Apocalypse X-Men: Apocalypse Box Office Prediction Thread

[kasjan]

2018: Storm

I would prefer they use it in one of next X-Men movies, set in 1990.
Story with Amah Farouk, before Ororo met Apocalypse, at begin of movie, next he back in 1990 as Shadow King.

 

[CaptainCanada]

I'm telling you, if this movie had Hugh Jackman, Patrick Stewart, and the rest of the original cast versus the new villains, the hype would be bigger simply because of the audience attachment - and majority of the cast from DOFP would have been in the film unlike right now where you have like only 5 cast members (in major/supporting roles) returning from DOFP.

4 of those 5 castmembers being the people who actually carried the bulk of DOFP. Other than Jackman, the OT cast were cameos, and other than Stewart and McKellen, fairly minimal cameos.

And its not helpful that they are pushing Jennifer Lawrence even more into the promotion, like as if that helped DOFP so much

According to audience surveys, it did.

Fourth big superhero movie this year. Fatigue?

A good list, but I don't think this will be a problem. Guardians of the Galaxy came last among three major superhero films in 2014 and made the most of any of them.

 

[psylockolussus]

Camoes that were plastered in every TV spot, poster and trailer? Yeah cameos...

And continue to believe that most people saw DOFP because of Jennifer Lawrence because of a Fandango survey??? Uh okay. Her latest movie, Joy earned $56 million in North America.

 

[CaptainCanada]

Camoes that were plastered in every TV spot, poster and trailer? Yeah cameos...

Yes, cameos. The point of having them cameo was to acquaint the audience with the new cast, the people who were actually the main characters of the film.

And continue to believe that most people saw DOFP because of Jennifer Lawrence because of a Fandango survey??? Uh okay. Her latest movie, Joy earned $56 million in North America.

"Most" is an exaggeration. But Lawrence is a draw, and the survey is a lot more evidence than your, what, personal belief otherwise?

$56 million for a somewhat indifferently-received drama is actually pretty good. Hugh Jackman's most recent movie made $14 million; by your logic, he couldn't be a draw based on that. Let alone other castmembers like Stewart, McKellen, or Page.

 

[marvelrobbins]

Lawrence's appeal is overated.any who went to see DOFP solely for her was
small.

DOFP heavily promated the original cast.doesn't matter except for jackman
they were extended cameos with Patrick stewart,and Ian Mckellen having biggest roles.

Hugh jackman is a draw as wolverine.outside of that he isn't.Lawrence became star with hungar games but that appeal doesn't really translate to other films.

Fox is putting lawrence at center of marketing for apocalypse since she's bigges "Star" they have.Apocalypse's box office depends on X-Men brand loyalty,those who liked DOFP,film quality,and those who like trailers not
lawrence.

 

[GuestStar2004]

LHugh jackman is a draw as wolverine.outside of that he isn't.Lawrence became star with hungar games but that appeal doesn't really translate to other films.

Fox is putting lawrence at center of marketing for apocalypse since she's bigges "Star" they have.Apocalypse's box office depends on X-Men brand loyalty,those who liked DOFP,film quality,and those who like trailers not
lawrence.

Lawrence does have her wide fanbase, if you don't believe that then go check the number of followers on her twitter fan pages.

And jackman is certainly a draw as wolverine but when you compare the wolverine and DOFP box office there is alot of people who didn't see the wolverine but who see X-Men: Days of future past, now i ain't saying thats down to lawrence even though i am sure every little does helps but its success likely was down to several factors

 

[CaptainCanada]

Lawrence became star with hungar games but that appeal doesn't really translate to other films.

Based on what? Lawrence's main non-franchise work of late has been her films with David O. Russell, which made, respectively, $132 million domestic, $150 million domestic, and $56 million domestic (the last being not nearly as well-received as the previous two, but it's still a pretty decent result for the genre and during the crowded holiday marketplace).

 

[marvelrobbins]

again that doesn't prove lawrence as reason DOFP was bigger than FC.I say her boxoffice appeal is overrated.

 

[CaptainCanada]

again that doesn't prove lawrence as reason DOFP was bigger than FC.I say her boxoffice appeal is overrated.

Nobody was arguing that she was the reason. There is no one reason for any film's success. She was a reason.

 

[metaphysician]

Also, a direct comparison of a drama and a blockbuster is deceptive. The better question is "How much would a movie like Joy have made if it *didn't* star Lawrence?"

 

[psylockolussus]

Yes, cameos. The point of having them cameo was to acquaint the audience with the new cast, the people who were actually the main characters of the film.

"Most" is an exaggeration. But Lawrence is a draw, and the survey is a lot more evidence than your, what, personal belief otherwise?

$56 million for a somewhat indifferently-received drama is actually pretty good. Hugh Jackman's most recent movie made $14 million; by your logic, he couldn't be a draw based on that. Let alone other castmembers like Stewart, McKellen, or Page.

Their role wasn't actually a cameo. A cameo is what Anna/James/Famke/Kelsey got and those weren't even featured in posters/TV spots.

But Halle/Ian/Patrick/Ellen/Shawn/Daniel weren't cameo roles, since they appeared in more than 1 scene. The role of Ian/Ellen/Patrick were even more substantial that what Lucas/Nicholas got.

