Apocalypse X-Men: Apocalypse Box Office Prediction Thread - Part 1

[Iceman]

I don't see it. They may set it up here, but it's still probably a couple films away. Sinister can support a movie by himself. After that, you'd be pushing it villain wise treading into less popular characters and stories. Go for Phoenix after that.

Sinister can definitely support a film by himself. Really hope he is up next.

 

[CaptainCanada]

After that, you'd be pushing it villain wise treading into less popular characters and stories.

The second movie in this series, which many still consider the best, was centered around William Stryker, a revamped version of a character known for basically a single story. A popular one in X-Men comics fan circles, mind you, but nowhere near the main tier of X-Men villains.

 

[Tilapia]

True.... But you have to look at the climate today. Adapting classic titles and story arcs. 300 million dollar budgets or higher with marketing. Avengers, Star Wars. You can't chance it with a subpar villain.

Apocalypse might be your Storm featured movie. Sinister revolves mostly on Cyke. Then you end it with Phoenix, which could be a two parter (not a fan but strong possibility). This is in addition to X-Force and possibly Cable going back in part II. That puts McAvoy/Hoult at 6 films and this new cast would have four under the belt. What more can you ask for as a fan if that isn't overkill already?

Fox can move into cosmic stuff after that and work closely with Marvel on some joint productions. Star Jammers, X-Factor. Whatever...

 

[Mars123]

It'll be interesting to see how other movies are fairing in the run up to apocalypse such a Jungle Book this weekend. A massive Disney classic!

 

[BatofGotham]

Can anyone tell me why the X-Men films have traditionally not made that much money? I mean the films are decent and the cast is great. I'm surprised an X-Men film hasn't crossed the $1 billion mark so far.

 

[RLAAMJR.]

I can really feel this movie is going to be bigger than X-men: Days of Future Past.

 

[jaymes_e06]

I hope RLAAMJR I really hope so.

 

[BeholdMe]

Can anyone tell me why the X-Men films have traditionally not made that much money? I mean the films are decent and the cast is great. I'm surprised an X-Men film hasn't crossed the $1 billion mark so far.

I'm not totally sure but XFilms aren't always as family friendly as other in different franchises and also people seem to think only one superhero movie can exist in all CBM and it's not certain ones they don't give others no matter how great the time of day.

 

[Havok83]

Its going to come right after WB's BvS and Marvel's Cap 3. It wont do as well but I hope it doesnt lag too far behind. At the very least better than DOFP and Deadpool

Can anyone tell me why the X-Men films have traditionally not made that much money? I mean the films are decent and the cast is great. I'm surprised an X-Men film hasn't crossed the $1 billion mark so far.

I think The Last Stand damaged it. The movies were seeing higher returns with its sequels but then that came out and damaged the franchise. With Deadpool doing better than all of them, lets hope its back on an upwards trend and it seems to be the case as DOFP did alot to repair things with the audience

 

[Tilapia]

Reason why no billion dollar movie yet? TLS and Origins. The defunct timeline that confused the heck out of people. The lack of great comedy and stellar visuals. The Wolverine actually has some funny moments of all films, but the Quick Silver comedy didn't work for me in DoFP. Came off as campy. That scene had great visuals though. Just been a little too hit and miss. DoFP is the official rebound and redirect however.

Apocalypse looks to have it all... except Wolverine (well maybe a cameo). I expect the film to do exceptionally well. Better legs than BvS for sure. Thinking 850 WW.

 

[freshandclean]

I think The Last Stand damaged it. The movies were seeing higher returns with its sequels but then that came out and damaged the franchise. With Deadpool doing better than all of them, lets hope its back on an upwards trend and it seems to be the case as DOFP did alot to repair things with the audience

The thing about DOFP is that it seems like such an anomaly compared to the other X-Films in terms of gross. It made something like 300 million more than the next highest film in the franchise. So I'm not sure if DOFP was a "lightening in a bottle" type success that Apoc won't be able to match, or if it really is part of the trend of X sequels gaining momentum (until thet're hit by a bus).

 

[psylockolussus]

Spider-Man 3 didn't even hit a billion. So like.... Even if X3 was as great as X2, I don't think it would have crossed the 1 billion mark especially when X2 earned 407 million, three years ago at that time. Maybe $600 million but not a billion. Then its follow-up, a spin-off Wolverine movie where it chopped down all the original trilogy cast members except for Hugh (and Patrick Stewart if you count his cameo role). I don't see how two would have earned a billion especially when international markets like China weren't that as strong as today.

