diving with his shield out in front.

I'm not trying to change anyones mind here, I'm genuinely curious as to how people can say we've seen this **** before, when we clearly haven't. Apart from on the pages of the comics or on the cartoons.

Giant alien robots destroying major cities? Transformers. War of the Worlds. Battle: Los Angeles. Battleship.

Iron Man flying? Iron Man. Iron Man 2.

Intense tracking shots of superhero action in cityscape? All three Raimi Spider-Man movies. Especially the last two.

I want to see The Avengers, but it's running a campaign of "If you liked Transformers and superheroes....YOU'LL LOVE THIS!" Which is a smart marketing campaign.

I hope for a good movie, myself. But that's just me.

 

[The Morningstar]

Giant alien robots destroying major cities? Transformers. War of the Worlds. Battle: Los Angeles. Battleship.

Iron Man flying? Iron Man. Iron Man 2.

Intense tracking shots of superhero action in cityscape? All three Raimi Spider-Man movies. Especially the last two.

I want to see The Avengers, but it's running a campaign of "If you liked Transformers and superheroes....YOU'LL LOVE THIS!" Which is a smart marketing campaign.

I hope for a good movie, myself. But that's just me.

I see what you did there

But yea, that is pretty much what Marvel is doing. Whether it works or not remains to be seen. I'm confident it will work and that the tracking for Avengers will explode after this new trailer has settled.

I just pray to god it's only the marketing that is similar to Transformers.

 

[DACrowe]

None of those had superheroes. Or 3D tickets.




Who says it will be the biggest of the year? The Hobbit will clearly be the biggest of the year.

So you're assuming that most of the audiences for those movies never saw Iron Man or Iron Man 2? You're assuming there's no cross-pollination.

There is. The superheroes are the obvious draw of TA. Superheroes that have never crossed $600 million WW. Thinking it will reach $800 million or $1 billion now is just silly.

 

[humbdrumb]

Where have you seen it all before?

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Thank you for those pictures because they proves my point.

I never thought I'd say this but I'm tired of big robots!

 

[The Morningstar]

So you're assuming that most of the audiences for those movies never saw Iron Man or Iron Man 2? You're assuming there's no cross-pollination.

There is. The superheroes are the obvious draw of TA. Superheroes that have never crossed $600 million WW. Thinking it will reach $800 million or $1 billion now is just silly.

Of course they are. But it isn't your standard superhero movie. All this talk of superhero fatigue is, i think, more superhero origin fatigue. And the formula of superhero movies.

This doesn't seem to have any of those things. It isn't an origin story. It isn't a story about the hero redeeming himself, getting revenge etc.

Obviously fans of superheroes will make up the majority. But i think after people see that trailer they'll see it isn't your typical superhero movie. It's an alien invasion disaster movie... which just so happens to feature superheroes fighting the battle.

And both Iron Man movies crossed 600 million WW.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

The second one did but the first one didn't.

 

[The Morningstar]

Yes, but have we seen superheroes like Iron Man or Hulk fighting those things? And didn't that movie make a billion dollars?

It's quite clear Marvels marketing strategy is "Transformers, with superheroes!"

Doesn't mean the movie itself will actually just be Transformers with superheroes. The trailer alone shows better writing and characterisation than the entire TF franchise.

And the thing is, that sorta imagery is kinda what the Avengers is about. You want street level stuff? Go to Batman or Spider-Man. You want stories with alien invasions, time travelling despots or inter-dimensional gods? You go to Avengers or JLA.

 

[The Morningstar]

The second one did but the first one didn't.

True, my mistake. Wasn't far off it though.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

True, my mistake. Wasn't far off it though.

It is pretty close.

 

[Octoberist]

Yeah, we can't 'unsee' what Michael Bay has done in Transformers 3. However, I'm banking more on the characterizations and story.

 

[Iceman]

I call over $1bn worldwide for Avengers. Domestic figures should almost definitely exceed Iron Man but not sure exactly by how much. Some people might have got sick of him by Iron Man 2 but I think nearly all the people who saw that film will stay on for Avengers (whether enthusiastically or reluctantly). Then I would add in a few guys who don't normally watch comic films but are partial to disaster type event films. Also I think this will have a better international split than many other comic films due to the scale and TF type attraction.

