Snikt! Wolverine's Box Office Predictions

[Jick]

Wolverine will be 2 hours, as stated somewhere around the net.
About Da Vinci Code...it was a success. It made above 700 million worldwide.
Angels & Demons is a far better book, imo. I think it will do really good at the box office, just not DVC's numbers, since it was way more polemic.

About Wolverine...I really don't know what to expect. I hope it is a major success.

 

[bunk]

I didn't mean to click 80-100. It should have been 170-200.

 

[danoyse]

I think there'll be a lot of "Speedracers" this year. Tops of that list will be "A Night in the Museum" Also think Star Trek and Angels & Demons (this more than Star Trek) will underperform.

Da Vinci Code was big because of the controversy it had surronding it. Take the controversy away and add a previous film that let down a majority of those that were anticipating it (aka Da Vinci) and you've got Angels and Demons...

DaVinci Code was big because it was based on hugely successful best-selling book, not because of the controversy. The movie was a letdown because it wasn't as good as the book. Like I said, many DaVinci fans believe A&D was a much better book than DaVinci and will probably give this one a try regardless of how the last film turned out.

Night at the Museum was such a huge family film that I would be very surprised if the sequel wasn't a big hit as well. There aren't a whole lot of non-animated under-13 films out this summer.

 

[bunk]

The first NatM came out at Christmas with no competition. The sequel seems to have only one good week to make money and they've spent 50 million more on it than the original so I don't think it looks very promising.

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

I need to know the run time before I can make a prediction.

I really don't see how the run time should affect your prediction on the box office. Run time does not really have an effect on the success of any movie as proven time and again. Unless it's a personal issue for you...


As of right now... I'm really unsure about Wolverine. Even a lot of my friends who became huge X-men fans and followed each movie religiously are just kind of, ''MEH'' about this. To be quite honest, i'm not even all that excited about it myself.

I think it will have a good weekend (emphasis on good) with about 70-80 million... but will drop rapidly after it.

I hope i'm wrong though.

 

[terry78]

I think due to his upfront status in the earlier X-movies, those are technically viewed as "his movies", so this is like the fourth chapter, and people are like, whatever. I honestly think the Magneto spinoff will fare a little better.

 

[Downhere]

I think it will land where X2 landed, around 215 million and probably have a similar sized opening weekend.

 

[THE MR. TERRIFIC]

I'm thinkin maybe $200 mil.

 

[chaseter]

I really don't see how the run time should affect your prediction on the box office. Run time does not really have an effect on the success of any movie as proven time and again. Unless it's a personal issue for you...


As of right now... I'm really unsure about Wolverine. Even a lot of my friends who became huge X-men fans and followed each movie religiously are just kind of, ''MEH'' about this. To be quite honest, i'm not even all that excited about it myself.

I think it will have a good weekend (emphasis on good) with about 70-80 million... but will drop rapidly after it.

I hope i'm wrong though.

Before you can make an accurate prediction, you need to know every aspect of the movie to guess how fans and the casual audience will react. The run time is the last bit of information left about this movie that we have no idea about as of yet. You can't make an accurate prediction about anything by going off of hunches or gut feelings.

 

[Peter McCabe]

Before you can make an accurate prediction, you need to know every aspect of the movie to guess how fans and the casual audience will react. The run time is the last bit of information left about this movie that we have no idea about as of yet. You can't make an accurate prediction about anything by going off of hunches or gut feelings.

Dude, you have literally programmed your mind to despise this movie if it ends up being aything less than an hour and 45 minutes.

I could do the same with a number of details.

this is why I tell people its alright to be skeptical but not to establish a negative agenda with the film based on a detail that you know is trivial.

Imagine if this was 1982, and you read in a newspaper that First Blood, Sylvester Stallone's new movie, is 94 minutes.

You coulda done what you're doing now with Wolverine and look how wrong you woulda been

just wait another 36 days and clear your mind of all negativity.

we'll ALL admit the short running time was bad if it indeed affects the film.

 

[chaseter]

It is trivial to blindly like any movie that a studio pushes out because it has X-Men in it. I am making a box office prediction and to do so without considering every aspect of a film is asanine. Quick...lets guess how much Wolverine 2 will make!!! Peter says to not be negative so it will make 500 million!!!

