Snikt! Wolverine's Box Office Predictions

[WeaponXProject]

In their Sunday round up of international box office, Variety gave an estimate of $123.7m. Boxofficemojo gives a domestic total up to Tuesday of $132.9m (but haven't updated their overseas figures).

So the worldwide total is around $257m.

Because this is meant to be a prediction thread, I'm going to guessimate that it makes another $30m domestic and $50m overseas (including Mexico and Japan) giving a worldwide total of around $340m.

I think the poor reviews/word of mouth combined with the success of Star Trek have cost it at least $50m. However, it is still a successful movie.

It's a cluddered month, I expect Star Trek to follow suit and drop dramatically because of Angels & Demons and then the same with A&D when T4 and Night at the Museum comes out.

 

[chaseter]

I don't think A&D is going to do great, 40-50 million, and I can see ST making another 30-40 million this weekend. Wolverine will be about 10-15 million.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Iconic to ME because I am a huge X-Men fan, and scenes like those (along with a few others) are PERFECT scenes in the X-Men universe.

But not iconic to the general movie viewing audience who really doesn't give a crap about the X-Men outside of a good movie to watch every couple summers.

But along those same lines, I think that there are iconic X-Men scenes in EVERY X-Men movie. I just don't think they matter to people outside of X-Men fandom.

Oh I dont know Nell, my friends, who arent NEARLY as into their movies as I am, STILL go on about how much they enjoyed X1, X2 and lately even Wolverine (X3 got 'meh' to bad responses). I think the first 2 movies especially will be remembered for a long time. The others will be remembered because of this, but maybe not so fondly.

Well, no superhero ever dies in his movie. The suspense comes from wondering how the hero will overcome some obstacle and who else will get hurt along the way.

Wolverine's an interesting, dark character but he needs a more compelling movie to star in.

Exactly, I have only read a couple of Wolverine comics, but they sucked me in and wouldnt let me go once I started reading them, and left me craving for more once I had finished. Origins and The End could be 2 movies on their own.

 

[kedrell]

XO:W is all but certain to grab a crown it probably didn't want. The highest opening weekend for a film that failed to reach 200M. The Simpson's Movie holds the record now with about 10M OW less.

 

[PSINGRAPHD]

XO:W is all but certain to grab a crown it probably didn't want. The highest opening weekend for a film that failed to reach 200M. The Simpson's Movie holds the record now with about 10M OW less.

Not only that, but I now believe its multiplier is going to be less than 2, 'cause $170+ million seems out of reach for WO. What this means is, that its opening weekend take will account for MORE THAN HALF its entire domestic run. There is no way a statistic like that, or the one you point out for that matter, can be looked upon in a positive manner. I'm certain Fox execs will attempt to do so, coming up with any and every excuse they can think of in the process. This is a serious blow to the X-franchise, I just hope the damage is not irreparable.

 

[PSINGRAPHD]

I specifically said Star Trek performed as expected, with Variety predicting $60m and MovieTickets predicting $100m - it fell right between those.

If this "MovieTickets" you site predicted $100m, then they were the only ones. Most industry analysts and experts were expecting an opening in the $50m range, including Paramount. So Star Trek did MUCH better than expected!

Wolverine's drop was pretty much as expected as well. I haven't yet been taken by surprise by any of the statistics for these two films.

Really? Perhaps movie execs should've just consulted you then, seeing as how your instincts and insight are so accurate. Who else was expecting an almost 70% drop? Fox, the fans, the aforementioned industry analysts and experts, please be more specific.

 

[X-Maniac]

If this "MovieTickets" you site predicted $100m, then they were the only ones. Most industry analysts and experts were expecting an opening in the $50m range, including Paramount. So Star Trek did MUCH better than expected!

Who are these 'most industry analysts and experts'. Variety is the only industry analysis site where i saw a prediction and it was $60m. And massive ticket sales at MovieTickets led them to predict a $100m because the advance sales and the sell-out screenings were far higher than for Wolverine. On those grounds, the result came in the middle. I clarified why i thought the result was expected, because of it being in the middle of those two predictions. I cannot see what is wrong with that.

Really? Perhaps movie execs should've just consulted you then, seeing as how your instincts and insight are so accurate. Who else was expecting an almost 70% drop? Fox, the fans, the aforementioned industry analysts and experts, please be more specific.

The bitter haters were expecting/wanting that drop, those who are aware how mixed-review movies drop were expecting it, anyone in their right mind who knew Star Trek was coming on the second weekend could have predicted it. It's not rocket science. A massive franchise revival like Star Trek doesn't arrive with a whimper, it arrives with a bang.