Of course less than $1bn is no failure and this film is going to be profitable at some stage no matter what. Merchandising, DVD, blu-ray sales etc.

 

[Octoberist]

I don't think anyone can get sick of Downey, though Sherlock was a misstep. Because of Sherlock 2, he couldn't fit Cuoron's 'Gravity' into his schedule with the shoot of 'Avengers' looming.

 

[Iceman]

The last major disaster movies:

2012: $166 million domestic/$769 million WW
Poseidan: $60 million domestic/$181 million WW
War of the Worlds: $234 million domestic/$591 million WW
The Day After Tomorrow: $186 million domestic/$544 million WW

None of those crossed $800 million. And I bet most of their audiences already went and saw Iron Man 1 and 2 as well.

That shows me 2012 made $600m abroad. So Avengers needs to target 2012's foreign takings and make Transformers/Spider-man money domestically to reach $1bn. Those are comparable films for content I believe.

 

[The Morningstar]

I don't think anyone can get sick of Downey, though Sherlock was a misstep. Because of Sherlock 2, he couldn't fit Cuoron's 'Gravity' into his schedule with the shoot of 'Avengers' looming.

Although i'd have love to have seen him work with Cuaron on a more serious film... i can't get enough of Downey's Sherlock. I loves him.

 

[Marvin]

Yes, but have we seen superheroes like Iron Man or Hulk fighting those things? And didn't that movie make a billion dollars?

It's quite clear Marvels marketing strategy is "Transformers, with superheroes!"

Doesn't mean the movie itself will actually just be Transformers with superheroes. The trailer alone shows better writing and characterisation than the entire TF franchise.

And the thing is, that sorta imagery is kinda what the Avengers is about. You want street level stuff? Go to Batman or Spider-Man. You want stories with alien invasions, time travelling despots or inter-dimensional gods? You go to Avengers or JLA.

You must have said this like 5 or 6 times now. We get it already. You're a slave to hyperbole in vain of proving a point. And actually you're very obviously wrong.

For example let's just look at this new trailer(which I'm digging) from the point of view of someone(and looking at box office numbers, there are alot) who hasn't had the pleasure of sitting through marvels half a decade long advertising campaign. Who are these people and why should I care? A god you say? Really, well if you say so....

Marvel is being smart, they are finally promising spectacle and it will pay off. However, there is a big chance this film will make less than the first Transformers did.

 

[Marvin]

I also noticed Paramount's logo at the start there. Looks like the revenue for this film is going to be split in more way than just Sam Jackson, Disney and RDJ.

Hope it's worth it.

 

[The Morningstar]

How is it hyperbolic? The writing in the Transformers is garbage. How is this deniable?

And why will people care for the characters? Because Joss Whedon wrote the script, not Michael Bay and friends.

And the idea that Marvels movies are nothing but adverts for the Avengers is laughable.

 

[Iceman]

I don't think anyone can get sick of Downey, though Sherlock was a misstep. Because of Sherlock 2, he couldn't fit Cuoron's 'Gravity' into his schedule with the shoot of 'Avengers' looming.

I think there is a dropout rate for everything, but in this case it should be very small. A certain percentage of people will not be in the same boat as us and will not have taken to him in quite the same way (I know of people who found him arrogant, overrated and not as funny as he thinks he is for eg). They still watched the first or both films but 2 may be enough. Even TDK will have a dropout rate. I know different types of people eg mums who took their kids and thought it was violent/downbeat/immoral! and other younger people who found it a draining experience. But again it's going to keep the vast majority of its audience just from how great the film was and how it smashed expectations. Then you factor in where it will generate growth from and word of mouth will be so strong that anyone with a passing interest who managed to miss out on TDK will make sure they don't repeat that mistake.

Avengers is different as although it follows 5 prequel films, it is not quite the same kind of film as them combining genres and bringing everything together. If you look at the likes of Star Wars & LOTR and think how much money films featuring the individual characters would have made it should show that the BOs of the 5 films are not the crucial indicator.