Box Office predictions thread-2007 Edition

[Erzengel]

You and I. LOL

Anywho, just a statement of fact JAL and I've seen you guilty of it in the past. Even when you aren't the next person posting. Someone posts something and you automatically think it's about you. Just telling you that just because someone follows your post doesn't mean they are talking about you.

 

[Hunter Rider]

*Wonders which of these posts are about him*

 

[Erzengel]

*Wonders which of these posts are about him*

What's that suppose to mean?

 

[Hunter Rider]

What's that suppose to mean?

I was just feeding into the JAL conspiracy theories that since i posted in here maybe someone who posted later was talking aobut me:meow:

 

[Erzengel]

I was just feeding into the JAL conspiracy theories that since i posted in here maybe someone who posted later was talking aobut me:meow:

Sorry I blew up at you like that. I thought you were talking about me.

 

[Hunter Rider]

Sorry I blew up at you like that. I thought you were talking about me.

No i wuv you in a manly way

 

[The Apatow Crew]

No i wuv you in a manly way

you guys aren't geiing all brokeback mountain are you now?

 

[Erzengel]

I could do worse.

 

[Darth Elektra]

No i wuv you in a manly way

Ahhh....

 

[The Apatow Crew]

I could do worse.

Like Who?

 

[primemover]

Man someone really is a shrek lover on this board.

i'm not talking about you erz so don't get huffy.

Yes, that's me, Shrek lover to the max, I have the toys, the games, I dress up like him for halloween . . bonehead . . get back to salivating over your imaginary mannequin girlfriend.

 

[primemover]

No it's not. It's called dodging the question.

How about just going to box-office.com and looking for yourself, answering your question would not get us anywhere, as just knowing that those weekends had enough competition for Shrek to make them weekends #3 and #4 on the all-time list. It proves that even in some dense box-office weeks Shrek was able to work through them to 400+ million, and it shows it can do it again.

 

[primemover]

Would you guys stop changing your damn avatars, that is the easiest way for me to see who I am talking to, as words can confuse. I plan on setting the record for longest time on the board without changing avatars!

Btw hunter rider, dig the avatar, that is one of the more unknown, and unrespected action movies ever.

 

[The Apatow Crew]

Yes, that's me, Shrek lover to the max, I have the toys, the games, I dress up like him for halloween . . bonehead . . get back to salivating over your imaginary mannequin girlfriend.

bonehead?

how old are you?

 

[Cmill216]

How about just going to box-office.com and looking for yourself, answering your question would not get us anywhere, as just knowing that those weekends had enough competition for Shrek to make them weekends #3 and #4 on the all-time list. It proves that even in some dense box-office weeks Shrek was able to work through them to 400+ million, and it shows it can do it again.

Although you're right in regards to Shrek 2's staying power being strong, I don't see how that "shows it can do it again".

 

[Cmill216]

Would you guys stop changing your damn avatars, that is the easiest way for me to see who I am talking to, as words can confuse.

No worries. I'm not changing mine for a good while.

 

[primemover]

Although you're right in regards to Shrek 2's staying power being strong, I don't see how that "shows it can do it again".

When something demonstrates something once, it shows it can do it again, you know, because it did it before, it's called a precedent.

 

[primemover]

bonehead?

how old are you?

Old enough to know a bonehead when I see one.

 

[Cmill216]

When something demonstrates something once, it shows it can do it again, you know, because it did it before, it's called a precedent.

So:

"Shrek 2 does this, which thereby means Shrek 3 has the ability to do it, as well."

Correct?

 

[primemover]

So:

"Shrek 2 does this, which thereby means Shrek 3 has the ability to do it, as well."

Correct?

Yes, and in this case Shrek 2 wading through big competion proves that Shrek 3 should have the same ability, at least it would favor that.

Now let me guess you'll use my logic to show that Spidey3 should get 400+ because Spidey1 did, except Spidey2 only got 360, so in choosing precedent there you have to look at the trend, which in this case is a downward trend. Shrek shows a trend too, but in this case it's an upward trend, which further points to Shrek 3 dominating in '07

 

[The Apatow Crew]

Old enough to know a bonehead when I see one.

The only last time i heard someone use the word bonehead was Bill Murray In Ghostbusters II

 

[primemover]

The only last time i heard someone use the word bonehead was Bill Murray In Ghostbusters II

Damn, then I guess that mean's I can't use it . . ok . . how about doofus?

