X3 Box Office Tracker

ntcrawler said:
Not necessarily. In Star Wars, fans accepted Ben Kenobi's and Quigon Jinn's death. In X2 they accepted Jean's death. Fans accepted death in the Alien trilogy, in the Terminator films, in Predator, and a host of other films. It all depends on how that death is set up, and whether it serves a purpose or has an effect on the plot, or whether it was just done for the hell of it. All those factors make a BIG difference.

Ben Kenobi died in the very first Star Wars film...there really wasn't a fanbase at the time to be in an uproar about it. Same with Qui-Gon...he died in the first prequel, and again...didn't have that much of a fanbase to be that upset about it. We all knew he must have died before Episode IV.

As far as "Alien"...I saw "Alien 3" opening night in the theater, and people in the audience booed when they found out Newt died in the crash, and again at the autopsy scene--and these were guys doing the booing.

It was absolutely pointless--they did it just to get rid of the character. She was everything Ripley fought for in "Aliens". And they just tossed away the character and the entire point of the 2nd movie.

You can argue that it was the same thing with Cyclops, but it's different. You didn't have to read a comic book or watch a cartoon to know who Newt was, she only existed in that 2nd film which everyone coming back for the 3rd film had seen. There was a connection there.

Cyclops was MIA for most of X2. The general audience didn't have that connection. X-Men was a rare comic book movie that attracted a big crowd that was unfamiliar with the comics, so killing him off wasn't as controversial outside the regular fanbase.
 
danoyse said:
Another thing with POTC, is that it's probably got the widest reaching audience. Families, couples...that teenage Orlando Bloom-obsessed crowd. Must more than a typical comic book audience.

Don't forget the Jhonny crowd :p :D


Iceman/Psylocke said:
I don't disagree with that. What I meant above is that factors such as the lack of development of certain characters and deaths of major characters would not be as much of an issue to the general audience as to fans of the source material. Unbothered by any of these and related factors, they can enjoy the film a lot more. Fans will never like deaths for example, even when handled well, as they rule out favourites from future films.

Besides the lack of character development am i the only who noticed that the characters didn't really potray themselves, i don't mean accent's and all that. I mean actual DAM PERSONALITIES!! that's what matters here. Movie Peter was ComicBook Peter, Movie Bats was CB Bats, HELL EVEN HULK, DD, and F4. All of them potrayed the same ppl, personalities, and characterisitcs. (SR wasn't that much of CB SUP-Man but he was dam close)IMO. In the X-Men films they started of rocky but it was ok it got better......and IT PLUNGED!! Practically non of the characters where themselves. Some where like that from the beginning like Bobby and Rogue. But Rogue made a change and then BAM took a wrong turn. Those who where like themselves in X2 wheren't in X3. The exceptions where maybe Prof. X, Magneto, Mystique, and Beast.
 
danoyse said:
Ben Kenobi died in the very first Star Wars film...there really wasn't a fanbase at the time to be in an uproar about it. Same with Qui-Gon...he died in the first prequel, and again...didn't have that much of a fanbase to be that upset about it. We all knew he must have died before Episode IV.

As far as "Alien"...I saw "Alien 3" opening night in the theater, and people in the audience booed when they found out Newt died in the crash, and again at the autopsy scene--and these were guys doing the booing.

It was absolutely pointless--they did it just to get rid of the character. She was everything Ripley fought for in "Aliens". And they just tossed away the character and the entire point of the 2nd movie.

You can argue that it was the same thing with Cyclops, but it's different. You didn't have to read a comic book or watch a cartoon to know who Newt was, she only existed in that 2nd film which everyone coming back for the 3rd film had seen. There was a connection there.

Cyclops was MIA for most of X2. The general audience didn't have that connection. X-Men was a rare comic book movie that attracted a big crowd that was unfamiliar with the comics, so killing him off wasn't as controversial outside the regular fanbase.

with all the better reasons that what they did was wrong. With over 30 years of history it was something you didn't expect. It goods story telling and adds drama ppl say .........that's so cliche it's been done and when it's done again with a character that has a huge GA (general audience) fanbase THEN it's unforgivable. Yes i understand the GA didn't know much about Cyclops but there where alot of ppl that did, who thought....wth, did they just kill of the leader? im not sayint this is the movies biggest flaw but it's been stressed more than enough that it was soooooo not cool :(
 
ntcrawler said:
Not necessarily. In Star Wars, fans accepted Ben Kenobi's and Quigon Jinn's death. In X2 they accepted Jean's death. Fans accepted death in the Alien trilogy, in the Terminator films, in Predator, and a host of other films. It all depends on how that death is set up, and whether it serves a purpose or has an effect on the plot, or whether it was just done for the hell of it. All those factors make a BIG difference.
Just to clear this up, I’m talking premature death of key characters.