 

[Havok83]

The thing about DOFP is that it seems like such an anomaly compared to the other X-Films in terms of gross. It made something like 300 million more than the next highest film in the franchise. So I'm not sure if DOFP was a "lightening in a bottle" type success that Apoc won't be able to match, or if it really is part of the trend of X sequels gaining momentum (until thet're hit by a bus).

where are you getting your numbers from? This?

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=xmen.htm

There is a 300M gap in worldwide sales but those numbers are not adjusted for inflation. If they were, this gap would be far much smaller

Spider-Man 3 didn't even hit a billion. So like.... Even if X3 was as great as X2, I don't think it would have crossed the 1 billion mark especially when X2 earned 407 million, three years ago at that time. Maybe $600 million but not a billion. Then its follow-up, a spin-off Wolverine movie where it chopped down all the original trilogy cast members except for Hugh (and Patrick Stewart if you count his cameo role). I don't see how two would have earned a billion especially when international markets like China weren't that as strong as today.

SM3 was close and if you adjust it for inflation today, it went over the 1 billion threshold

 

[psylockolussus]

Yeah but we all know at those times, X-Men weren't as huge as Spider-Man and if I remember correctly, there was more buzz for the Da Vinci Code film which weren't even a great film to begin with.

While Origins, had a leaking incident which IMO affected its box-office performance especially internationally. Like I got a copy of that like in April or March of 2009 after just finishing my classes. And I think thats the only time I encountered that for a blockbuster film.

 

[freshandclean]

where are you getting your numbers from? This?

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=xmen.htm

There is a 300M gap in worldwide sales but those numbers are not adjusted for inflation. If they were, this gap would be far much smaller

True. So domestically DOFP is the 4th most successful X-Men film?

 

[kevork89]

I don't see the obsession with having to hit $1 billion. Sure lots of movies are doing it but if it's a fantastic film and makes enough to warrant more then I'm happy. I think hitting the $700-800 million area is great. And that should be what X-Men strives for and not try and make $1 billion. I mean of course try but if they're making $800 million im sure Fox and co will be happy.

 

[def28]

I'm not totally sure but XFilms aren't always as family friendly as other in different franchises and also people seem to think only one superhero movie can exist in all CBM and it's not certain ones they don't give others no matter how great the time of day.

Neither is Deadpool or The Dark Knight but they still made more. Being family friendly does not have much to do with it imo. There is a huge audience for this stuff. X-Men has never had a flop even with it's mediocre films, so that alone speaks alot.

Imo the answer for why it can't see a huge increase will always be that they don't use the majority of their characters or elements to the truest marketable potential. It took 14 years to get to Sentinels, we had a bad Phonix film etc. Too many characters are not walking out of these films as marketable franchise stars or engaging/fun characters. Lately Characters like Quicksilver and NTW have had a far bigger audience reaction then main X-Men. They are just more fun then characters like Rogue and Iceman in the films. Downplay the fun characteristics of them and they lose their appeal.

For example, just having Deadpool show up like in XMOW isn't enough to grab audiences, you need to capture why he was popular and worked as a character in the first place. So if a character like Storm or Cyclops is represented stronger in Apocalypse more so then the OT then they will surge and help the franchise become more profitable. Likewise with just about any character.

 

[psylockolussus]

I think Days of Future Past could have potentially crossed the 1 billion mark IF
a. X3 was great and it earned like $600 to $700 million in 2006;
b. If Origins: Wolverine, The Wolverine and First Class earned like $450 million to $550 million
c. If we got a film like X-Men 4 that truly teases DOFP.
d. released in IMAX 3D and more weekends for itself

The thing is with DOFP, there wasn't a strong momentum leading to it especially if you look at the b.o. numbers that First Class/The Wolverine.

 

[BeholdMe]

Neither is Deadpool or The Dark Knight but they still made more. Being family friendly does not have much to do with it imo. There is a huge audience for this stuff. X-Men has never had a flop even with it's mediocre films, so that alone speaks alot.

Imo the answer for why it can't see a huge increase will always be that they don't use the majority of their characters or elements to the truest marketable potential. It took 14 years to get to Sentinels, we had a bad Phonix film etc. Too many characters are not walking out of these films as marketable franchise stars or engaging/fun characters. Lately Characters like Quicksilver and NTW have had a far bigger audience reaction then main X-Men. They are just more fun then characters like Rogue and Iceman in the films. Downplay the fun characteristics of them and they lose their appeal.

