Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie Musings >> RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 9/2/2013 5:54:08 PM   
directorscut


Posts: 10887
Joined: 30/9/2005
Top Gun back in the US Top 10 twenty seven years later.

Pretty impressive for only 300 screens. The second highest PTA in the top ten.

_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to Dirk Miggler)
Post #: 61
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 10/2/2013 5:02:26 AM   
Deviation


Posts: 27284
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

Willis has had a far more up and down career than Sly or Arnie. Out of the 54 films he's starred in about half of them were outright bombs.


I checked this out. You're right, his career is occasionally a bizarre mix of one or two of the films failing but making out by starring in a blockbuster or something quite accliamed or succesful (then there's 2011, which is just horrific, I also though Hostage was a hit). It's also far more varied then any other actor's here still, the man ranges from Sin City, to Looper, to The Sitxh Sense, to The Whole Nine Yards, to Lucky Number Sleven, to Die Hard, to Moonrise Kingdom. That's still a far wider range and a far bigger chance of a starring role then Stallone and Arnie, who seem to be stuck in in archetypical roles (yes, I know Copland exists).

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 62
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 11/2/2013 9:29:01 AM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19049
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

Top Gun back in the US Top 10 twenty seven years later.

Pretty impressive for only 300 screens. The second highest PTA in the top ten.


BOM has it just outside of the top ten, but still very impressive screen average.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.


(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 63
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 11/2/2013 9:07:45 PM   
azzman1984


Posts: 468
Joined: 24/1/2011
From: Coventry
Not a good time for the action genre at the moment, first The Last Stand flopped and now Bullet To The Head has flopped in the UK http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/movies/news/a456669/les-miserables-retains-uk-box-office-no1-top-10-in-full.html

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 64
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 11/2/2013 9:10:15 PM   
directorscut


Posts: 10887
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44


quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

Top Gun back in the US Top 10 twenty seven years later.

Pretty impressive for only 300 screens. The second highest PTA in the top ten.


BOM has it just outside of the top ten, but still very impressive screen average.


It was in the top ten on Friday.

_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 65
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 16/2/2013 8:44:04 AM   
veejaychuse

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 16/2/2013
Skyfall is the best movie of 2013..i think this movie will be biggest hit movie of 2013..


Watch it Here >>>>http://hdmovieway.blogspot.com

(in reply to Olaf)
Post #: 66
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 17/2/2013 12:17:21 PM   
jackcarter


Posts: 1862
Joined: 12/1/2006
AGDTDH = 25m opening but big foreign box office (80m).

total = 113m already


< Message edited by jackcarter -- 17/2/2013 10:07:58 PM >

(in reply to veejaychuse)
Post #: 67
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 17/2/2013 12:23:05 PM   
ElephantBoy

 

Posts: 8590
Joined: 13/4/2006
I know we still have a lot of big stuff to come, but I wouldn't be suprised if Les Miserables turns out to be the highest grossest film of the year. It spent three weeks at number one (quite rare these days), and is going to stick around for awhile yet.

(in reply to jackcarter)
Post #: 68
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 17/2/2013 4:22:44 PM   
AngryDude92


Posts: 980
Joined: 16/4/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElephantBoy

I know we still have a lot of big stuff to come, but I wouldn't be suprised if Les Miserables turns out to be the highest grossest film of the year. It spent three weeks at number one (quite rare these days), and is going to stick around for awhile yet.

It won't be the biggest, though top 10 is a possibility, My money's on Iron man 3 to be the biggest of the year, with a strong showing from both Thor 2 and maybe The hobbit 2 (Which did better the two towers or fellowship?). Other that those, fast 6, Hunger games 2 and Maybe Man of Steel, there's nothing that rally stands out this year as being a biggy.