Run time affects quality, that is my opinion and I can give tons of evidence to support that and I can talk about it without you telling me that you think I am wrong. There is more evidence that short films aren't as good as longer films and coming from Fox only adds more to that. Sorry but I go with the odds as a realist instead of expecting the best every single time and being let down.

You literally programmed your mind to think this movie will be teh awesomez no matter what. As for this thread, I would love to see your predictions for the box office and where it will stand amongst a full summer line up.

 

[BMM]

I can't tell either. Many thought Angels & Demons was a far better book than DaVinci Code (it was), so there's still a lot of anticipation for it. If it's as mediocre as the DaVinci Code movie was, who knows?

I haven't read Angels and Demons, but I have heard it is the better of the two. The trailer looks more eventful than what I remember for Da Vinci Code, which only adds to my confusion as to how it will be received.

 

[Peter McCabe]

I would love to see your predictions for the box office and where it will stand amongst a full summer line up.

I'm gonna say it brings in a rounded $100 Million on opening weekend and dies out after 10 weeks with $270 Million.

My lowest estimate for the overall gross is $250 and my highest is $300.

The May 1 spot is the source of my $300 million estimate, but yes its not a solid possibility on the count of so much competition opening after it.

I dont think the Star Trek community is a danger to Wolverine, but I do think that Terminator and Transformers will give him a heavy opposition.

 

[dark_b]

I really don't see how the run time should affect your prediction on the box office. Run time does not really have an effect on the success of any movie as proven time and again. Unless it's a personal issue for you...

when the studio is FOX then the runtime is very important. with short running time you get bad editing.

of course you will now writte something but facts are facts.
x3,hitman,max payne,fantastic four movies,daredevil,dragonball,AD babyln,elektra. and do you think i am a member on this forum from yesterday? of course you will now writte something like ''hugh jackman is in this movie'', '' wollverine is a better movie then the ones you listed'' bla bla

when it comes to FOX ..............runtime is very important. fact not opinion.

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

when the studio is FOX then the runtime is very important. with short running time you get bad editing.

of course you will now writte something but facts are facts.
x3,hitman,max payne,fantastic four movies,daredevil,dragonball,AD babyln,elektra. and do you think i am a member on this forum from yesterday? of course you will now writte something like ''hugh jackman is in this movie'', '' wollverine is a better movie then the ones you listed'' bla bla

when it comes to FOX ..............runtime is very important. fact not opinion.

I completely understand that... and I realise how important the run time is.

What I am arguing is that knowing the run-time in advance will not help you in your prediction of the movies box office... It's like saying ''Oh, this movie is only 90 minutes, it HAS to flop now!''

And trust me, I understand the fears and worrys with FOX but still... with over a month to go, knowing the run time will not affect the promotion or the success of the movie. The only instance we should be worried about the run time is once the end credits roll.

 

[JaD]

I think Paul Blart should be used to squash any debate with run time effecting box office success.

 

[Celestial]

Of course it's all guesswork at this stage. We don't even know the theatre counts and that's more important the running time.

It's reasonable to base expectations on X2 and X3. There may be a drop-off because of people disappointed by X3 or who are fans of characters or actors not featured in this movie. Against that, ticket prices have risen, theatre attendances are up and there may be new fans.

Could someone explain why Iron Man did so much better than The Incredible Hulk? (I'm probably typical in that I saw IM but not TIH)

I really don't know what to think about the other May openers.

Star Trek has potential beyond the trekkies if it can appeal to the people who grew up watching the tv series. It reminds me of Superman Returns and that just managed to get to $200m domestic.

Angels and Demons should appeal to an older audience. At least that's the impression I got with The Da Vinci Code. I can't see it hurting Wolverine.

Terminator - I'm puzzled by the excitement. It's McG and it doesn't have Arnie. Bale gives it a bit of credibility but is that enough?

 

[dark_b]

I think Paul Blart should be used to squash any debate with run time effecting box office success.

short big budget FOX movies.
i never said a comedy.

i will say it again. big budget FOX movies that are short are bad

 

[bunk]

I think it will land where X2 landed, around 215 million and probably have a similar sized opening weekend.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. I don't see this movie making X3 money at all.