For example, just having Deadpool show up like in XMOW isn't enough to grab audiences, you need to capture why he was popular and worked as a character in the first place. So if a character like Storm or Cyclops is represented stronger in Apocalypse more so then the OT then they will surge and help the franchise become more profitable. Likewise with just about any character.

I didn't say it was the end all be all but it does play apart sometimes, which is what helps the Avengers franchise. It is also being faithful to the characters you are representing as well that plays a huge part. This time around they really do seem to be doing things right. They do need to release it in IMAX all over not just overseas I think that hurts a little, it's something I don't understand.

 

[freshandclean]

It's getting harder to predict BO for CBMs nowadays. You have Spidey, Batman and Superman underachieving. Meanwhile, GOTG & Deadpool are overachieving. X-Men, at least, has the luxury of not having the expectations placed on them that Spidey & Co. have. If Apoc does similar to DOFP (or even a little under) I don't think it'll effect them the same way it did TASM2 or BvS. More like TDKR, which is fine with me.

I do think marketability is an issue, but honestly, it doesn't bother me too much. I like the tone and quality I'm getting from the films. 4 out of 5 isn't too shabby. And if Apocalypse maintains Singers quality that'll be 5 out 6.

 

[def28]

BvS and Amazing Spider-Man 2 were bad films. That's why they didn't do as well as they should. Deadpool and GOTG were excellent.

The prior popularity doesn't matter as we have seen time and time again since Iron Man 1. Make Batman and Robin and it's not gonna do well, make The Dark Knight and you are gonna come out on top. Gotta earn it.

 

[Smilodon]

Neither is Deadpool or The Dark Knight but they still made more. Being family friendly does not have much to do with it imo. There is a huge audience for this stuff. X-Men has never had a flop even with it's mediocre films, so that alone speaks alot.

Imo the answer for why it can't see a huge increase will always be that they don't use the majority of their characters or elements to the truest marketable potential. It took 14 years to get to Sentinels, we had a bad Phonix film etc. Too many characters are not walking out of these films as marketable franchise stars or engaging/fun characters. Lately Characters like Quicksilver and NTW have had a far bigger audience reaction then main X-Men. They are just more fun then characters like Rogue and Iceman in the films. Downplay the fun characteristics of them and they lose their appeal.

For example, just having Deadpool show up like in XMOW isn't enough to grab audiences, you need to capture why he was popular and worked as a character in the first place. So if a character like Storm or Cyclops is represented stronger in Apocalypse more so then the OT then they will surge and help the franchise become more profitable. Likewise with just about any character.

It's really this. There is no reason why Iceman, Blink, Bishop, Emma, Rogue, Kitty, Beast or Colossus can't be as popular/notable as the characters in GotG or supporting characters like Falcon/War Machine etc. Fox just hasn't used the X-Men to their potential. We're really still scratching the surface of the potential of this universe I feel like. Once this franchise starts feeling more like a team and expansive universe rather than a very intimate (but also kinda narrow) saga of several characters, I think it'll take off financially. Deadpool showed that getting characters right and enjoyable will make them a hit with the fans. Once the X-Men start turning their lesser known characters in known characters, then I think we'll start to see some of the success financially that the MCU has.

 

[def28]

Exactly

 

[psylockolussus]

It's really this. There is no reason why Iceman, Blink, Bishop, Emma, Rogue, Kitty, Beast or Colossus can't be as popular/notable as the characters in GotG or supporting characters like Falcon/War Machine etc.

That would continue that way if they let the X-Men be stucked in the past... I mean the likes of Rogue/Iceman/Shadowcat weren't carbon copies of the comic-books but had they appear in more films, they would be developed more and do more stuff. Iceman/Kitty kinda did that with their limited sceentime in DOFP but still not enough in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Havok83]

IMO, with the exception of Xavier, Magneto and Wolverine, they never got any of the characters right in the original trilogy. ALL were severly underdeveloped, some more so than others. They didnt start to change that till First Class when addition to those 3, Mystique and Beast finally got some much needed character development. I may not be a fan of what they've done but its been a heck of alot more than what any of the X-men got from 1-3. With any luck, Apocalypse continues with that