_____________________________

There was once a god who walked the earth, his name was Warren Oates

(in reply to ElephantBoy)
Post #: 69
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 18/2/2013 10:00:57 PM   
azzman1984


Posts: 468
Joined: 24/1/2011
From: Coventry
A Good Day to Die Hard has topped the US box office plus it has grossed $37,539,000 in the states alone and $79,600,000 in other territories for a worldwide total of $117,139,000 from a reported $92 million budget.

(in reply to AngryDude92)
Post #: 70
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 22/2/2013 12:57:49 AM   
ElephantBoy

 

Posts: 8590
Joined: 13/4/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: azzman1984

A Good Day to Die Hard has topped the US box office plus it has grossed $37,539,000 in the states alone and $79,600,000 in other territories for a worldwide total of $117,139,000 from a reported $92 million budget.

If that is true I am suprised, but I predict it will flop in the UK. It is opening at a bad time (Oscar season) and is competeing against some very popluar films some of which (Les Mis and Lincoln for example) are more suited for British audiences. I reckon it will go in at about number four, but then quickly drop.

(in reply to azzman1984)
Post #: 71
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 22/2/2013 1:28:42 PM   
directorscut


Posts: 10887
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElephantBoy


quote:

ORIGINAL: azzman1984

A Good Day to Die Hard has topped the US box office plus it has grossed $37,539,000 in the states alone and $79,600,000 in other territories for a worldwide total of $117,139,000 from a reported $92 million budget.

If that is true I am suprised, but I predict it will flop in the UK. It is opening at a bad time (Oscar season) and is competeing against some very popluar films some of which (Les Mis and Lincoln for example) are more suited for British audiences. I reckon it will go in at about number four, but then quickly drop.


It topped the UK charts with $7.5 million - its biggest international opening.

_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to ElephantBoy)
Post #: 72
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 22/2/2013 2:09:09 PM   
ElephantBoy

 

Posts: 8590
Joined: 13/4/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut


quote:

ORIGINAL: ElephantBoy


quote:

ORIGINAL: azzman1984

A Good Day to Die Hard has topped the US box office plus it has grossed $37,539,000 in the states alone and $79,600,000 in other territories for a worldwide total of $117,139,000 from a reported $92 million budget.

If that is true I am suprised, but I predict it will flop in the UK. It is opening at a bad time (Oscar season) and is competeing against some very popluar films some of which (Les Mis and Lincoln for example) are more suited for British audiences. I reckon it will go in at about number four, but then quickly drop.


It topped the UK charts with $7.5 million - its biggest international opening.

Ever or just this year? What the Fuck is up with people?

(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 73
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 3/3/2013 5:45:41 PM   
jackcarter


Posts: 1862
Joined: 12/1/2006
Jack & the beanstalk opens with 28m

okish but Singer probably wouldve been better off doing Battlestar for this summer (or last)




< Message edited by jackcarter -- 3/3/2013 5:54:13 PM >

(in reply to ElephantBoy)
Post #: 74
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 3/3/2013 6:21:03 PM   
directorscut


Posts: 10887
Joined: 30/9/2005
The movie cost $200 million. $28 is far from okish. Bomb city.

_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to jackcarter)
Post #: 75
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 3/3/2013 6:26:10 PM   
jackcarter


Posts: 1862
Joined: 12/1/2006
quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

The movie cost $200 million. $28 is far from okish. Bomb city.



be lucky if it makes that back - although John Carter opened similar and pulled in total 282m due to strong overseas box office (but was still classified a major bomb)

Hobbit breaks $1b - so thats four billion $ hits last year - most in any year so far:

(2008 = 1, 2009 = 1 although the one film made 2.8b, 2010 = 2, 2011 = 3)

wonder how many 2013 will bring? (none according to my estimates )

< Message edited by jackcarter -- 3/3/2013 6:35:32 PM >

(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 76
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 3/3/2013 9:10:05 PM   
directorscut


Posts: 10887
Joined: 30/9/2005
John Carter is the biggest bomb in the history of cinema. It's international box office was almost as poor as its US.