 

[danoyse]

Terminator[/i] - I'm puzzled by the excitement. It's McG and it doesn't have Arnie. Bale gives it a bit of credibility but is that enough?

I don't get it either. I wasn't all that impressed with the trailers so far, and I feel like between this and the TV show they've really beaten the story to death at this point. I'll see it, but it's pretty far down my list of summer movies.

 

[chaseter]

I completely understand that... and I realise how important the run time is.

What I am arguing is that knowing the run-time in advance will not help you in your prediction of the movies box office... It's like saying ''Oh, this movie is only 90 minutes, it HAS to flop now!''

And trust me, I understand the fears and worrys with FOX but still... with over a month to go, knowing the run time will not affect the promotion or the success of the movie. The only instance we should be worried about the run time is once the end credits roll.

You see, if the run time is short which would more than likely denote a bad movie and would therefore greatly decrease repeat viewings. If the run time is suitable for the movie or longer and considered to possibly be epic then the repeat viewings will increase. Look at TDK, SM2, SM1, Iron Man, etc...for evidence that longer movies pull in repeat viewers which equates to a bigger box office because those movies are more fleshed out. So, that is why I hold off on numbers because the run time is important. If it is 90 minutes, more than likely it will be a bad movie but I never say with 100% certainty that it will be because there have been good short movies but like I have said before, they greatly pale in comparison to longer movies that are also very good. There are just more longer movies, especially super hero movies, that are better critically, fan wise, and box office wise than shorter movies.

 

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

I just don't think the runtime will play much factor in the -box office- because - when I am a casual viewer (I.E. for films that aren't something like X-Men, Terminator, Star Wars, Transformers, Punisher, etc... - something that I am not a fan of going in), I don't base my decision on runtime when I go see a movie.

In fact, when I -decide- to go see a movie, I never have any clue about the runtime. When I go online to check showtimes, sure, I'll see a runtime, but it has zero influence on whether I see the movie or not.

X-Men films I will see regardless, because I am a fan of the X-Men and want to see their movies.

Watchmen, for instance, I still saw, even though the night I saw it I wasn't really in the mood for a 2 1/2 hour + movie. But because Watchmen was a movie I -wanted- to see (because I thought it looked good from TV / trailers), I went. My mind had already been made up.

I just don't think that people really take runtime into consideration when going to see movies. Perhaps if they are taking the kids, because they don't want to go to a movie where the children will lose attention and become restless. But I somehow doubt Wolverine is going to draw a lot of kids anyways. He doesn't have bright flashy costumes or powers to draw them in (like a Spiderman or Fantastic 4 would) and the TV spots that the parents would see depict a rather dark and violent story that the parents probably don't was their kids to see.

I mean, I know my 5 year old nephew won't be going to see Wolverine anytime soon, and to be honest I don't think he has that big of an interest in it. He likes comic Wolverine, who has bright yellow costumes and is a bit more shiney. But I don't think that wife-beater, jeans, and cowboy boot Logan is quite as appealing.

Runtime may impact the overall quality of the film, but I doubt it impacts the box office. People will go see it if they want to see it, or won't if they are burnt out on the X-Men franchise.

 

[chaseter]

So Watchmen in 90 minutes would have cause the box office to be better?

 

[Peter McCabe]

You see, if the run time is short which would more than likely denote a bad movie and would therefore greatly decrease repeat viewings. If the run time is suitable for the movie or longer and considered to possibly be epic then the repeat viewings will increase. Look at TDK, SM2, SM1, Iron Man, etc...for evidence that longer movies pull in repeat viewers which equates to a bigger box office because those movies are more fleshed out. So, that is why I hold off on numbers because the run time is important. If it is 90 minutes, more than likely it will be a bad movie but I never say with 100% certainty that it will be because there have been good short movies but like I have said before, they greatly pale in comparison to longer movies that are also very good. There are just more longer movies, especially super hero movies, that are better critically, fan wise, and box office wise than shorter movies.

If this was IRON MAN, or SPIDER MAN, I would agree with you.

those are superhero movies.

this is clearly an anti-hero piece, and most critically acclaimed anti-hero films (see my earlier post for list) run from 90 to 100 minutes.

 

[chaseter]

This is a superhero movie.