Rise of the Silver Surfer BOX OFFICE Discussion

[Spade]

Underdog just seems like such a waste of time...it's like Hollywood took a cool concept and, in their usual lack of creativity, made it into Dr. Dolittle with no Eddie Murphy. Not surprising, just depressing. They could have done this without attaching the timeless Underdog to their...film, if you want to call it that.

 

[Kelly]

I think from what I've seen, they've done a great job bringing it to the screen.

 

[GL's Light]

I've never seen the Underdog cartoon, but the trailer for the movie looks funny.

 

[Malus]

I think from what I've seen, they've done a great job bringing it to the screen.

It looks cute and funny to me, but it doesn't look like Underdog.
If they were calling it something else, I'd actually be more interested.
I was an Underdog fan as a child, and I don't see much of what I loved in the ads.
I'd much rather have seen a Pixar-type Underdog movie, or even conventional animation. I wanted to see the iconic Polly Purebread and Shoeshine Boy and hear that familiar theme music... This movie appears to have none of that.

By contrast, the trailer for Alvin & The Chipmunks (which I disliked as a child) looks to be far more faithful, with the chipmunks and the chipmunks alone being created with CGI. Ironically Jason Lee is also involved, starring as their "handler" Dave.

 

[Kelly]

Meh, I'm tired of Pixar movies.

 

[Malus]

Reflecting The Simpsons' massive box office across Europe, the picture faced off with Transformers' opening in the United Kingdom and handily beat the robo-spectacle by 56 percent with a fantastic $27.5 million versus $17.6 million. In France, Simpsons again went head-to-head with Transformers and won. Despite playing on 156 fewer screens, it nabbed $9.5 million from 716 screens compared to Transformers' $6.7 million.

This is the greatest thing I've read all year.
All is right with the freakin' world, baby. t:

In Germany, Simpsons posted a phenomenal $14.2 million from 754 screens, which was bigger than Spider-Man 3's opening earlier this year......
...As great as Europe was for The Simpsons, Latin America fared even better. In Argentina, the comedy notched recorded a smashing $2.3 million from 182 screens, which almost doubled Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix and topped Shrek the Third to become the year's biggest opening. It followed suit in Chile with a $1.3 million start from 43 screens, which was also the year's best, topping Spider-Man 3.

Planet Earth loves Homer Simpson.
Pretty amazing.

 

[Malus]

Meh, I'm tired of Pixar movies.

Yes. I still prefer traditional animation, provided it's well done.

2-D animation had been pronounced dead at the multiplex, but The Simpsons enormous success has probably got more than a few studio honchos re-considering their emphasis on the computer-generated stuff.

 

[Bishop2]

Meh, I'm tired of Pixar movies.

I pretty much decided that after I saw Finding Nemo and it bored me. You have failed me for the last time, America!

 

[Tony Stark]

Looking at the foreign numbers:

FF 2's run is about complete in the UK, Mexico and Australia, which were FF 1's 1st, 2nd and 6th biggest markets respectively. FF 2 posted an increase over FF 1 in the UK ($ 24.4 mil to $ 22.57 mil), but has performed somewhat below FF 1 in Australia ($ 8.1 mil to $ 9.18 mil) and quite substantially lower than FF 1 in Mexico ($ 16.5 mil to $ 22.17 mil).

The chances for FF 3 now likely rest with the strength of FF 2's box office in France, Spain, Italy, and Japan.

FF3 will be made, the question is will it be made by Fox? If Fox has no plans to produce a sequel, then Marvel is surely going to get the rights to the characters back.

 

[GL's Light]

FF3 will be made, the question is will it be made by Fox? If Fox has no plans to produce a sequel, then Marvel is surely going to get the rights to the characters back.

Sure, but that would more likely lead to a relaunched FF franchise than FF 3 with the same cast.

 

[Advanced Dark]

FF3 will be made, the question is will it be made by Fox? If Fox has no plans to produce a sequel, then Marvel is surely going to get the rights to the characters back.

That's not even a question. The Silver Surfer release will extend the rights by 4 years and Fox will NEVER let go of those rights. The films are profitable no matter how much some don't like it.

 

[GL's Light]

That's not even a question. The Silver Surfer release will extend the rights by 4 years and Fox will NEVER let go of those rights.

So which is it? Does Fox lose the rights no matter what in 2011 or can they extend them indefinitely by making sequels?

 

[Advanced Dark]

So which is it? Does Fox lose the rights no matter what in 2011 or can they extend them indefinitely by making sequels?

Fox keeps the rights as long as they're making movies. If they don't make a film for 4 years...they lose the rights. That won't happen. They can use the Surfer to extend the rights (Like Wolverine extends X-Men rights) in his own film. Producers will change, directors, actors, etc...but Fox won't let go. Hopefull the franchise will continue to improve with each film. If in it's current state it can make these kind of profits...good things will come.

 

[Ahura Mazda]

It is coming out next week here in Switzerland and in france. I can tell you the critics and initial audience postings on a couple websites are not very good.

I will be going to see it and somehow will be taking my GF (that is about as hard a task as fighting Galactus ).

 

[Dragon]

That's not even a question. The Silver Surfer release will extend the rights by 4 years and Fox will NEVER let go of those rights. The films are profitable no matter how much some don't like it.

You actually think Fox is going to risk 100 million bucks on a Surfer film when so little interest was shown in this film? And let's remember that there has yet to be a film the features a CGI character in the lead that's been a hit. Fox isn't that adventurous.

