V For Vendetta Box Office Tracking Thread

[Darthphere]

Im sorry but Watchmen needs not to be touched. Honestly, the 12 part mini-series idea is the only way to go. Theres way too much material to be covered and unlike V, all the plots and storylines are necessary for Watchmen, you cant cut anything out. Its at its core a murder mystery, all the elements need to be present.

 

[Antonello Blueberry]

We'll see. I don't think the studio is going to just cough up $100 million for a movie like Watchmen without trying to make a lot of changes to it or get it at a more PG-13 level.
The moviegoing public seemed pretty receptive to Sin City, but again, that one was made for cheaper than most comic book movies, and it still only made less than $80 million.
That's overseas. V is probably the type of movie that will play well in Europe and overseas.

You still think that just the US theatrical grosses make the income of the movie.
The money a blockbuster movie makes in theatre in the US is (as average) a fifth ot the total income for the studio.

 

[BatJeff7786]

Watchmen was budgeted at 100 millions. WB is waiting to see if the public is receptive to this kind of material, dark comic-book with a political subtext, to greenlight it.
James McTeigue is lobbying to be the director of the Watchmen movie.
And we're not talking of a blockbuster kind of comi-book movie like X-Men. Word of mouth is good, even in Italy I heard from a couple of persons that the theatres showing V are packed. So I'm not sure if we'll see such a dramatic drop next week.

I haven't read Watchmen, but from what I've read, the David Hayter script is so good that even Alan Moore approved it. If they are smart, they would go with that script.BTW, almost all the shows for V for Vendetta at my theater (near Los Angeles) were sold out, and the general public seems to like it, so I agree that it will probably have a strong, if not better run next weekend.

 

[Nivek]

From comingSoon.net


Warner Bros. Pictures' graphic novel adaptation V For Vendetta, starring Natalie Portman and Hugo Weaving, topped the weekend box office with an estimated $26.1 million from 3,365 theaters. The action-thriller averaged a strong $7,766 per theater. The film, which is also playing in IMAX theaters, was adapted by Andy and Larry Wachowski, creators of "The Matrix" franchise, and directed by James McTeigue.

 

[Darthphere]

I haven't read Watchmen, but from what I've read, the David Hayter script is so good that even Alan Moore approved it. If they are smart, they would go with that script.BTW, almost all the shows for V for Vendetta at my theater (near Los Angeles) were sold out, and the general public seems to like it, so I agree that it will probably have a strong, if not better run next weekend.

David Hayter's script was for a 12 part HBO like series.

 

[GL's Light]

No, Hayter's script was for a feature film. The script ran 134 pages - Stax had a review of it at IGN.

On V For Vendetta: MCN has the weekend estimate at $ 24.7 million. We'll have to wait for the actuals tomorrow to see who's right.

 

[Darthphere]

No, Hayter's script was for a feature film. The script ran 134 pages - Stax had a review of it at IGN.

On V For Vendetta: MCN has the weekend estimate at $ 24.7 million. We'll have to wait for the actuals tomorrow to see who's right.

Im pretty sure hsi draft was for a mini-series. Ill have to double check since I dont rust IGN ever.

 

[GL's Light]

CHUD also ran a script review of Hayter's screenplay - again it was a feature film screenplay. Everything I've heard about it was that it was for a feature.

 

[Darthphere]

CHUD also ran a script review of Hayter's screenplay - again it was a feature film screenplay. Everything I've heard about it was that it was for a feature.

Ok, I see where I got confused. Hayter wanted to split it into two movies when he first started doing the scripts back in 2001, his 3rd draft in 2003 is the one you speaketh of.

 

[THE MR. TERRIFIC]

It's #1, that's pretty cool.

 

[Karea07]

I hope it makes a lot more money

 

[TheVileOne]

You still think that just the US theatrical grosses make the income of the movie.
The money a blockbuster movie makes in theatre in the US is (as average) a fifth ot the total income for the studio.

And yet Warner Brothes still canned a Constantine sequel even though the first movie did very well overseas and more than doubled its box office.

In other words, I doubt any movie studio is going to give the greenlight to a $100+ million Watchmen movie.

 

[War Party]

Yeah it's cool that the movie was #1 this weekend, but it doesn't mean as much as it used to. It seems like now that it isn't too difficult to have a #1 movie these days.It would mean something if it were to be for more than 2 weeks. Inside Man is probably going to be #1 next week, and V is probably going to have no legs. I hope that doesn't happen though, because I loved this film.

 

[TheVileOne]

http://www.superherohype.com/forums/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=14968

I think a lot of people over-predicted this one. There should've been at least a "less than $100 million" or more than $50 million option on this poll.

I see the movie getting around $60-80 million, unless it has an absolutely FABULOUS second weekend. I suppose that this is pretty respectable.

However, I think the marks for this movie need to see that most comic book movies these days, even if they have strong openings, almost always have big dropoffs in the second weekend. Even dark and violent ones like Sin City.

The Spider-man movies are among the FEW exceptions.

 

[Octoberist]

Also, it's a Rated R movie. With Sin City, it's going to break records, but their glory will not work with the box office; It will live on....in our HEARTS!

 

[GL's Light]

The actuals are in: $ 25,642,340.

 

[Deathlok2001]

so is that number good or bad

 

[GL's Light]

so is that number good or bad

It's within the expected range, although on the low end of that range. Studio tracking predicted an opening of $ 25-30 million.

The success of the film now rests on how good its legs are. A lot of genre films, especially those with R ratings, tend to be frontloaded (even when reviews and word of mouth are strong).

If V is similarly frontloaded it could end up with a multiplier of 2.5X, which would lead to a domestic gross of around $ 64 million. That should be the minimum that it'll gross.

