Rise of the Silver Surfer BOX OFFICE Discussion

[Tony Stark]

The one that suprises me though is Harry Potter. Other than the first those movies just don't do as well in the states. Although I though POA was the weakest of the movies made.

 

[Tony Stark]

Nah you know what sux? CAVS!!

Cavs got PWN3D!!! I was rooting for them though, because the Spurs played like a bunch of goons. Robert Hory should be strung up by his jock.

 

[GL's Light]

Well, maintaining a domestic gross of $ 250-290 mil over three sequels is impressive, even if it's not as high as Spider-Man and The Lord of the Rings. But, yes, Potter is twice as strong overseas as domestically. But that's going to become more and more common for big franchises as the international market continues to develop.

 

[Spade]

HP:POA sucked partly because of the abrupt change in direction, and partly because the story itself wasn't as good as it could have been. It had a very slow build-up what with what was true and what wasn't about Sirius Black, and the lack of a mythical element to cause direct conflict in the climax took away from it. In fact, in the books GOF was the last one I really liked. The 5th just put in filler material for the inevitable realization that Voldemort was back, and the only reason the 6th even stood out was because they killed such a pivotal character (the same could be said of OOTF, though).

This next one can be great, but it needs to be more condensed and interesting than the book. That's a hard feat, moreso when the source material is flimsy to begin with.

 

[GL's Light]

Potter 5 is the shortest of the films so far.

 

[Bishop2]

HP:POA sucked partly because of the abrupt change in direction, and partly because the story itself wasn't as good as it could have been. It had a very slow build-up what with what was true and what wasn't about Sirius Black, and the lack of a mythical element to cause direct conflict in the climax took away from it. In fact, in the books GOF was the last one I really liked. The 5th just put in filler material for the inevitable realization that Voldemort was back, and the only reason the 6th even stood out was because they killed such a pivotal character (the same could be said of OOTF, though).

This next one can be great, but it needs to be more condensed and interesting than the book. That's a hard feat, moreso when the source material is flimsy to begin with.

POA is largely considered the best of the movies, though, and even though I'm usually a minority opinion kinda guy... this happens to be one I can agree on. Still, I sympathize with your position because I've been there many times.

Anyway. FF?

 

[Gregory Brannon]

You bring up good points. And that's exactly why recasting any of the main leads could prove to be disastrous for a possible FF3. I hate to say it, but the studio really only has 2 good options at this point:

1.) Fire Tim Story and get a well-respected "big name" director--this will raise eyebrows with critics and mainstream alike--and will give the studio the leverage of marketing the film fresh again

2.) Put the franchise to bed permanently

No. 2 is most likely. They can't fault Tim for anything because he's done exactly what they wanted to, and the results of the studio-controlled films have not been pleasing. Yet, FOX's execs are too ego-driven to just give the film to a self-propelled director: they NEED to control their stuff for some reason.

I honestly don't understand the philosophy of FOX right now. They are releasing soooooooooo many bad movies now; it's like they don't even care that their reputation is like...**** now.

I couldn't agree more with Lightning Strykez second point. As I looked at www.boxofficereport.com early Saturday morning and saw how it was tracking. I couldn't help but to think that maybe this series should be over and not do a 3rd one.

Last week's $58 million was okay because it was #1 and it made above most analysts projections but I couldn't help but to think that it had to be a disappointment for FOX because Xmen 1 opened @ $54 million and the second one opened at @ $85. Granted it was the only movie to open on it's weekend of May 2nd. Where as FF2 had strong competition from the previous weeks. But with FF2 slightly higher opening numbers it makes me think that it didn't increase it's base from the first one and that you had mostly FF fans to show up and not new fans. Heck even X-men 3 despite the fact that fanboys and internet blogs blasted the movie from preproduction all the way through the finish still had an even bigger opening and the movie wasn't as good as the 2nd one but because original and the sequel where well made films perhaps that allowed it build it's audience beyond it's core fan base and people were willing to give it a chance. But with FF1 I don't know if the movie going public got anything from #1 to have hope that the second would be worth their $10 to invest in again.

