Days of Future Past 'Days Of Future Past' BOX-OFFICE worldwide prediction - Part 1

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]455499[/split]

 

[Angamb]

Since previous poll was posted before Days of future past was confirmed, with all the subsequent news of Bryan's comeback, all these original actors, 3D release and more, we needed a new poll to take into account all of this now.

So here it is:

Vote your worldwide prediction, and share your opinion on both domestic and foreign markets.

 

[josh8]

again, I dont buy at all this 'X3 and Origins hurt the franchise' as much as most fans think. I mean, this is the first movie with original actors since 2006, so its works somehow as a sequel to X3, meaning the audience hasnt had a real sequel before so we can compare the real impact after X3 reception. 8 years is a very long time to forget an old movie. The main issue here is all the actors are now more popular, both original and FC actors. Thats why I dont get this

You don't get it, but you're also rejecting the explanation that is pretty much the consensus?

The damage that X3 and Origins did was significant because it played out at the exact wrong time... when franchise fatigue was kicking into gear. After those two movies, it was pretty hard to justify to the entire movie-going audience why more movies were being made. The hardcore fans were obviously invested, but the ones that left had possibly left for good. The fact that DOFP brought a lot to the table was enough to entice many back but obviously not all.

The box office for this movie is a GOOD sign. The Spider-man franchise is a good example of a bad-case-scenario. It suffered from many of the same problems, but wasn't able to reinvent itself the way the X-Men franchise seems to have done.

 

[DACrowe]

I will admit that the only reason I saw X-Men: First Class is that I knew Matthew Vaughn is a very underrated director and could do something special, especially with the '60s Bond setting and Michael Fassbender playing Sean "Magneto" Connery in the previews. But otherwise, the marketing was a mess, and I understood why it was such a hard sell for people who couldn't care less after how terrible X3 and Wolverine 1 were.

Even I wasn't going to see The Wolverine in theaters until it got rave reviews, and I'm glad I caught it. Handily better than Iron Man 3, Man of Steel, or Thor 2 that year.

However, the marketing for this one felt different. This certainly wanted to look like "The Avengers" of X-Men movies, and in some ways it is. And it has succeeded. This movie will easily make more than the last three X-Men films (counting the Wolverine spin-offs as such) and will probably be either the first or second most successful entry in the series domestically and the most commercially successful worldwide.

But X-Men are still a tough sell. Moreso than the Avengers which looks like a cartoon (that is not an insult). Singer's aesthetic is naturally more muted. And even when Vaughn briefly brought back some of that comic book style, he too continues the thoughtfulness of the X-Men movies which eludes many of the genre, including at Marvel Studios.

That combine with bad movies leaves a ceiling on this movie. I do think Apocalypse is in line to make more similar to how The Dark Knight built off the strong WOM on BB and its DVD sales. Or how even X3 had a huge OW for 2006 because of how well received X2 was.

But I do not think this will ever be a $1 billion franchise. I hope Fox continues to put DOFP money into it, because DOFP has reinvigorated the franchise and Apocalypse will likely make more. But even then, it probably is not as appealing as Avengers is to general audiences. Though in terms of quality, that is not necessarily a bad thing.

 

[HIA]

Iceman
The X-franchise has lost a chunk of the GA for good, or at least a long time. It's like the old Star Trek series (not that I'm saying there was anything wrong with it). Even if one of them had been the best film of the year too many people think Star Trek ...oh tried it, not for me. And I think many do this now with X-Men. They think by now they know what's it about and it might just not be their thing, good or not. We had the disadvantage of starting out when things were uncertain so we never had the budget and freedom to go for event film status and once we had 2 disappointing films in a row, now even if we do get event film status people won't know to check it out or be as open to it as they would be to something new or something proven (to them).

Good post and you have a point. While at the same time, one thing is for sure, XMen never had the huge audience since day 1. X1 didnt have the huge audience of other franchises, X2 worked better, but again it wasnt a huge audience, even if both movies were good. X3 worked better yet again, but not a huge increase in terms of money, so with the ticket inflation, was basically the same audience.