Jack the Giant Slayer may gross even less than John Carter but it will escape the "Biggest bomb of all time" title from costing $100 million less.

_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to jackcarter)
Post #: 77
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 4/3/2013 12:02:35 AM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19049
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

John Carter is the biggest bomb in the history of cinema. It's international box office was almost as poor as its US.

Jack the Giant Slayer may gross even less than John Carter but it will escape the "Biggest bomb of all time" title from costing $100 million less.


John Carter isn't the biggest bomb of all time. It is up there, but still pales next to Mars Needs Moms.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.


(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 78
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 4/3/2013 12:28:38 AM   
directorscut


Posts: 10887
Joined: 30/9/2005
http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/records/budgets.php



That's conservative. Most report it lost $200 million.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/walt-disney-sony-viacom-studios-422487?page=2
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17442200

< Message edited by directorscut -- 4/3/2013 12:29:13 AM >


_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 79
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 4/3/2013 9:33:39 PM   
jackcarter


Posts: 1862
Joined: 12/1/2006
DH5 at 221 ww, wonder if it can struggle to 300? (DH4.0 made 383m in 2007 but it was PG13). will have to pull in a good deal more forgien as it looks to be fizzing out at the 60m mark in US (less than half of 4.0s US take)

seems strange that an off shoot like Taken 2 will make more than a Die Hard (376m)

in hindsight they may as well have cut it to PG13 (like 12A here) in order to get a stronger US gross (maybe 100m).
it felt more like 4.0 part 2 (or 4.2) than anything like the original trilogy, and was half expected due to 4.0s pg rating so it wouldnt have been such a big deal.



(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 80
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 5/3/2013 1:14:58 PM   
DONOVAN KURTWOOD


Posts: 9123
Joined: 6/10/2005
From: PLANET G
quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/records/budgets.php



That's conservative. Most report it lost $200 million.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/walt-disney-sony-viacom-studios-422487?page=2
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17442200


I still can't believe John Carter was that much of a flop (not denying the facts, i just can't believe it flopped so hard). It's kind of fascinating with John Carter as you mention the movie and the name, and no one has ever heard of it! They look back at you blankly. For example, my brother in law, who has a casual interest in movies had no idea what it was and had NEVER heard of it. For a movie that Disney spent about 200M on (if not more) they have failed on a colossal level if Joe Public has never even heard of your movie. He kept thinking we were talking about John Carepenter until i realised his confusion and explained he was thinking of a director. I got the blu ray to show him the cover so he could get some kind of recognition, but no, he'd never seen the name or heard of it before.

Worst marketing ever. It gets draining having to explain what John Carter is and its rich history in terms of the movies that the stories have inspired. I feel like i'm doing Disney's job for them. Why on earth they failed so badly to get this movie into the public mindset is beyond me.

< Message edited by DONOVAN KURTWOOD -- 5/3/2013 1:16:43 PM >


_____________________________

Pack your bags, we're going on a guilt trip!

(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 81
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 5/3/2013 1:42:56 PM   
MonsterCat


Posts: 7934
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire
I'm pretty sure that after The Avengers made all money, Disney forgot they even made John Carter.

I tried to watch some of JC on Sky Movies, but I only got about 45 minutes into it. I decided that watching paint dry was an infinitely more entertaining and pleasurable way to kill a couple of hours.

_____________________________

"I am a writer, a doctor, a nuclear physicist and a theoretical philosopher. But above all, I am a man, a hopelessly inquisitive man, just like you."