And,yes, perhaps they should have consulted me. Please do feel free to do so in future, if you can afford my fees.

 

[Celestial]

Edward Douglas was pretty close Weekend Warrior with Star Trek opening to $72.5m and Wolverine dropping 68%.

It didn't take a great deal of expertise to think the Wolverine could drop by at least 65%. A lot of comic book adaptations drop by that kind of percentage and given the critical reception and the competition it was unlikely that this was going to buck the trend. I was fearing a drop of as much as 75% earlier in the week.

(In this context, the word you want it "cite" not "site".)

 

[PSINGRAPHD]

The Wolverine domestic box office total passed FF2 and The Hulk, yesterday. On Friday it will pass The Incredible Hulk. Internationally, it's already passed The Hulk and was only $5m below TIH at the end of last weekend.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/genres/chart/?id=comicbookadaptation.htm

Yes, it's not TDK, IM or even X2 or X3 numbers, but it's doing a lot better than most comic book adaptations.

On Monday, Watchmen passed Batman & Robin's domestic take.

Watchmen passed Batman & Robin on Monday.

OMG Celestial, lol! I'll give you credit, you're persistent in trying to find the silver lining. So how are the sequels for the FF and Hulk workin' out BTW? And right now, it's #20 for comic book adaptions according to Box Office Mojo, and will make it to #15 at best. It's #19 for superhero movies and will make it to #14 at best. I also notice that you continually never take into account adjustments for ticket price inflation. When this calculation is taken into consideration, it will not beat the original X-Men film OR the original FF movie. Sad, but true.

I'm also crunching some #'s for WO's & ST's opening international weekends that I'll post when completed. Using only the countries you mentioned as major markets, so far they make up slightly less than half WO's take, while they are slightly more than 70% of ST's. I believe my findings will put a pretty big whole in your assertation that 102 markets/9,234 playdates versus 54/5,000 wasn't a factor.

 

[PSINGRAPHD]

Who are these 'most industry analysts and experts'. Variety is the only industry analysis site where i saw a prediction and it was $60m. And massive ticket sales at MovieTickets led them to predict a $100m because the advance sales and the sell-out screenings were far higher than for Wolverine. On those grounds, the result came in the middle. I clarified why i thought the result was expected, because of it being in the middle of those two predictions. I cannot see what is wrong with that.

What's wrong with it, is that you only CITE 2 estimates, and they just happen to be favorable to your assessments. What a coincidence, no? I've gotta get ready for work soon, when I get time I'll provide some alternative predictions that put it closer to $50m, which is what I read most were putting it at.

The bitter haters were expecting... blah, blah, blah, lol..

What you call bitter haters, I call realists.

And,yes, perhaps they should have consulted me. Please do feel free to do so in future, if you can afford my fees.

Don't hold your breath. I got some penny rolls for ya, 'cause that's about all your opinion is worth to me.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

I think everyone should stop being so mean to each other, it's upsetting me.

 

[PSINGRAPHD]

It didn't take a great deal of expertise to think the Wolverine could drop by at least 65%. A lot of comic book adaptations drop by that kind of percentage and given the critical reception and the competition it was unlikely that this was going to buck the trend. I was fearing a drop of as much as 75% earlier in the week.

(In this context, the word you want it "cite" not "site".)

And a lot of comic book adaptions DON'T drop by that much, the good ones anyway. The first 2 X-movies didn't, neither did IM, TDK, or BB, and the list goes on. I think 69+% is bad enough, a 75% hit would have actually been disastrous. So you're right in that sense, saying it could've been worse. There's that silver lining again, lol.

And if the purpose of your pointing out my incorrect spelling of cite as site was to embarrass me, it was a feeble attempt. My ego is not that fragile, friend. I will say that your pretentious and rather condescending remarks say quite a bit about your attitude though. Peace.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

How was he trying to embarrass you? He was just correcting you.

 

[PSINGRAPHD]

But like Celestial's excellent box office analysis shows, the movie seems to be doing OK regardless, even if it's not a runaway blockbuster.

Yes, but don't you think it was intended to be a blockbuster? I agree, it's not an all-out failure or mega-bomb, that's to be certain. But it just doing OK does make it somewhat of a disappointment, don't you agree?

 

[PSINGRAPHD]

I think everyone should stop being so mean to each other, it's upsetting me.