And 8 years later, even with a prequel with a new cast, and talented and hot actors like Jen, James and Michael, more Dinklage, this series seem to have the same audience. Less money than X3 on first day, and just a bit more than X2. So thats it, same audience. Some viewers left since 2006, some viewers joined, but the numbers are on the same range, so again, the audience number is basically the same.
Its a really weird case

 

[Bruce Malone]

Hmm I read that this made 36 million on Friday which is good but it's behind both Godzilla and WS's Friday debuts, and they both just missed out on 100 million over 3 days.

It might have a stronger saturday so we'll see.

 

[Yellow Cyclone]

Hmm I read that this made 36 million on Friday which is good but it's behind both Godzilla and WS's Friday debuts, and they both just missed out on 100 million over 3 days.

It might have a stronger saturday so we'll see.

it's memorial day weekend however

 

[Bruce Malone]

it's memorial day weekend however

Yeah so it'll likely have a stronger sunday at least.

I'm sure Fox is hoping for as big a debut as they can milk though. The X-Men franchise doesn't have a great track record when it comes to big weekend debuts and strong legs.

This is going all the way back to the 1st X-Men.

 

[BlackFox]

I will admit that the only reason I saw X-Men: First Class is that I knew Matthew Vaughn is a very underrated director and could do something special, especially with the '60s Bond setting and Michael Fassbender playing Sean "Magneto" Connery in the previews. But otherwise, the marketing was a mess, and I understood why it was such a hard sell for people who couldn't care less after how terrible X3 and Wolverine 1 were.

Even I wasn't going to see The Wolverine in theaters until it got rave reviews, and I'm glad I caught it. Handily better than Iron Man 3, Man of Steel, or Thor 2 that year.

However, the marketing for this one felt different. This certainly wanted to look like "The Avengers" of X-Men movies, and in some ways it is. And it has succeeded. This movie will easily make more than the last three X-Men films (counting the Wolverine spin-offs as such) and will probably be either the first or second most successful entry in the series domestically and the most commercially successful worldwide.

But X-Men are still a tough sell. Moreso than the Avengers which looks like a cartoon (that is not an insult). Singer's aesthetic is naturally more muted. And even when Vaughn briefly brought back some of that comic book style, he too continues the thoughtfulness of the X-Men movies which eludes many of the genre, including at Marvel Studios.

That combine with bad movies leaves a ceiling on this movie. I do think Apocalypse is in line to make more similar to how The Dark Knight built off the strong WOM on BB and its DVD sales. Or how even X3 had a huge OW for 2006 because of how well received X2 was.

But I do not think this will ever be a $1 billion franchise. I hope Fox continues to put DOFP money into it, because DOFP has reinvigorated the franchise and Apocalypse will likely make more. But even then, it probably is not as appealing as Avengers is to general audiences. Though in terms of quality, that is not necessarily a bad thing.

Agreed.

Avengers is more family friendly (again not an insult) and Marvel wont be putting any scenes with drug addiction/taking, swearing or decapitations in their films anytime soon.

 

[HIA]

Yeah so it'll likely have a stronger sunday at least.

I'm sure Fox is hoping for as big a debut as they can milk though. The X-Men franchise doesn't have a great track record when it comes to big weekend debuts and strong legs.

This is going all the way back to the 1st X-Men.

X3 had a huge opening for its time. Thats why Dofp with all its positive factors was promising similar numbers if not more. Comic Con early hype, biggest cast ever... superhero genre being bigger than ever... we'll see the final numbers and especially second weekend

 

[kedrell]

Good post and you have a point. While at the same time, one thing is for sure, XMen never had the huge audience since day 1. X1 didnt have the huge audience of other franchises, X2 worked better, but again it wasnt a huge audience, even if both movies were good. X3 worked better yet again, but not a huge increase in terms of money, so with the ticket inflation, was basically the same audience.

