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  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 2/6/2013 9:25:16 PM   
Shifty Bench

 

Posts: 15398
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Land of the Scots
It's as though Cool Breeze has been ignoring the phrase 'it is the domestic numbers that are important' for the past few pages.

_____________________________

Extended Edition Podcast- Episode 46:Threads Of Destiny (Star Wars Fan Film)

(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 211
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 2/6/2013 10:43:15 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19049
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park
The movie still isn't doing great international box office. It is currently at 20M more than the last one, and might, just might, hit 200M international. In this day and age, that ain't amazing.



_____________________________

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 Shifty Bench)
Post #: 212
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 3/6/2013 2:06:58 PM   
spark1

 

Posts: 7026
Joined: 18/11/2006
paramount will be happy it will do $200mil domestic and are bound to greenlight trek XIII.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 213
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 3/6/2013 4:37:34 PM   
Cool Breeze


Posts: 2351
Joined: 9/11/2011
From: The Internet

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

The movie still isn't doing great international box office. It is currently at 20M more than the last one, and might, just might, hit 200M international. In this day and age, that ain't amazing.




The movie has actually done terrific international box office.An increase of 80% on the last film.According to box office mojo it is now outperforming Trek '09 than that film did in the same space of time four years ago.It will most likely hit over 200 million domestic.That is a terrific success no matter which way you cut it.It was never going to hit Avengers numbers, especially given the competition it was up against this time.For Star Trek it is an amazing performance especially compared to the TNG films.

I know you didnt really like the film Rgirvan but the film is far from a failure and has proven to have had strong legs at the box office due to good word of mouth.We certainly havnt seen the last of this crew and there is the 50th anniversary coming up in a few years time....

_____________________________

'' Iv played Oskar Schindler, Michael Collins, Rob Roy Mcgregor, even ZEUS for gods sake! No one is going to believe me to be a green grocer! ''

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 214
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 3/6/2013 4:41:56 PM   
Shifty Bench

 

Posts: 15398
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Land of the Scots
Cool Breeze, you must remember that this film was in 3D and Imax, both of which costs more than 2D, which the first film was. This means less people are have been to see it, therefore, while it is not a failure, it has still underperformed. It still should have made more than it is.

_____________________________

Extended Edition Podcast- Episode 46:Threads Of Destiny (Star Wars Fan Film)

(in reply to Cool Breeze)
Post #: 215
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 3/6/2013 4:52:17 PM   
Rob


Posts: 2473
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

The movie still isn't doing great international box office. It is currently at 20M more than the last one, and might, just might, hit 200M international. In this day and age, that ain't amazing.




The movie has actually done terrific international box office.An increase of 80% on the last film.According to box office mojo it is now outperforming Trek '09 than that film did in the same space of time four years ago.It will most likely hit over 200 million domestic.That is a terrific success no matter which way you cut it.It was never going to hit Avengers numbers, especially given the competition it was up against this time.For Star Trek it is an amazing performance especially compared to the TNG films.

I know you didnt really like the film Rgirvan but the film is far from a failure and has proven to have had strong legs at the box office due to good word of mouth.We certainly havnt seen the last of this crew and there is the 50th anniversary coming up in a few years time....


I say this as someone that loved the film and dearly hopes that we get a future installment...it's a bit of a disappointment in terms of revenue.

$200 domestic is all well and good but the production budget was $190 million, the marketing budget would have been significant and the studio obviously doesn't get 100% of the box office.

The rule of thumb is that a film of this scale needs to make 2 or 3 times it's budget back in order to break even. Ultimately it will probably turn a small profit but the question is will Paramount greenlight a sequel on the promise of another small profit down the line.

Unfortunately the film simply can not be classed as a great success in terms of revenue no matter how good it is.


_____________________________

Same thing happened to me when I played Neil Armstrong in Moonshot. They found me in an alley in Burbank trying to re-enter the earth's atmosphere in an old refrigerator box.

(in reply to Cool Breeze)
Post #: 216
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 3/6/2013 4:54:34 PM   
Cool Breeze


Posts: 2351
Joined: 9/11/2011
From: The Internet

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

Cool Breeze, you must remember that this film was in 3D and Imax, both of which costs more than 2D, which the first film was. This means less people are have been to see it, therefore, while it is not a failure, it has still underperformed. It still should have made more than it is.