And I wasn't using my personal belief when I said the original cast was a big factor to the hype of the film, just 1 example for was the Comic Con's reaction when the original cast arrived at the Comic-Con. Comic-Con panel for X-Men Apocalypse didn't top that. And another thing is they were shown in a lot of promotional materials despite your "claim" that they only got "cameo" roles which is not even true. Fox's marketing wouldn't showcase them if they didn't have any pull for the marketing? I'd be just Jennifer Lawrence or the ones that didn't have a "cameo" role, right???

 

[iacobusleo]

Also, a direct comparison of a drama and a blockbuster is deceptive. The better question is "How much would a movie like Joy have made if it *didn't* star Lawrence?"

This. Also consider that X-Men and Hunger Games (the main source of her fanbase) share more similar target audiences as compared to Joy.

I think the issue that I'm seeing on these boards is that some people tend to take polarised attitudes towards things. It's all or nothing. So it's either JLaw's appeal is overrated and the OT cast is the reason why DOFP worked, or the OT cast were just cameos and the FC cast carried the weight of the film. But things are never that black and white. JLaw drew the Hunger Games and the young fans in, the OT played on nostalgia. Both were equally vital to the film's success.

Nobody was arguing that she was the reason. There is no one reason for any film's success. She was a reason.

Basically this.

What is interesting now is how the films will proceed from Apocalypse. You have many longtime X-Men fans who are sick of JLaw and will get their wish once she leaves, but there are also people (usually younger) who will no longer watch the films once she's gone (though honestly this would be a very small minority, all they needed was an introduction to this franchise via JLaw and some of them may have become X-Men fans).

I've also had people come up to me and say that though DOFP was good because of the nostalgia, they're not that keen on seeing the OT cast again (specifically highlighting that they prefer McAvoy and Fassbender as compared to Stewart and McKellan because they're, well, not at their prime).

At the end of the day, what's important is that the film is good. That takes precedence over all else. People will still watch it because it's X-Men. May not make as big bucks as DOFP, but respectable.

 

[RLAAMJR.]

X-men Apocalypse will outgross BvS.

 

[Baba3231]

I can't see that happening even with the reviews as they are.

 

[CaptainCanada]

Yeah, I think the movie will do well, but no way it outgrosses BvS, whatever the difference in quality.

 

[kasjan]

In my country Deadpool outgrossed any other hero movie.

 

[BMM]

I can't see that happening even with the reviews as they are.

Agreed. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen received a rotten rating of 19%, but that didn't stop it from grossing $400 million in the US and $830 million worldwide.

 

[RLAAMJR.]

Agreed. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen received a rotten rating of 19%, but that didn't stop it from grossing $400 million in the US and $830 million worldwide.

It stopped the movie from reaching to a billion dollars though.

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

I doubt that BvS will fall to those levels. Will still be a huge hit at the B.O.

 

[Sithborg]

It stopped the movie from reaching to a billion dollars though.

A billion wasn't as much of a "sure thing" it is now when Revenge of the Fallen released. It did continue the trend of sequels growing from the first movie.

BvS's first weekend is pretty much assured to be amazing, thanks to the marketing. I somehow doubt that the legs will be so terrible that Apocalypse will be able to make up the difference.

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

Even with BvS likely ending up in the 40% + range on RT, I'd still put it's chances at hitting a billion dollars at 85%. Apocalypse will probably receive much stronger acclaim (definitely more important), but I'd put it's chances at reaching that number at 20%

 

[psylockolussus]

Bvs is already at the low 30s. Its not hitting the 40s anymore.

X-men Apocalypse will outgross BvS.

I really hope you don't eat your words but you seem so sure about Apocalypse outgrossing BvS. IMO, thats highly unlikely, given Apocalypse's big competition this summer and lack of IMAX tickets.

 

[kevork89]

So I saw BvS and it certainly has its flaws but I think the rotten score is kind of unfair. I think it belongs somewhere in the high 60s. Gal and Ben were really fantastic and the story was decent enough. The main issue was the editing. It chopped and ruined the flow in some parts. But overall I thought it was good. But the sessions were packed. Oh and here in Sydney our trailers were Huntsman, Apocalypse, Civil War and Suicide Squad. There was a lot of talking after the CW and SS trailers. People excited and murmuring a lot but the best was after the Apocalypse trailer. The theatre was dead silent. And everyone was very loud but the Apocalypse trailer had them silent and it lasted a bit after it ended. I think Apocalypse is gonna do really well.

 

[metaphysician]

Eh, Transformers is more than a bit an outlier. Most movie franchises lack in the same immunity to critical response. They may do better than you'd think relative to their reviews, but almost nobody else has their grosses rises massively while their reviews plummet precipitously.

( And before anybody says "Terminator Genisys", note that even with the unexpectedly strong Chinese performance, it only made like 450M worldwide. Its defiance to quality merely took it up to "profitable", not "Transformers". )

 

[def28]

The big thing with Bat vs Supes imo is that for the past decade Batman films have been top level in reception. There's an expectation with Batman that isn't there with the rest of the DC universe quality wise. Regardless if it isn't as bad as critics say, if this doesn't come close to the level of storytelling audiences have come to expect with Batman then that's not gonna be good.