My apologies, Knaves. I'm sorry, guess I'm sorta in a bad mood today. In the future, I will try and refrain from engaging in such childish tete-a-tetes.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

I'm only joking with ya, I think it's funny.

 

[PSINGRAPHD]

How was he trying to embarrass you? He was just correcting you.

Maybe you're right. Tone is difficult to detect in text sometimes, and as I mentioned, I'm feelin' a lil' surly today.

 

[PSINGRAPHD]

I'm only joking with ya, I think it's funny.

Well alrighty then. Now I feel stupid. See, this is what I mean about tone and text, lol. Gotta go to work, Im runnin late, see ya!

 

[danoyse]

And if the purpose of your pointing out my incorrect spelling of cite as site was to embarrass me, it was a feeble attempt. My ego is not that fragile, friend. I will say that your pretentious and rather condescending remarks say quite a bit about your attitude though. Peace.

I don't believe there was intent to do anything other than point out a spelling error, and it was done politely. That was nothing to freak out over, so let's not jump to conclusions, OK?

And to answer your other question, yes, I would imagine everyone involved is disappointed that the film wasn't a blockbuster of X2-proportions (and I would love to think this would convince Fox not to keep short-changing their franchise films, but I know better ), but as it's been pointed out, it's not an all-out loss either.

 

[Celestial]

I wasn't intending to embarass you, but I'd noticed you making the same mistake before so I thought you might like to know for future use. I'm surprised you find my comments pretentious and condescending, though.

I'm just trying to give a different take on the situation. There's no need to take it too seriously as none of us know what we're talking about - we don't have access to the information that really matters. Like you, I'm just picking over the limited (and probably unreliable) data that's made available.

Anyway, on to the discussion, if you're still interested:

Overseas numbers - boxofficemojo has been very slow to update which makes it hard to work out what's really going on. The Variety report doesn't give Star Trek numbers for Italy and Brazil and they're big markets. If you have time, you could compare the international released dates for the two films and work out which additional markets Wolverine has opened in. Then look to see how much X3 made in those markets.

Inflation - I decided it wasn't worth worrying about that as costs also go up with inflation. I know there's a significant different between the first X-Men and now but the markets have changed a lot, too. X1 looks to have been a bargain at $75m.

Comparison with other comic book adaptations - we all know this isn't a TDK, an IM or a Spider-Man so there's no fun in comparing it with those. It's certainly worth comparing with the other X-Men movies but there's a lot of that. So why not look at how it compares with the rest?

Wolverine should easily pass the box office, both domestic and international, for FF2, Hulk and TIH. Probably FF, too.

FF got a sequel but FF2 won't.

The Incredible Hulk barely matched the box office of Hulk even before adjusting for inflation. Add in the rumours of trouble between the studio and star and the chance of a sequel with Edward Norton seems unlikely.

Profitability - that depends on the costs and we don't have a clue. We don't know what income comes from sponsers, what rebates are received for choosing that location (Wolverine gets 15% of most of it's australian costs but does it get anything from New Zealand or Canada?).

Costs - I don't believe any of the costs at boxofficemojo. We don't know what sort of backend deal Hugh Jackman received. Did this movie cost less to market and promote than other movies? Did they benefit from lower advertising costs due to the recession? The promotional tour and premiere seemed lean and economical but effective.

Fox also have excuses for why Wolverine didn't do better, so if they want to go ahead, they'll use them.

 

[neemer5]

Hopefully this will help shut the door on the whole long legs/word-of-mouth/summer drops arguments:

Star Trek, showing on 10% less theatres than Wolverine, has made 104 million in one week. That's with a nearly 10 million dollar smaller start, so the daily drops have been significantly smaller, and the per screen average is much higher.
To put things into perspective, Wolverine made 102 million in 1 week.

 

[Celestial]

To be picky, Star Trek's $104m includes $4m from Thursday, so if you're going for a full week, it's $99m Thursday-Wednesday or $101m Friday-Thursday, so that's just under Wolverine's first week. But yes, Star Trek is holding up better and will do better overall for domestic box office.

 

[chaseter]

I didn't have midnight showings for Star Trek at my theatres here and I think they just showed them on Thursday instead of at midnight so it can be seen as equal. The fact that it opened in less venues than Wolverine and has already caught up says something.

 

[Project862006]

Worldwide:$259,346,914

 

[FaT_tONle]

Didn't have too many people show up at a late Trek showing... maybe 10-12 people max... doesn't say much because that's a small theatre I went to but I expected at least 1/3 full. I still think it will do well this weekend.