Green Lantern Box Office Prediction Thread

[DieSmiling]

You say that like Thor was a flop or something, I mean it wasn't Harry Potter it's clearly a success.

Yeah, but it's relevent to the discussion.

1) GL is in a tougher slot
2) is getting worse reviews and
3) cost more to make.

Plus, whereas Thor is fourth in a line of Marvel films with an obvious plan to move ahead, the future of heroes like Flash, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, etc. depend pretty heavily on GL.

The opening weekend isn't looking very good, as this is looking like it'll make somewhere in the 115-140 million range domestically, which is not what fans were hoping for. It's not the deathnell, but it's not good.

 

[ClarkLuther55]

The general audience's reaction to Green Lantern: Link

Green Lantern earned a B CinemaScore, while 63% of the audience was over the age of 25.

Not good. Most movies get "B+" or higher. The mainstream audience's "B" grade is of course far better than the rancid 24% Rotten Tomatoes score that the critics gave this movie. Without any in depth information about how this "B" grade breaks down (which is proprietary and provided to CinemaScore's clients, the movie studios) you can look at this from different perspectives. If most of the audience graded near the average, then the mainstream consensus is that Green Lantern was OK but not great. However, there could also be big divisions among the people who were polled. Some might have loved the movie and and given it an "A" grade, while a significant amount of people may have hated it and given it "C" grades.

Either way, an "OK" CinemaScore doesn't cut it when you also account for the so-so opening box office, as well as the fact that the audience skewed older. 63% over age 25 means that kids aren't swarming to the theaters to see Green Lantern. It was the 12 year old boys that some people on this forum were counting on to save this movie.

I predict a 2nd week drop of 60% or more. This movie will struggle, especially with the stiff competition ahead. The WB has got to be worried right now, after all the money and hopes that they put into this.

 

[Marvin]

You would think so but heavy CG movies from Sony tend to have massive budgets. GL, the Spider-Man films, etc.

And I don't see your point about Bay having ILM for his other movies. He got the discount because Spielberg was Exec Producing. I don't see what's countered by what you said.

it's countered by the idea that bay has a strong working relation ship with them already. The same way he doesn't need someone to give him a discount on GM cars or Military hardware because of the working relationship in place.

To assume berg got him a discount would be nothing more than speculation.

The key will be Sunday's drop off, which will be very telling for this series. Right now 150 seems to be the celing for this film, but I have a feeling after next weekend it will barely clear 100M, and probably not break 300M world wide.

that's kinda neat considering there are films that exist that open at about 150

 

[SuperAl]

i wonder what WB is hoping to pull in. i still think it'll make its budget back but im curious in how the foreign box office does.

 

[Mysteryman]

Deadline is now saying that Fridays take was 21.6 million.
Right now, it's looking like GL will make 58 million .

 

[dark_b]

hahahahahahah

http://www.slashfilm.com/green-lantern-harry-potter-selling-2d-tickets-3d-tickets/


come on this is funny

 

[TheVileOne]

Thing is look at where Thor is now.

Thor will probably top out somewhere around $180 million domestic and around $475 million worldwide which isn't bad. And that was in a less competitive spot.

Green Lantern is in a more competitive spot now and it is already underperforming. Thor was also #1 for two straight weeks which Green Lantern will not be able to manage. Chances are a movie like Thor will have had better word of mouth than GL. This movie will be lucky to break over $150 million domestic which I doubt.

 

[TheVileOne]

hahahahahahah

http://www.slashfilm.com/green-lantern-harry-potter-selling-2d-tickets-3d-tickets/


come on this is funny

Audiences are wise to the 3D ******** now. Especially movies with ****** and rushed 3D conversions that are purposefully darker.

Even Transformers 3 wasn't shot fully in 3D despite what they say.

 

[The Morningstar]

Isn't the complaints about the 3D screens being darker down to the individual projectors though?

I've seen some people say it was too dark, others say it wasn't dark at all (in regards to Thor)

 

[TheVileOne]

When I took off my glasses during Green Lantern, the picture was considerably brighter.

 

[The Morningstar]

Ahh i see.

I hate 3D. Whether it's real 3D like Avatar or crappy conversion jobs. It gives me a splitting head ache.