Now is that the fault of Tim Story and the less than positive reception of the first movie? I don't know. Because by all accounts (i.e. reviews) the second movie is considered better than the first one. Personally I don't fault him too much because I think he showed a knowledge and respect of the material. However at this time in his career he may not have develped that visionary talent that some directors know how to make the material appear epic. Perhaps he's still getting his directing legs underneath him. I don't know if Spielberg, Cameron or Columbus would have done such a great job as many have been saying. I do remember that someone made a post a few years back after the release of the first movie "What directory would you like for the sequel and I remember posting "Gore Vorebinski" because I liked the tone and the epic feel of the first Pirate movie.

Is it FOX fault for being too hands on? Was the marketing not good enough? I know that they flooded the market with ads and weeks leading up to the release but couldn't they find one positive review from an early screening to put on the TV or print ads prior to the opening. And what about after the opening where was the usual "#1 movie in America" ad that studios like to brag.

But back to should there be a 3rd one. I don't think there should be. I think the audience expectation is that it's a second rate comic book movie and not in the elite class as Spiderman, Xmen movies and now the new Batman series. It's a shame because behind, Spiderman, Xmen and Hulk it's arguably one of Marvel's most well liked properties . Perhaps if FOX had treated it as such from the get go by having a well known or respected director and better script then maybe I could see this franchise heading in a positive direction. So perhaps shelving this franchise for a few years and bringing it back with a new director and cast ala Universal's decision with the "Hulk" maybe the way to go. We'll see next summer if the franchise reboot of the Hulk will be a "Batman Begins" type of success or a "Superman Returns"disappointment.

 

[FCEEVIPER]

Wow, I don't know if this will make anyone feel better, but June is not a very good month for movies. These are the top 5 opening weekends for June. Everyone of them had a 60% drop or more in week 2.

Harry Potter and the Pris 6/4/04 3855 93.69
Hulk, The 6/20/03 3660 62.13
Cars 6/9/06 3985 60.12
Fantastic Four: Rise of t 6/15/07 3959 58.05
Austin Powers II: The Spy 6/11/99 3314 54.92

It wasn't to good for BB either.

 

[Nokio]

I don't care how big-name a director is, it doesn't mean crap if they don't know the source material, and I doubt Steven Spielberg knows crap from Fantastic Four. As for Cameron, have you read his Spider-Man treatment from years ago? That thing was an abomination. I wouldn't trust him anywhere near a comic movie. I think these guys should be sticking to their own original materials that have no attached expectations (until the sequels roll around). Luckily, there was no way a big-name director that demanded the money that these guys do would ever have touched the FF anyway. Fox never would've put that much money into the project. I think they were always wary that, despite the huge superhero movie surge, FF is hardly as big a property as your X-Men or your Spider-Man.

You are quite correct almost. Just becasue a big name director may have been attached doesn't mean that the F4 would've been good. I was commenting on someone mentioning that Speilberg would've done a better job. Now I stand by what i said, a Speilberg directed Fantastic Four would've been better. As for Cameron i also say his would've been better as well. Did you see the 1st F4? That movie isn't to hard to upstage. I doubt Cameron would've changed the f4 so much that would've angered people. Fox did it anyway with the 1st one, just look at Doom.

 

[Fanticon]

See, I don't get this...Are you sad that Fox isn't making more money? This confuses me, since most fanboys HATE Fox, so I don't care if they make a TON of money, just enough to keep them happy and to keep the check book open.

Here's another thing on this sequel Front. Fox doesn't own Fantastic Four, they have a option to make sequels, just like Univeral did for Hulk. If they let it lapse, Marvel gets the rights back. The contract language for these usually require some cash, when the option is excercised, and it usually shows up on Marvel books..which is how you know they are serious. Now, I can't remember the specifics for FF, and maybe Blades will have it on hand, since he's still in Marvel as far as I know, but Fox can't delay too long. They have alot of "capital" invested in the Franchise, and with them making $100 million + off the last film, I can't see them letting this thing slip back to Marvel.

please...if i actually let this stuff really get to me then that would be sad. I don't give a $#!t about FOX either...i am a little disappointed that this movie is under performing, i happen to think it was a better movie, I'd like to see a third movie, and I really just thought that with the marketing and the quality of this picture that the general audiences and even fanboys would be behind it. But as with most movies this summer...its seems like it will fizzle...plain and simple...other movies this summer...are already set to bomb...others are being predicted as the surprise hits...it was an overcrowded summer and I think if studios considered the idea of summer-sized blockbusters being released in Nov. or December...they might have had better results (Like Pirates 3...or dare I predict mediocre box office for HP5)

 

[GL's Light]

Actuals are up:

$ 20,009,476 (- 65.5%), for a total of $ 97,463,035 domestic.