Qui-Gon Jinn as far as I know isn't a big character even now amongst Star Wars fans. I think Darth Maul was missed more. Kenobi obviously is but he returned in all 5 of the other films in some form.

Jean’s death was justified as being the precursor to Dark Phoenix. If there was to be no Dark Phoenix, I doubt fans would have accepted that sacrifice out of the blue. I can’t speak for everyone but the death would have seemed very pointless to me.

In Alien/Predator, I only regard Weaver's and Schwarzenegger’s characters as key with all others (even Newt although that also seemed a waste) serving as legitimate Alien/Predator fodder. The killing of the majority of the cast is par for the course in horror/hunting to the death type film settings.

To lose key characters like Cyclops early with absolutely no emotional weight and ruling him out of future films is something that hurts those with knowledge of the source material a lot more than non fans who probably don’t regard Cyke as a key character. But I accept that a one off death can be forgiven by fans even if it rules out that character from future films if the death scene is poignant enough to compensate for this and if the character has already had ample opportunity to show enough of his strengths. The death of Arnie in T2 is a good example of this.
 
gambitfire said:
Besides the lack of character development am i the only who noticed that the characters didn't really potray themselves, i don't mean accent's and all that. I mean actual DAM PERSONALITIES!! that's what matters here. Movie Peter was ComicBook Peter, Movie Bats was CB Bats, HELL EVEN HULK, DD, and F4. All of them potrayed the same ppl, personalities, and characterisitcs. (SR wasn't that much of CB SUP-Man but he was dam close)IMO. In the X-Men films they started of rocky but it was ok it got better......and IT PLUNGED!! Practically non of the characters where themselves. Some where like that from the beginning like Bobby and Rogue. But Rogue made a change and then BAM took a wrong turn. Those who where like themselves in X2 wheren't in X3. The exceptions where maybe Prof. X, Magneto, Mystique, and Beast.
There was a lot of "flexibility" with this. Although some of the characters were correctly portrayed many others were changed (some drastically) to serve various plot points etc. :(
 
Updated numbers. X3 should cross 440 million worldwide by monday.
China and Japan are the only countries where it hasn't been released.Though a release in China is still uncertain.


X-MEN:
THE LAST STAND


Total as of Jul. 27, 2006


TOTAL LIFETIME GROSSES
Domestic: $233,115,252 53.0%
+ Foreign: $206,811,344 47.0%

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

= Worldwide: $439,926,596
Source: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=x3.htm
 
It's moving by about $2 a day now :p until it opens in Japan.

I hate how comic book films always seem to make less abroad than generic action films. :(
 
hmmmm..... I wonder now if Cars will actualy catch X3 as the number 2 movie of this year... at any rate it will be either a slim 2nd or a close 3rd in this Summer movies line ups.


A very nice place quite a bit higher then X2.
 
Weadazoid said:
hmmmm..... I wonder now if Cars will actualy catch X3 as the number 2 movie of this year... at any rate it will be either a slim 2nd or a close 3rd in this Summer movies line ups.


A very nice place quite a bit higher then X2.
Domestically Cars is assured of overtaking X3. It's only about $1m behind and is making more than half that per day (non weekend) at the moment.
 
gambitfire said:
In the X-Men films they started of rocky but it was ok it got better......and IT PLUNGED!!

Yes, especially Rogue. She went back to the panicky little kid she was at the start of X1. So much for growing up, gaining confidence and feeling accepted and being able to contribute to her new family. Where did the spunk and heart go? Someone blew her fuse.

Practically non of the characters where themselves. Some where like that from the beginning like Bobby and Rogue. But Rogue made a change and then BAM took a wrong turn. Those who where like themselves in X2 wheren't in X3. The exceptions where maybe Prof. X, Magneto, Mystique, and Beast.

I disagree with Prof X. In X1 and X2 he's seen as a fatherly figure, experienced, wise, patient. In X3 it turns out he's arrogant and controlling, talking down to people, and then he turns panicky when it comes to Jean. He knows exactly what the dangers are but doesn't bother to explain them to anyone. He knows what needs to be done, and the importance of keeping Jean calm and focused, but instead does exactly the opposite and sets her off on a rampage at her house. And his whole attitude towards Scott. He'll get help when he's ready? And that's it?
 
