Age of Ultron Early Avengers 2 Box Office Prediction Thread - Part 2

[Docker2.0]

Nothing was stopping those same people from seeing AOU the following week though.

Yeah? Well you're just a hater!!


Seriously though, between Avengers 1 and 2 alone, they have over $3B WW. I call this a success. Let's be real also: CA:CW is looking like it's going to make a billion as well, especially with the first appearance of Spiderman.

 

[rashad]

Hopefully Civil War can remedy the FF7 situation and get 1.5

Civil War needs to worry more about being a great followup to the excellent Winter Soldier. The box office will do what it does.

 

[Flint Marko]

Looks like my somewhat modest prediction of 1.2-1.4 billion wasn't so far off after all. I got chastised for "low balling", but I had a gut feeling about it.

 

[Wildcard]

There's nothing "modest" about $1.2-$1.4 billion.

 

[Wildcard]

Apparently Marvel have badly disappointed a lot of people for not looking like earning upward of $2 billion.

Apparently so. People keep posting as if Marvel really dropped the ball and yet, once again, they're looking to make another $1.3-$1.5 billion. All of this failure and "bounce back" talk is ridiculous.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

yeah but FF7 didnt seem to mind about the exchange rate did it ?


I think the main reason was the lack of novelty of seeing the team for the 1st time in cinematic history.

Just because F7 made more than Avengers 2 doesn't mean the exchange rate didn't hurt both movies.

 

[Iceman]

Looks like my somewhat modest prediction of 1.2-1.4 billion wasn't so far off after all. I got chastised for "low balling", but I had a gut feeling about it.

Most of us were expecting a better received film. If the first film had had this kind of mixed reception it wouldn't have broken out either.

 

[thalidomide]

Walker's death had a big part in getting people out to see the movie. Just like Ledger with TDK.

No one likes to admit it but its true.

Yep!

 

[KDM1986]

Apparently so. People keep posting as if Marvel really dropped the ball and yet, once again, they're looking to make another $1.3-$1.5 billion. All of this failure and "bounce back" talk is ridiculous.

I agree with everything you said here. I think it's just the fans get so hyped up about new movies and always expect too much.

 

[JOE]

Where has the movie yet to be released?

 

[Raiden]

Where has the movie yet to be released?

Japan.

 

[hafizbat]

Civil War needs to worry more about being a great followup to the excellent Winter Soldier. The box office will do what it does.

 

[8ulk]

Walker's death had a big part in getting people out to see the movie. Just like Ledger with TDK.

No one likes to admit it but its true.

That and the one last ride marketing treatment it got. The general audience doesnt have a clue that FF will get more sequels.

Unless its a STELLAR movie im expecting Civil War to gross less than AoU. 1,2-1,35 bil WW. The same for BvS or maybe slightly worse.

 

[def28]

Most of us were expecting a better received film. If the first film had had this kind of mixed reception it wouldn't have broken out either.

I think it would have. It played strong being the first of it's kind. The whole concept of bringing superhero movies together was the sell there. This movie wasn't hit hard enough with mixed reviews for it to be affected by that at all, an even if it was these film are so much in a league of their own I don't think it would matter much at all. Way too many strong performers and sequels out there that were received worse.

This one wasn't bringing anything new to the table like the first. That new event status and curiosity from audiences is gone. That's the major difference here. Marvel will need something new to have a fresh event status for future crossovers in order to get to 2 bill, as well as a slew of audience pleasing films for their solos. They can't bank on playing the same hand with the same cast and expect things to go up.

 

[Iceman]

I think it would have. It played strong being the first of it's kind. The whole concept of bringing superhero movies together was the sell there. This movie wasn't hit hard enough with mixed reviews for it to be affected by that an even if it was these film are so much in a league of their own I don't think it would matter much at all. Way too many strong performers and sequels out there that were received worse.

This one wasn't bringing anything new to the table like the first. That new event status is gone. That's the major difference here. Marvel will need something new to have a fresh event status for future crossovers in order to get to 2 bill, as well as a slew of audience pleasing films for their solos. They can't bank on playing the same hand.

It could easily have gone very wrong. Despite all the dollars on the table studios were always too nervous to try something like this and it took Avengers making big bucks for JL to get greenlit and Fox to double down on X-Men (& even F4!). And by reception I don't mean just reviews. Just from conversations with fans and non-fans alike, this film doesn't generate anywhere near the excitement of the first where nearly every non fan I spoke to really liked it (even one who had previously said the idea of a superhero team up on film was worse than Alien Vs Predator t), and although I will love rewatching it a few hundred times, Ultron (the character) is still a disappointment to me and while AoU will be one of my favourite films to watch, I'd be hard pushed to call it a good film or defend it against detractors.

Also not many predicted that success even in the Avengers box office threads here so I'm not the sure the 'would have done X amounts' aren't influenced by hindsight (I think we all do it to an extent).