And 8 years later, even with a prequel with a new cast, and talented and hot actors like Jen, James and Michael, more Dinklage, this series seem to have the same audience. Less money than X3 on first day, and just a bit more than X2. So thats it, same audience. Some viewers left since 2006, some viewers joined, but the numbers are on the same range, so again, the audience number is basically the same.
Its a really weird case

Not really when you think about it. It all spawns from having too many characters and not letting the audience get hooked on them(maybe because there isn't much there to get hooked on in the first place, I dunno since I've never been an X-Men fan), but there's certainly not much shown on screen to get us hooked. I bet you could ask any GA member to describe key X-Men from the films w/o going to what they look like or what their job is and they'll likely not come up with much for the vast majority of the characters.

That's why in a match up for GA attention between an X-Men model of doing things and an Avengers model that the Avengers one will win every time. The GA knows and cares about almost all of the characters in the TA universe(Hawkeye is pretty much the lone exception and Whedon has said that AoU will be correcting that).

If Fox wants to break out then they are going to need a massive shift in their mindset about how they approach these films.

 

[HIA]

Not really when you think about it. It all spawns from having too many characters and not letting the audience get hooked on them(maybe because there isn't much there to get hooked on in the first place, I dunno since I've never been an X-Men fan), but there's certainly not much shown on screen to get us hooked. I bet you could ask any GA member to describe key X-Men from the films w/o going to what they look like or what their job is and they'll likely not come up with much.

That's why in a match up for GA attention between an X-Men model of doing things and an Avengers model that the Avengers one will win every time. The GA knows and cares about almost all of the characters in the TA universe(Hawkeye is pretty much the lone exception and Whedon has said that AoU will be correcting that).

If Fox wants to break out then they are going to need a massive shift in their mindset about how they approach these films.

100% agreed. I honestly think Fox formula is lacking. I know most of us are impressed with the movie, the action and all, but I keep reading comments about many characters wasted, and many of them could be big players that the general audience could really love, but without the enough exporuse, it wont ever happen. Thats the problem

 

[Ms. Marvel]

Agreed.

Avengers is more family friendly (again not an insult) and Marvel wont be putting any scenes with drug addiction/taking, swearing or decapitations in their films anytime soon.

I thought Cap was on super steroids.

 

[Rike]

More "Avengers vs. X-Men" crap?

 

[marvelrobbins]

Agreed.

Avengers is more family friendly (again not an insult) and Marvel wont be putting any scenes with drug addiction/taking, swearing or decapitations in their films anytime soon.

I have said in past X-Men will never be the success of Iron Man films,the avengers,and the Sam Rami SPider-man films.X-Men Is darker,and deals with
more serious issues even when you have films with lighter moments as well.
DOFP have moments when audences laugh but it sure isn't a light heated film.

DOFP Is on track to beat the Amazing Spider-man 2 domesticly.

Man of steel may be gloom a lot and has a lot more destrucon than DOFP but it doesn't deal with Issues that X-Men does.

If you want family friendly films go see Marvel studio films. You could put amazing spider-man films In same catergry but untill Sony deals witht he problems Spider-man has the problem X-Men films had to deal with.

You want darker with dealing with issues then X-men Is for you.

DC films and the FF reboot probally fall Inbetween the MS and Spider-man family friendly on one side and the dark and dealing with series issues X-men
on the other side.

 

[BlackFox]

I thought Cap was on super steroids.

Ha yeah true, but that was a one time hit onlyt:

 

[marvelrobbins]

More "Avengers vs. X-Men" crap?

Some here are never going to be happy even when A good film Is made like DOFP. It turns into a fox or Singer bashing by some even when you have film that Is more Xavier centric.