Iceman/Psylocke said:
Jean’s death was justified as being the precursor to Dark Phoenix. If there was to be no Dark Phoenix, I doubt fans would have accepted that sacrifice out of the blue. I can’t speak for everyone but the death would have seemed very pointless to me.


I agree but I think you're jumping just a little too fastt here. Jean's death was justified as being a precursor to Phoenix. Dark Phoenix is not supposed to be the direct result of her death and resurrection, or as a result of her powers, but something that was done to her later and for unnatural reasons. In fact there are other ways to portray Dark Phoenix besides mental blocks or mental manipulation by the Hellfire club that would have fit nicely into the context of the film and given you a frighteningly powerful, destructive character but with a touch of humanity remaining inside add to the conflict.


To lose key characters like Cyclops early with absolutely no emotional weight and ruling him out of future films is something that hurts those with knowledge of the source material a lot more than non fans who probably don’t regard Cyke as a key character. But I accept that a one off death can be forgiven by fans even if it rules out that character from future films if the death scene is poignant enough to compensate for this and if the character has already had ample opportunity to show enough of his strengths. The death of Arnie in T2 is a good example of this.

Exactly. And Cyclops' demise served neither purpose. It didn't contribute to the plot, it wasn't due to him performing some heroic feat or being in character, and there was absolutely no emotional weight at all. Certainly no one except Jean even hinted at missing him or being upset, and he didn't even get a funeral. Everyones' mourning the loss of Xavier but no one missed Scott or bothered to give him a grave, even though by that point he's understood by the Xavier household to be "dead". In fact, his death wasn't even clearly established or shown, and the events leading up to his final demise gave no hint that his encounter with Jean at Alkali Lake was to end up being fatal in the first place. It was due politics at the studio but had no reasonable explanation or motivation within the context of the film's plot. It happened so fast that most of the people I talked to didn't even understand what happened or took place, and were later in disbelief to hear other characters suggest that he was dead.
 
The writers did that on purpose to show that he isn't as perfect as everyone thinks he is.
 
My Red Sight said:
The writers did that on purpose to show that he isn't as perfect as everyone thinks he is.

You can only go so far with this before it becomes unbelievable.
 
AznBABYBANDIT said:
i understand but why not show it gradually in the film? it just zoomed right there.

Because the return of Jean forced his hand, made him admit what he had done. It gives another side to his personality, that he isn't Mr Perfect...
 
ntcrawler said:
I agree but I think you're jumping just a little too fastt here. Jean's death was justified as being a precursor to Phoenix. Dark Phoenix is not supposed to be the direct result of her death and resurrection, or as a result of her powers, but something that was done to her later and for unnatural reasons. In fact there are other ways to portray Dark Phoenix besides mental blocks or mental manipulation by the Hellfire club that would have fit nicely into the context of the film and given you a frighteningly powerful, destructive character but with a touch of humanity remaining inside add to the conflict.
[/color]
Yeah the key thing is that there was an explanation for fans that Jean's otherwise unnecessary death had a point to it.

ntcrawler said:
Exactly. And Cyclops' demise served neither purpose. It didn't contribute to the plot, it wasn't due to him performing some heroic feat or being in character, and there was absolutely no emotional weight at all. Certainly no one except Jean even hinted at missing him or being upset, and he didn't even get a funeral. Everyones' mourning the loss of Xavier but no one missed Scott or bothered to give him a grave, even though by that point he's understood by the Xavier household to be "dead". In fact, his death wasn't even clearly established or shown, and the events leading up to his final demise gave no hint that his encounter with Jean at Alkali Lake was to end up being fatal in the first place. It was due politics at the studio but had no reasonable explanation or motivation within the context of the film's plot. It happened so fast that most of the people I talked to didn't even understand what happened or took place, and were later in disbelief to hear other characters suggest that he was dead.
All true. :up: The only evidence for Scott's death is that gravestone near the end when all three are lined up next to each other. Without that they could have easily brought him back if required. If only... :(
 
but still, they haven't found the body........and remember what rothman said, now that Phoenix "died" everything could be reverted back.......
 
well they just made $24 million from FX buying X-men the Last Stand rights! They are already making a sh1tload of money
 
obeastdyke said:
well they just made $24 million from FX buying X-men the Last Stand rights! They are already making a sh1tload of money

GO MARVEL franchises. :up: :)

and FOX u better start working on X4 and give us an awesome F4-2.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"