 

[Kelly]

Cavs got PWN3D!!! I was rooting for them though, because the Spurs played like a bunch of goons. Robert Hory should be strung up by his jock.

 

[GL's Light]

This is how the weekend breaks down in the actuals (bit different from the estimates - the Friday increase is a bit higher and the Sunday drop is steeper):

Fri - $ 6,263,622 (+ 59%)
Sat - $ 7,965,366 (+ 27.2%)
Sun - $ 5,780,488 (- 27.4%)

Total - $ 20,009,476 (- 65.5%)

 

[Excel]

wow.

 

[Mr. Socko]

Just read on the main page on Hype that this film isn't doing as good as the first. Me beginning to doubt a third, at least one with a budget as big as this one's.

 

[Excel]

theyll make a 3rd simply because theres nothing outthere for them tomake; if they want to be big they need me as writer n director.

 

[Mr. Socko]

What do you mean they'll make it 'cause there's nothing out there to make?

 

[FCEEVIPER]

This is how the weekend breaks down in the actuals (bit different from the estimates - the Friday increase is a bit higher and the Sunday drop is steeper):

Fri - $ 6,263,622 (+ 59%)
Sat - $ 7,965,366 (+ 27.2%)
Sun - $ 5,780,488 (- 27.4%)

Total - $ 20,009,476 (- 65.5%)

Thanks GLsL.

 

[Excel]

What do you mean they'll make it 'cause there's nothing out there to make?

its make ff or make films like starship dave.

 

[Tony Stark]

Heh, heh, sorry I was rooting for Phoenix.

 

[Tony Stark]

Just read on the main page on Hype that this film isn't doing as good as the first. Me beginning to doubt a third, at least one with a budget as big as this one's.

It won't get a larger budget, but it should get the same budget.

 

[Paste Pot Pete]

We'll see next summer if the franchise reboot of the Hulk will be a "Batman Begins" type of success or a "Superman Returns"disappointment.

Except (and this is off topic) Superman Returns grossed more worldwide than Batman Begins. The only reason Returns is considered less of a success is because of it's much bigger budget. The Saw films were more successful than either of these films, because the budgets were miniscule compared to their pretty huge take.

Anyways, yeah.

 

[Tony Stark]

Here's the good news: It had a better 2nd week than Hulk did, however Hulk had a better opening.

Here's a great page at BO Mojo to give you some comparison here.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/showdowns/chart/?view=basic&id=marvelmidrange.htm

At this point I just want to see it finish ahead of Hulk. Let's just hope the week 3 drop is in the low 40's and not another above 50% drop. If it does that I think 140-145 is attainable.

The biggest problem is with all the new movies coming out in the next 3 weeks it may not have enough screens to maintain those numbers.

 

[FCEEVIPER]

Here's the good news: It had a better 2nd week than Hulk did, however Hulk had a better opening.

Here's a great page at BO Mojo to give you some comparison here.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/showdowns/chart/?view=basic&id=marvelmidrange.htm

At this point I just want to see it finish ahead of Hulk. Let's just hope the week 3 drop is in the low 40's and not another above 50% drop. If it does that I think 140-145 is attainable.

The biggest problem is with all the new movies coming out in the next 3 weeks it may not have enough screens to maintain those numbers.

Yeah the TF movie will be a juggernaut come July 3.

 

[Carp Man]

Weekend actuals are in. $ 20,009,476. Down 65.5 %. Domestic total $ 97,463,035. $ 125,228,139 WW. Overseas #'s thru 6-18. $ 2,732,760 behind FF.