 

[HIA]

on other hand, Im 100% confident that once Fox does more solo movies, including a new team spin-off, this franchise will enter the 1 billion club and wont ever leave.
Apocalypse is a very strong contender, and maybe it will happen, but once we get Gambit, XForce and Deadpool, the x-men audience will be really huge. no doubt about it. Many different viewers will come together to the main team sequels. Its just a matter of time

 

[Raiden]

on other hand, Im 100% confident that once Fox does more solo movies, including a new team spin-off, this franchise will enter the 1 billion club and wont ever leave.
Apocalypse is a very strong contender, and maybe it will happen, but once we get Gambit, XForce and Deadpool, the x-men audience will be really huge. no doubt about it. Many different viewers will come together to the main team sequels. Its just a matter of time

I think the problem is that Jackman and Lawrence won't be doing X-Men forever, and if they leave it will leave a void that will be hard to replace even with Gambit, X-Force, and Deadpool. Marvel Studios will face the same problem once RDJ, Hemsworth, and Evans leave for good.

 

[Raiden]

Bye, I'm I'm the theatre right now, about to watch DOFP soon.

 

[kedrell]

To give an example of this:

It's ridiculous that even after 7 films(4 of which she was in with lines given to her and played by an Academy Award winning actress) that even now in the film universe we still don't know that Storm comes from Africa rather than just being an African-American(which I'm confident that 99.9% of the GA just assumes that she is). That's a very big and basic piece of her character and I know that much just from osmosis having read other Marvel comics growing up.

 

[HIA]

I think the problem is that Jackman and Lawrence won't be doing X-Men forever, and if they leave it will leave a void that will be hard to replace even with Gambit, X-Force, and Deadpool. Marvel Studios will face the same problem once RDJ, Hemsworth, and Evans leave for good.

the key to all of this issue is this: Jackman and Lawrence arent the only stars in the world, and there will always be new stars on movie industry.
So Fox should consider two options: Bringing more current stars to the franchise or creating new stars.

actually, there is a third option: doing both.

 

[BlackFox]

Which is why they are getting Tatum, hoping he's the next big thing. Bed him in while they got one or two movies left with the big guns.

 

[HIA]

exactly. Signing Tatum is a clear indication of one of the two options I mentioned: bringing a current star to the franchise. Fox wants more stars, and now they have another hot actor on the franchise ready for next solo series. And at the end of the day, they could easily do the same with most characters and a possible new team. Its all about a great cast and a great script. And thats not that hard if you go for the right team

 

[DACrowe]

Not really when you think about it. It all spawns from having too many characters and not letting the audience get hooked on them(maybe because there isn't much there to get hooked on in the first place, I dunno since I've never been an X-Men fan), but there's certainly not much shown on screen to get us hooked. I bet you could ask any GA member to describe key X-Men from the films w/o going to what they look like or what their job is and they'll likely not come up with much for the vast majority of the characters.

That's why in a match up for GA attention between an X-Men model of doing things and an Avengers model that the Avengers one will win every time. The GA knows and cares about almost all of the characters in the TA universe(Hawkeye is pretty much the lone exception and Whedon has said that AoU will be correcting that).

If Fox wants to break out then they are going to need a massive shift in their mindset about how they approach these films.

I will concede every X-Men have characters who clutter the film only to fill in the background. But I wouldn't say the Avengers are immune to that (right, Hawkeye?).

I would also say that the main characters of at least the Singer and Vaughn X-Men movies are far better drawn or more nuanced than what Marvel has done. Intentionally so. The depth with which McAvoy and Fassbender's Xavier and Magneto are explored in FC and DOFP or Wolverine is in the first two Singer movies is much more thoughtful (not necessarily a good thing to audiences) than say Thor, Captain America, Black, Widow, Hawkeye, etc.

With that said, they also clutter every film with do-nothings like Angel (ether version), Storm (all films), even Blink, Bishop, and Colossus in DOFP.

So, it is a give and take. I think for the characters the X-franchise has zeroed on, there is a lot of depth there. But there are a lot of background fillers that Marvel avoids in the larger sense.