 

[def28]

Even if this got fantastic reviews or fan reaction like the first I don't think it would get that much increase. That new car ya bought in 2012 ain't so new anymore in 2015 ya know? If they wanted to hit 2 bil (which is near impossible) I really think they needed to have a new novelity to boost it. Maybe Spidey could work, maybe a better villain or maybe X-Men. I don't know. But something. Good reviews and happy fans is not enough to have that big of an increase when numbers are this high imo. All my pov of course. This is all new territory so it's difficult to say how these crossovers should play.

Everyone I know loves the film, but that's hardly proof of anything. Only time I see negative stuff is fans onlin tbh. While there are def very worthy issues for people to have with the film, the fan psyche nowadyas is so odd from more then a few that it's difficult to tell stuff in a general sense. All I know is that from my perspective it was well received from audiences and made a ****load of cash that almost no other frnachise can hit. It will be interesting in the next few years how the new additions play and how other stuiods expanded universe effects superhero films in general.

 

[Raiden]

I think the fact that AOU has hit 1.2 bil WW and we are talking as if the movie is a disappointment shows just how high the bar has risen for MCU movies, especially ones with Avengers in the title. Meanwhile, Disney's 180 mil movie Tomorrowland only managed 40 mil in its OW. Making movies isn't as easy as it seems.

 

[def28]

It's extremely difficult. Making a stronger sequel is even more so. People usually lose out bad by part 3. With these crossovers they play as sequels to all of the films without even being a year away so I'd imagine it's even more difficult. This stuff requires extreme planing. Trying to top expectations with the positivity and hype of the previous films has gotta drive one mad.

I'm still amazed we are even at this point tbh. Pretty much every character I grew up being a fan of will be on screen next year.

 

[JB33]

I think the new novelty factor some people are looking for could be the Masters of Evil. Sure, to some that would just be recycling already used characters, but we've already seen a lot of heroes together on screen. What we haven't seen is villains all together. Do you guys think that would bring the novelty factor back?

Honestly, it's the only thing they can do for Avengers 4 - if they even do Avengers 4 - with the rights to Kang reportedly being owned by Fox.

 

[Iceman]

Even if this got fantastic reviews or fan reaction like the first I don't think it would get that much increase. That new car ya bought in 2012 ain't so new anymore in 2015 ya know? If they wanted to hit 2 bil (which is near impossible) I really think they needed to have a new novelity to boost it. Maybe Spidey could work, maybe a better villain or maybe X-Men. I don't know. But something. Good reviews and happy fans is not enough to have that big of an increase when numbers are this high imo. All my pov of course. This is all new territory so it's difficult to say how these crossovers should play.

Everyone I know loves the film, but that's hardly proof of anything. Only time I see negative stuff is fans onlin tbh. While there are def very worthy issues for people to have with the film, the fan psyche nowadyas is so odd from more then a few that it's difficult to tell stuff in a general sense. All I know is that from my perspective it was well received from audiences and made a ****load of cash that almost no other frnachise can hit. It will be interesting in the next few years how the new additions play and how other stuiods expanded universe effects superhero films in general.

If this gross for AoU is a more realistic reference point for the series maybe we can see growth (not necessarily explosive) from here on out. Stripping out the first film and the one-off factors might make trends easier to spot going forward. For a start would be good to see Civil War get close to this AoU figure and for IW1 to beat it.

 

[Iceman]

It's extremely difficult. Making a stronger sequel is even more so. People usually lose out bad by part 3. With these crossovers they play as sequels to all of the films without even being a year away so I'd imagine it's even more difficult. This stuff requires extreme planing. Trying to top expectations with the positivity and hype of the previous films has gotta drive one mad.

I'm still amazed we are even at this point tbh. Pretty much every character I grew up being a fan of will be on screen next year.

I think the new novelty factor some people are looking for could be the Masters of Evil. Sure, to some that would just be recycling already used characters, but we've already seen a lot of heroes together on screen. What we haven't seen is villains all together. Do you guys think that would bring the novelty factor back?

Honestly, it's the only thing they can do for Avengers 4 - if they even do Avengers 4 - with the rights to Kang reportedly being owned by Fox.

I think Furious can continue doing well with the same formula of increasingly crazy car stunts (which isn't by itself a novelty) and a slowly growing but familiar group of core characters. Avengers is kind of like that and people aren't getting bored of the Furious series after 7 films (although it did nearly die off in the middle).

 

[PunyGod]

...

 

[JB33]

With an estimated $1.4M Thursday gross, AoU edges past Toy Story 3 on the all time domestic chart ($416.1M). Next up domestically: The Lion King (422.8M).

And another little tidbit: Avengers: Age of Ultron is officially the 4th fastest film to $400M domestically (24 days), after The Avengers (14 days), The Dark Knight (18 days) and Avatar (23 days). Next up is the Dark Knight Rises (29 days) and then there's a huge gap before the next fastest, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, which took 42 days to reach $400M domestic. All this to say, Age of Ultron is still in elite company.

 

[Iceman]

Funny that Avatar was only just about getting out of 2nd gear at this stage! t:

 

[JB33]

Funny that Avatar was only just about getting out of 2nd gear at this stage! t:

Tell me about it! James Cameron's films are unique and totally in a league of their own (as far as box office goes).