 

[Cmill216]

Yes, and in this case Shrek 2 wading through big competion proves that Shrek 3 should have the same ability, at least it would favor that.

Here's where we disagree:

I feel there's a major difference between The Day After Tomorrow and Pirates of the Caribbean 3. The former appealed to a decently broad audience with its disaster genre and PG-13 tag. However, the latter is the sequel to the previous year's biggest blockbuster (2006, of course) and has a great family appeal of its own.

Now, this isn't to say Pirates will COMPLETELY sink Shrek. However, if you're saying that Pirates could break its own opening weekend record (which would mean about $140 mill), and Shrek STILL gets $60 million (when in 2004 it managed just a little over $70 million against a film opening to less than half your projected opening figure for POTC 3), I think that's up for question.

Now let me guess you'll use my logic to show that Spidey3 should get 400+ because Spidey1 did, except Spidey2 only got 360, so in choosing precedent there you have to look at the trend, which in this case is a downward trend. Shrek shows a trend too, but in this case it's an upward trend, which further points to Shrek 3 dominating in '07

Well, I do find the word "trend" kinda funny, as if one sequel (with a risky slower pace) making less than the only previous installment equals some sort of "negative down spiral" for a franchise. Now, if we were looking at the Potter films and saw Chamber of Secrets taking in less than Sorcerer, and then Azkaban less than Secrets, THAT'S a trend.

 

[Erzengel]

How about just going to box-office.com and looking for yourself, answering your question would not get us anywhere, as just knowing that those weekends had enough competition for Shrek to make them weekends #3 and #4 on the all-time list. It proves that even in some dense box-office weeks Shrek was able to work through them to 400+ million, and it shows it can do it again.

Week 1:
1. Shrek 2
2. Troy
3. Van Helsing

Week 2:
1. Shrek 2
2. Day After Tomorrow
3. Troy

Week 3:
1. Harry Potter
2. Shrek 2
3. Day After Tomorrow

Week 4:
1. Harry Potter
2. Chronicles of Riddick
3. Shrek 2

Week 5:
1. DodgeBall
2. The Terminal
3. Harry Potter

So you are saying Troy, Van Helsing, Day After Tomorrow, Chronicles of Riddick, Terminal and Dodgeball which ranged $57 mil to a max of $187 mil is essentially the same type of competition of Spider-Man 3, Pirates of the Carribean 3 and Ocean 13?

 

[primemover]

Here's where we disagree:

I feel there's a major difference between The Day After Tomorrow and Pirates of the Caribbean 3. The former appealed to a decently broad audience with its disaster genre and PG-13 tag. However, the latter is the sequel to the previous year's biggest blockbuster (2006, of course) and has a great family appeal of its own.

Now, this isn't to say Pirates will COMPLETELY sink Shrek. However, if you're saying that Pirates could break its own opening weekend record (which would mean about $140 mill), and Shrek STILL gets $60 million (when in 2004 it managed just a little over $70 million against a film opening to less than half your projected opening figure for POTC 3), I think that's up for question.

I said this in a previous post, but I forsee POTC3's opening weekend being the #1 all-time weekend due to Shrek 3 being around, and I think it's not out of the question for Shrek 3 to pull around 60 million that weekend #1 because it's Shrek, #2 because it will get plenty of POTC runoff, as it'll be the 2nd choice of movies for that weekend.

Well, I do find the word "trend" kinda funny, as if one sequel (with a risky slower pace) making less than the only previous installment equals some sort of "negative down spiral" for a franchise. Now, if we were looking at the Potter films and saw Chamber of Secrets taking in less than Sorcerer, and then Azkaban less than Secrets, THAT'S a trend.

A trend between two factors is definately not the strongest of trends, but it does show that some of the luster wore off Spider-Man as a franchise to lose almost 30 million even when Sm2 was a better movie. While not much of a drop I think that under 400 is definately where the franchise will rest. Shrek going from 270 million to 440 million between movies definately shows fan interest going up which will most likely carry over.

I think one thing to consider here is a possible backlash with Pirates of the Carribean 3 due to it being received critically a good bit less than its predecessor. The more I talk to people about it the more I get the feeling like after the rush of it being there, it was not that memorable. This could be kind of a Matrix sequels deal where POTC3 takes a considerable dive from POTC2. People seem to automatically think that POTC3 will do exactly what POTC2 is doing, but that might not be the case, which opens the door even more for Shrek 3.