If it holds up well it could have a multiplier of 3X, which would mean a domestic gross of $ 77 million. It's possible that it could develop even better legs, but I don't think it's likely.

$ 65-75 million domestic is the most likely range. With worldwide box office and DVD revenue it will certainly turn a profit. It won't be one of the smash hits of the year, it won't be in the Top 20, but it will be a solid success.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

It did well, but i'm a little surprised (with Imax and all) it could match SinCity's opening. I think that it only went up 18% on saturday because St. Patties day hurt it's friday numbers. I don't think good legs are instore for it. Hope I'm wrong.

 

[Cinemaman]

The Matrix made $27m opening weekend, for V it isn't so bad.

I think it will hardly get $105m domesticly and $128m in overseas.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

The Matrix made $27m opening weekend, for V it isn't so bad.

I think it will hardly get $105m domesticly and $128m in overseas.

I wouldn't compare it to the matrix. I liked V but it didn't come close to the Matrix in my eyes. The lack of action will surely hurt it's legs.

 

[Agentsands77]

I hope they never make a film of WATCHMEN. Too much material would be missing. I know Hayter's script is supposedly phenomenal (with the excellent "Watchmaker" chapter entirely intact), but there's just too much. The work would lose so much of it's wonderful complexity.

WATCHMEN is the greatest graphic novel work of all time and I just can't see a film being anything but a disappointment in comparison.

 

[Cinemaman]

I hope they never make a film of WATCHMEN. Too much material would be missing. I know Hayter's script is supposedly phenomenal (with the excellent "Watchmaker" chapter entirely intact), but there's just too much. The work would lose so much of it's wonderful complexity.

WATCHMEN is the greatest graphic novel work of all time and I just can't see a film being anything but a disappointment in comparison.

Do you have a link of script or where can I find script review???

 

[The Guard]

David Hayter's WATCHMEN script was indeed, fantastic. Very faithful, hit on most, if not all, of the important points, and kept the essence of WATCHMEN intact, and then some. Later versions of his script did away with many of the problems people had with the script's earlier drafts.

I hope they never make a film of WATCHMEN. Too much material would be missing. I know Hayter's script is supposedly phenomenal (with the excellent "Watchmaker" chapter entirely intact), but there's just too much. The work would lose so much of it's wonderful complexity.

No, it wouldn't. The work wouldn't lose ANY of it's complexity. And this is the kind of thinking that fans of any material have GOT to get past when it comes to the material adapted. WATCHMEN would not lose any of it's complexity, because the FILM does not alter the book itself. Did the movie version of FROM HELL make the graphic novel "From Hell" any less impressive? Hell no. The movie, which was pretty solid, but made numerous changes, was based on the book, and did what it could, given the demands of screentime and story space, to keep the main thrust of the story intact, while introducing a whole new generation of readers to Moore's work on some level. Because you'd better believe the movie made people go "I have to read this".

No matter what happens with WATCHMEN (and I have every reason to believe it will be the most powerful comic book film ever made), the book itself will remain one of the best comic book works of all time, if not the best. What would happen is that a wonderfully complex and powerful and layered film would be made, that happens not to be AS complex and chock full of layers as the book. Now, seeing as how damn near any movie I've ever seen lacks the complexity and power and layering of the books they are based on, how the hell is this a bad thing? Nevermind that, like with FROM HELL and numerous other adaptions that have been made into major motion pictures, many people who otherwise would never have experienced WATCHMEN as a graphic novel would go "I have to read this", and be introduced to the true joy of WATCHMEN through that route. Again, how is this a bad thing?

The "If it's not a perfect adaption, it's not a good one" attitude sickens me. People continue to ignore that it is not possible to make perfect adaptions, given the nature of the mediums involved.

WATCHMEN is the greatest graphic novel work of all time and I just can't see a film being anything but a disappointment in comparison.

What movie hasn't been a disappointment compared to the book it was based on? Try not to compare the film to the book on every detail. That's an absurd practice.

 

[Agentsands77]

No, it wouldn't. The work wouldn't lose ANY of it's complexity. And this is the kind of thinking that fans of any material have GOT to get past when it comes to the material adapted. WATCHMEN would not lose any of it's complexity, because the FILM does not alter the book itself. Did the movie version of FROM HELL make the graphic novel "From Hell" any less impressive? Hell no. The movie, which was pretty solid, but made numerous changes, was based on the book, and did what it could, given the demands of screentime and story space, to keep the main thrust of the story intact, while introducing a whole new generation of readers to Moore's work on some level. Because you'd better believe the movie made people go "I have to read this".

Let's face it, the film would *not* be as complex as it's graphic novel counterpart. WATCHMEN as a graphic novel cannot be devalued by the film, but I couldn't help but feel that no matter how well done the film was, I'd just miss so much of the excess material. As far as I'm concerned, there isn't a moment in WATCHMEN that just isn't pure gold.

And for the record, I really liked the film version of V FOR VENDETTA, which I thought was actually superior to the graphic novel at certain moments.

The "If it's not a perfect adaption, it's not a good one" attitude sickens me. People continue to ignore that it is not possible to make perfect adaptions, given the nature of the mediums involved.

I am not a "perfect adaptation" mongerer. I tend to give a lot of room for adaptations.

If a WATCHMEN film is made, I'll probably go to the theatres, fall in love with it, add it to my collection, and watch it over and over again. I'm just wary of it - if they're going to do WATCHMEN, they better do it well, and I'm so afraid that a film wouldn't live up to the graphic novel. I'm not prepared to give that adaptation the leeway I gave V FOR VENDETTA.