 

[Kritish]

I bet Underdog will bomb like hell. Will definitely make Surfer seem like a huge hit!

Underdog, the next Superbabies.

 

[Antonello Blueberry]

You actually think Fox is going to risk 100 million bucks on a Surfer film when so little interest was shown in this film? And let's remember that there has yet to be a film the features a CGI character in the lead that's been a hit. Fox isn't that adventurous.

1) Silver Surfer is not a CGI character.
2) http://www.boxofficemojo.com/genres/chart/?id=cgistar.htm
Casper, for example, made 300 million worldwide.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

You actually think Fox is going to risk 100 million bucks on a Surfer film when so little interest was shown in this film? And let's remember that there has yet to be a film the features a CGI character in the lead that's been a hit. Fox isn't that adventurous.

I agree, i seriously doubt Fox will risk much money on EITHER an SS movie or FF3 after the performance of this movie. Fox arent usually very patient when it comes to franchises just look at their recent history. IMO there is little chance an SS movie or FF3 will happen.

 

[Advanced Dark]

You actually think Fox is going to risk 100 million bucks on a Surfer film when so little interest was shown in this film? And let's remember that there has yet to be a film the features a CGI character in the lead that's been a hit. Fox isn't that adventurous.

You actually think Fox will throw away movie rights to a franchise that's making a profit? LOL Fox will NEVER give up these rights. I think the competition hurt FF2 badly. It couldn't swim with all the sharks and the bad taste of the 1st film hurt it too. It's gonna make close to 280-300 worlwide before the DVD. Also FF2 was on the internet the day after it hit the theatre and it's readily available for thieves to download and has been. As was Spidey 3, Shrek , and Pirates 3 all which underperformed compared to the prior films domestically. Fortunately the international market and dvd sales ensure profits.

 

[Iron Maiden]

I think the piracy issue, despite how good or how bad you felt FF:ROTSS was as a film, is making a big impact on a lot of movies. A lot of people here for example, said they would wait on the DVD and not spend the $$ on FF2 to go to the theater because of the poor reception on the first film. On the other hand, POTC and Spider-Man will still draw in the fans who want to see it on a big screen, in IMAX or whatever. I do recall last year, I saw POTC: Dead Man's Chest around Labor Day weekend, thinking there would not be that many people by this time yet the theater was still about 80 per cent full. Right now, POTC has pretty much disappeared in my area, along with Spider-Man 3. The new film arrivals have pushed them out. FF is just playing on one screen in the $5 all day theater.

 

[GL's Light]

You actually think Fox will throw away movie rights to a franchise that's making a profit?

That FF 2 will make a profit isn't in question. Whether it will make enough of a profit for Fox to make FF 3 is in question. Not every profitable franchise film leads to a continuation. Daredevil was a profitable film, yet after Elektra tanked Fox didn't make another Daredevil film and is indeed going to throw away the rights.

 

[highguard]

That's not even a question. The Silver Surfer release will extend the rights by 4 years and Fox will NEVER let go of those rights. The films are profitable no matter how much some don't like it.

Ad do you have a link on this, I find it hard to think that Avi made this kind of a deal, I thought it was that they had up until like 2012 to make possibly four movies, this does not sound like what Michael Chicklis stated sometime before the first movie came out.

Can anyone recall or have an exact link to how this deal was structured. I can't find anything on the web but Marvel forecasts.

 

[Advanced Dark]

Ad do you have a link on this, I find it hard to think that Avi made this kind of a deal, I thought it was that they had up until like 2012 to make possibly four movies, this does not sound like what Michael Chicklis stated sometime before the first movie came out.

Can anyone recall or have an exact link to how this deal was structured. I can't find anything on the web but Marvel forecasts.

I don't have a link to it and I probably can't send you one. I know this as 100% fact. You can trust me or not but I'm telling you Wolverine extends the X-Men and Silver Surfer extends the FF rights. This is in the actual contract. The 3 pic deal for the movie is a contract with the cast and Fox. The perpetual rights deal is a contract between Fox and Marvel. Now New Regencies contract with Marvel is expiring at the end of this year so Marvel will get Daredevil, Elektra, and Kingpin rights back.

 

[Dragon]

You actually think Fox will throw away movie rights to a franchise that's making a profit? LOL Fox will NEVER give up these rights. I think the competition hurt FF2 badly. It couldn't swim with all the sharks and the bad taste of the 1st film hurt it too. It's gonna make close to 280-300 worlwide before the DVD. Also FF2 was on the internet the day after it hit the theatre and it's readily available for thieves to download and has been. As was Spidey 3, Shrek , and Pirates 3 all which underperformed compared to the prior films domestically. Fortunately the international market and dvd sales ensure profits.

First off, FF2 isn't going to make another 40-60 million dollars. Make book on that.

Second, yes. Fox will let the rights run out. They've done it with Daredevil, which was more profitable than FF2. The fact that, as you say, it couldn't swim with the sharks shows you the problem. Fox can't lower the budget on a sequel. Can't release it in the summer, the only time films of such budget ranges are released. The lukewarm reception shows that no one is looking forward to another FF movie from Fox. The only way another of these films will come from Fox will be if, as with The Hulk & Universal, Marvel finances it. Which will involve a retooling of the franchise.

 

[The Joker_1000]

So, you're saying there will be no FF3?