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to DONOVAN KURTWOOD)
Post #: 82
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 5/3/2013 1:45:00 PM   
jackcarter


Posts: 1862
Joined: 12/1/2006
quote:

ORIGINAL: DONOVAN KURTWOOD

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/records/budgets.php



That's conservative. Most report it lost $200 million.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/walt-disney-sony-viacom-studios-422487?page=2
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17442200


I still can't believe John Carter was that much of a flop (not denying the facts, i just can't believe it flopped so hard). It's kind of fascinating with John Carter as you mention the movie and the name, and no one has ever heard of it! They look back at you blankly. For example, my brother in law, who has a casual interest in movies had no idea what it was and had NEVER heard of it. For a movie that Disney spent about 200M on (if not more) they have failed on a colossal level if Joe Public has never even heard of your movie. He kept thinking we were talking about John Carepenter until i realised his confusion and explained he was thinking of a director. I got the blu ray to show him the cover so he could get some kind of recognition, but no, he'd never seen the name or heard of it before.

Worst marketing ever. It gets draining having to explain what John Carter is and its rich history in terms of the movies that the stories have inspired. I feel like i'm doing Disney's job for them. Why on earth they failed so badly to get this movie into the public mindset is beyond me.


maybe they shouldve put aside the fear of having Mars in the title and just gone with A Princess of Mars (youd have thought Disney wouldve jumped at that), or John Carter of Mars.
at least that way the average movie goer wouldve known it was a Sci Fi film and not some drama like Michael Clayton or the belated sequel to Get Carter or Coach Carter, to call it simply John Carter was ridiculous (like calling Star Wars 'Luke Skywalker' - but at least that would be an unusual interesting name)

also the main poster was incredibly dull :
http://www.moviegoods.com/Assets/product_images/1020/548061.1020.A.jpg

they couldve had something more pulpy star wars style or at least used this one:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/coolproduction/ckeditor_assets/pictures/5681/original/JCMondoImax.jpeg?1329859205


< Message edited by jackcarter -- 5/3/2013 1:46:16 PM >

(in reply to DONOVAN KURTWOOD)
Post #: 83
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 5/3/2013 1:45:59 PM   
DONOVAN KURTWOOD


Posts: 9123
Joined: 6/10/2005
From: PLANET G

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

I'm pretty sure that after The Avengers made all money, Disney forgot they even made John Carter.

I tried to watch some of JC on Sky Movies, but I only got about 45 minutes into it. I decided that watching paint dry was an infinitely more entertaining and pleasurable way to kill a couple of hours.


Wow i would rather watch even the most boring movie ever made than watch paint dry. Each to their own though

_____________________________

Pack your bags, we're going on a guilt trip!

(in reply to MonsterCat)
Post #: 84
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 5/3/2013 1:47:18 PM   
DONOVAN KURTWOOD


Posts: 9123
Joined: 6/10/2005
From: PLANET G

quote:

ORIGINAL: jackcarter

quote:

ORIGINAL: DONOVAN KURTWOOD

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/records/budgets.php



That's conservative. Most report it lost $200 million.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/walt-disney-sony-viacom-studios-422487?page=2
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17442200


I still can't believe John Carter was that much of a flop (not denying the facts, i just can't believe it flopped so hard). It's kind of fascinating with John Carter as you mention the movie and the name, and no one has ever heard of it! They look back at you blankly. For example, my brother in law, who has a casual interest in movies had no idea what it was and had NEVER heard of it. For a movie that Disney spent about 200M on (if not more) they have failed on a colossal level if Joe Public has never even heard of your movie. He kept thinking we were talking about John Carepenter until i realised his confusion and explained he was thinking of a director. I got the blu ray to show him the cover so he could get some kind of recognition, but no, he'd never seen the name or heard of it before.

Worst marketing ever. It gets draining having to explain what John Carter is and its rich history in terms of the movies that the stories have inspired. I feel like i'm doing Disney's job for them. Why on earth they failed so badly to get this movie into the public mindset is beyond me.


maybe they shouldve put aside the fear of having Mars in the title and just gone with A Princess of Mars (youd have thought Disney wouldve jumped at that), or John Carter of Mars.
at least that way the average movie goer wouldve known it was a Sci Fi film and not some drama like Michael Clayton or the belated sequel to Get Carter or Coach Carter, to call it simply John Carter was ridiculous (like calling Star Wars 'Luke Skywalker' - but at least that would be an unusual interesting name)

also the main poster was incredibly dull :
http://www.moviegoods.com/Assets/product_images/1020/548061.1020.A.jpg

they couldve had something more pulpy star wars style or at least used this one:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/coolproduction/ckeditor_assets/pictures/5681/original/JCMondoImax.jpeg?1329859205



Agree with all of the above. I just can't understand why they didn't handle that huge investment better. I mean, seriously. I have to go through the whole 'yes it looks exactly like Star Wars but the story came before Star Wars' line all the time!