I mean sure, 3D theme park attractions that last 15 minutes? Fine. But a ****ing 2 hour movie? Man, **** that noise.

Keep 3D where it belongs... at the theme parks.

 

[Marvin]

Thing is look at where Thor is now.

Thor will probably top out somewhere around $180 million domestic and around $475 million worldwide which isn't bad. And that was in a less competitive spot.

Green Lantern is in a more competitive spot now and it is already underperforming. Thor was also #1 for two straight weeks which Green Lantern will not be able to manage. Chances are a movie like Thor will have had better word of mouth than GL. This movie will be lucky to break over $150 million domestic which I doubt.

if only every superhero film was released on thors date...
especially cap.

Audiences are wise to the 3D ******** now. Especially movies with ****** and rushed 3D conversions that are purposefully darker.

Even Transformers 3 wasn't shot fully in 3D despite what they say.

you'd be hard pressed to find a film that is
last I heard even avatar had conversion.
animated film are nothing but.

conversion has it's place

 

[Marvin]

Ahh i see.

I hate 3D. Whether it's real 3D like Avatar or crappy conversion jobs. It gives me a splitting head ache.

I mean sure, 3D theme park attractions that last 15 minutes? Fine. But a ****ing 2 hour movie? Man, **** that noise.

Keep 3D where it belongs... at the theme parks.

they're were people saying the same thing about colour 60 years go when it was new, un-needed and inflated the pricing of tickets.

 

[Metropolis_Man]

I don't know if the screen I saw it on was any different than others but the 3D version I saw was very bright and colorful. I saw the 2D version this morning and in comparison the 3D stood out better for me. Probably the best 3D I've seen other than Avatar and How To Train Your Dragon.

 

[The Morningstar]

Colour and 3D is a bit different. There is a reason colour TV/Films have stuck around and 3D failed in the 80s to be brough back now to mixed/negative reaction.

 

[Marvin]

Colour and 3D is a bit different. There is a reason colour TV/Films have stuck around and 3D failed in the 80s to be brough back now to mixed/negative reaction.

the same reason why 3D films will probably be a staple of every middle class house in 24 years or so. Now is it's time.

 

[chaseter]

Pirates 4 is doing less than Pirates 3.

Not worldwide.

21 million opening day for this is terrible...even with 3D prices added in. 55ish opening weekend for this thing is awful and I bet WB is pissed. They are lucky they have Potter this summer to pick up the slack. This movie will be lucky to crawl to 125 domestic with Cars, then Transformers, then Potter moving in each week.

 

[The Morningstar]

the same reason why 3D films will probably be a staple of every middle class house in 24 years or so. Now is it's time.

No it won't. 3D TV sales are actually pretty poor.

3D won't become the norm until they develop the technology to have it be holograms like in Minority Report or something. Without the need of the glasses.

 

[chaseter]

3D movies will decline and only a few event films a year will use 3D. I wouldn't be shocked if it dies off completely again and lets be honest...who cares?

 

[The Morningstar]

Good riddence is what i say.

 

[KangConquers]

I still haven't seen a single film in 3-D.

 

[Marvin]

No it won't. 3D TV sales are actually pretty poor.

3D won't become the norm until they develop the technology to have it be holograms like in Minority Report or something. Without the need of the glasses.

that's why I said 24 years from now.
and yes, this complaint is very much similar to the colour complaint, it wasn't needed and now it's still uneeded but a standard all the same.

 

[ClarkLuther55]

The only movie I've seen in 3D is Avatar, and that was an amazing experience. The technology is not a problem, it's the way most movies use it. The majority of movies are going to be mediocre anyway. I say give the tech a chance, and some time to mature. It'd be great if good 3D movies were a commonplace thing in the near future.

 

[TheVileOne]

3D isn't exactly a new gimmick for film. It's been around since the 1950's. I feel the color comparison is invalid.

 

[Marvin]

they jumped the gun with it in the 50's and they might be even today
but I believe in it's perfected form it is an added sensory experience much like sound and colour have been to the age of silent brown under cranked film.

they'll look back at us and say, wow they were missing out and didn't even know it.

For me personally, it does nothing(curious about bay), but I do think at the very least it turns films into stage plays and if someone asked if If I'd rather watch a stage play projected onto a screen or in front of a stage the answer would be obvious. Just get rid of the sun glasses