2012: A Monster Year? (box office predictions)

[Tanin]

Everything I've seen out of Carter reminds me of Prince of Persia. That movie was so bland; definitely not great but not bad enough to laugh at. It was a total waste of time. I think POP flopped at the BO too.

Maybe POP would have done better if the script made sense and they hadn't whitewashed the cast.

 

[BestGirl]

^Supposedly Carter's script doesn't make much sense either so they have that in common.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

^Supposedly Carter's script doesn't make much sense either so they have that in common.

It doesn't. But Carter is a little better than POP.

 

[CConn]

I don't think the American audiences mind whitewashing much.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

I feel like John Carter would have been better off if it was animated. I also feel like it would have made more if it was.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Maybe POP would have done better if the script made sense and they hadn't whitewashed the cast.

Probably.

 

[jmc]

Even if Avengers sell no more tickets than Iron Man 2 opening weekend it would still make somewhere around 150 million thanks to 3D no?

That depends on the percentage of 3D and whether audiences will are willing to pay for the extra. Question is are people becoming more savy now with what's filmed in 3D and what's post converted to 3D? Every post converted 3D film to date has come away with the same criticism 'the 3D didn't add anything' yet the films make money so maybe they aren't. It ****s me people are willing to hand over hard earn money for an inferior product, I don't know why audiences are putting up with is, going to the theatre is expensive as hell but no-one seems to bat an eyelid for paying for at best average 3D.

 

[CConn]

Avengers is being post-converted, and ASM was shot in 3D, right?

 

[dark_b]

yes. which is why i will watch Spidey in 3D

 

[craigdbfan]

That's right.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

That depends on the percentage of 3D and whether audiences will are willing to pay for the extra. Question is are people becoming more savy now with what's filmed in 3D and what's post converted to 3D? Every post converted 3D film to date has come away with the same criticism 'the 3D didn't add anything' yet the films make money so maybe they aren't. It ****s me people are willing to hand over hard earn money for an inferior product, I don't know why audiences are putting up with is, going to the theatre is expensive as hell but no-one seems to bat an eyelid for paying for at best average 3D.

People don't have time to research what is good 3d and what isn't. Plus there are a bunch of LieMax screens around the country. It's Friday and you decide to go see a movie, most people aren't going to stop and do research.

I work a concession stand at work and I'm surprised how much people will pay for concession stand food when they know full and well it's beyond the already overpriced stuff they normally get.

 

[CConn]

yes. which is why i will watch Spidey in 3D

I'd kinda like to, but I'll be going at midnight with a very anti-3D crowd, so I'm bound to be out voted.

 

[Marvin]

Yes. with Red epic tech.
ASM is a huge dark horse imo.

If it's solid it really has no reason not to do as well as the previous installments. It's not like Raimi/Tobi/Dunst are untouchable talents the likes of which the new team can't compare.

I think if the reviews are strong will will make more money than the marvel films.

 

[The Morningstar]

A Spider-Man film will always do well. I imagine at least 600-700 million. What is it's release date though?

 

[CConn]

I agree, I think it's going to be the big dark horse in both financial and critical success.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Yes. with Red epic tech.
ASM is a huge dark horse imo.

If it's solid it really has no reason not to do as well as the previous installments. It's not like Raimi/Tobi/Dunst are untouchable talents the likes of which the new team can't compare.

I think if the reviews are strong will will make more money than the marvel films.

Each of the Raimi's domestically made less and less. So I wonder what the success/fail is?

 

[DoomsdayApex]

It doesn't. But Carter is a little better than POP.

To me, I thought POP was a bit better than JC. Jake was more preferrable than Taylor.

 

[Doctor Jones]

John Carter was much better than PoP. I wasn't disappointed with John Carter. Perhaps it's because I was so looking forward to PoP and came out really disappointed.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Each of the Raimi's domestically made less and less. So I wonder what the success/fail is?

I'm gonna take a wild guess at Spider-man.

Spider-man 2 was released fourth of July weekend. While it made a lot (not as much as Spider-man 1 in it's first 3 days), it was still released ahead of in the middle of the busy summer unlike Spider-man 1, which was released in early May.

Spider-man 3 was released in May, and the result was the biggest opening of the three movies, but the word of mouth was so-so so it made less than the first two domestically.

But this year, ASM's only competition is G.I. Joe, personally I think that if it's good, it should be smooth sailing for ASM until July 20th.

 

[DoomsdayApex]

John Carter was much better than PoP. I wasn't disappointed with John Carter. Perhaps it's because I was so looking forward to PoP and came out really disappointed.

I wasn't. I came in with very low expectations (POP), so I suppose that helped.

It didn't work with JC so much.

 

[jmc]

People don't have time to research what is good 3d and what isn't. Plus there are a bunch of LieMax screens around the country. It's Friday and you decide to go see a movie, most people aren't going to stop and do research.

I work a concession stand at work and I'm surprised how much people will pay for concession stand food when they know full and well it's beyond the already overpriced stuff they normally get.

Then they're being ripped off. It's up to studios and cinema chains to ensure the public know the difference.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

To me, I thought POP was a bit better than JC. Jake was more preferrable than Taylor.

Jake was definitely better than Taylor and I thought that Jake was woefully miscast but he's a better actor so, he won.

 

[rayc1971]

Jake was definitely better than Taylor and I thought that Jake was woefully miscast but he's a better actor so, he won.

i agree but you know they would kill us on the john carter thread for saying that lolt:

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Then they're being ripped off. It's up to studios and cinema chains to ensure the public know the difference.

Corporations should? t:

Spend less money converting screens and having proper projectors or do nothing and make the same money?

 

[DACrowe]

Yes. with Red epic tech.
ASM is a huge dark horse imo.

If it's solid it really has no reason not to do as well as the previous installments. It's not like Raimi/Tobi/Dunst are untouchable talents the likes of which the new team can't compare.

I think if the reviews are strong will will make more money than the marvel films.

Fans opinions range on Raimi, Maguire and Dunst (though unsurprisingly more negative the closer we get to the shiny new toy being released this summer), but the GA loved the first two movies and for the most part didn't seem to hate the third--though the Internet seems to despise that movie.

I think rebooting with the origin this soon will have a backlash. If they had just done a loose sequel to SM3--Andrew Garfield vs. The Lizard while discovering some secret about his father with none of the high school stuff, getting bitten, Uncle Ben, etc.--it would probably be better accepted. But doing the origin and calling it "The Untold Story" just reeks of unoriginality.

I still think it will only make $200-$230 million domestic and $600 to $700 million WW, which is still a success.