_____________________________

Pack your bags, we're going on a guilt trip!

(in reply to jackcarter)
Post #: 85
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 5/3/2013 1:53:04 PM   
MonsterCat


Posts: 7934
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire
quote:

ORIGINAL: DONOVAN KURTWOOD


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

I'm pretty sure that after The Avengers made all money, Disney forgot they even made John Carter.

I tried to watch some of JC on Sky Movies, but I only got about 45 minutes into it. I decided that watching paint dry was an infinitely more entertaining and pleasurable way to kill a couple of hours.


Wow i would rather watch even the most boring movie ever made than watch paint dry. Each to their own though


To be fair, it might have gotten better after those 45 minutes but I just don't care enough to find out. Hence why I won't write a badly written review for it.


_____________________________

"I am a writer, a doctor, a nuclear physicist and a theoretical philosopher. But above all, I am a man, a hopelessly inquisitive man, just like you."

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to DONOVAN KURTWOOD)
Post #: 86
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 6/3/2013 10:27:19 AM   
spark1

 

Posts: 6985
Joined: 18/11/2006
guardian on how international box office helps a struggling blockbuster-


http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2013/mar/05/action-sequels-hit-beyond-us

(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 87
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 6/3/2013 2:34:48 PM   
Hood_Man


Posts: 12182
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: DONOVAN KURTWOOD


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

I'm pretty sure that after The Avengers made all money, Disney forgot they even made John Carter.

I tried to watch some of JC on Sky Movies, but I only got about 45 minutes into it. I decided that watching paint dry was an infinitely more entertaining and pleasurable way to kill a couple of hours.


Wow i would rather watch even the most boring movie ever made than watch paint dry. Each to their own though

If it was gloss I'd agree with you, that stuff takes forever to dry.

(in reply to DONOVAN KURTWOOD)
Post #: 88
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 7/3/2013 5:05:28 PM   
azzman1984


Posts: 468
Joined: 24/1/2011
From: Coventry
Heres the current top 20 highest grossing films of 2013 so far


1 A Good Day to Die Hard Fox $223.1
2 Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters Par. $181.4
3 Identity Thief Uni. $110.5
4 Mama Uni. $104.8
5 Gangster Squad WB $99.0
6 Warm Bodies LG/S $89.6
7 From Up on Poppy Hill GK $60.0
8 Safe Haven Rela. $58.1
9 Beautiful Creatures (2013) WB $45.3
10 Escape From Planet Earth Wein. $45.3
11 Jack the Giant Slayer WB (NL) $44.7
12 Quartet Wein. $41.7
13 A Haunted House ORF $40.0
14 Texas Chainsaw 3D LGF $34.3
15 The Last Stand LGF $31.3
16 Side Effects (2013) ORF $28.4
17 Snitch LG/S $25.7
18 Movie 43 Rela. $23.1
19 22 Bullets Cdgm. $21.3
20 Broken City Fox $19.6

(in reply to Hood_Man)
Post #: 89
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 8/3/2013 4:02:49 PM   
jackcarter


Posts: 1862
Joined: 12/1/2006
Oz wkend predictions? (US only)

BOmojo is saying 90-100m but that seems abit high.

will go with 70m tops

(in reply to azzman1984)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie Musings >> RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Movie News|Empire Blog|Movie Reviews|Future Films|Features|Video Interviews|Image Gallery|Competitions|Forum|Magazine|Resources
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.156