Maybe people opted to see it in proper 2D instead of all that 3D nonsense.

Less people have been to see it because it was released in between a post Avengers Iron Man 3 and a post Fast Five Fast 6.The last film didnt have such strong competition.Despite all that it has still proven to have had strong legs at the box office.I remember a few weeks ago people were predicting a disappearing act for the film after the opening weekend because of Fast 6 and Hangover 3 being released the following week.As it turns out,Its Hangover 3 which seems to be the one going down the tubes.

Bloody hell, no one seems to be impressed unless you make a billion dollars these days!

_____________________________

'' Iv played Oskar Schindler, Michael Collins, Rob Roy Mcgregor, even ZEUS for gods sake! No one is going to believe me to be a green grocer! ''

(in reply to Shifty Bench)
Post #: 217
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 3/6/2013 4:59:53 PM   
Cool Breeze


Posts: 2351
Joined: 9/11/2011
From: The Internet
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rob


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

The movie still isn't doing great international box office. It is currently at 20M more than the last one, and might, just might, hit 200M international. In this day and age, that ain't amazing.




The movie has actually done terrific international box office.An increase of 80% on the last film.According to box office mojo it is now outperforming Trek '09 than that film did in the same space of time four years ago.It will most likely hit over 200 million domestic.That is a terrific success no matter which way you cut it.It was never going to hit Avengers numbers, especially given the competition it was up against this time.For Star Trek it is an amazing performance especially compared to the TNG films.

I know you didnt really like the film Rgirvan but the film is far from a failure and has proven to have had strong legs at the box office due to good word of mouth.We certainly havnt seen the last of this crew and there is the 50th anniversary coming up in a few years time....


I say this as someone that loved the film and dearly hopes that we get a future installment...it's a bit of a disappointment in terms of revenue.

$200 domestic is all well and good but the production budget was $190 million, the marketing budget would have been significant and the studio obviously doesn't get 100% of the box office.

The rule of thumb is that a film of this scale needs to make 2 or 3 times it's budget back in order to break even. Ultimately it will probably turn a small profit but the question is will Paramount greenlight a sequel on the promise of another small profit down the line.

Unfortunately the film simply can not be classed as a great success in terms of revenue no matter how good it is.



Well by those standards Star Trek '09 was a failure cos it grossed $350 million on a $150 million budget.So the film didnt make a HUGE profit.Yet the sequel was greenlit almost immediately.

And I hate to sound like a broken record but the film has done MUCH better internationally than the last film and has only grossed slightly less than the last domestically because of the huge competition it was up against this time.And STID is now altogether outgrossing the last film cumulatively speaking ( Dont give me any of that '' oh only domestic counts '' cos money is money no matter where it comes from ).

Im sure paramount would have liked it to perform even better but thats what they get for taking four years for getting the film out by letting JJ make his Cloverfield for kids movie and releasing it during one of the most competitive movie summers in many years.



< Message edited by Cool Breeze -- 3/6/2013 5:06:32 PM >


_____________________________

'' Iv played Oskar Schindler, Michael Collins, Rob Roy Mcgregor, even ZEUS for gods sake! No one is going to believe me to be a green grocer! ''

(in reply to Rob)
Post #: 218
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 3/6/2013 5:00:59 PM   
Rob


Posts: 2473
Joined: 30/9/2005
Unfortunately though, again pointing out I loved the film, it's all about the cash for the studios. No matter how great the film was, no matter how much you, and I, want it to be successful in my opinion the film has to be considered a slight disappoint purely on box-office terms.

I think Paramount would have been expecting a figure in the region $500 million but obviously hoping for more.

_____________________________

Same thing happened to me when I played Neil Armstrong in Moonshot. They found me in an alley in Burbank trying to re-enter the earth's atmosphere in an old refrigerator box.

(in reply to Cool Breeze)
Post #: 219
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 3/6/2013 5:01:31 PM   
Shifty Bench

 

Posts: 15398
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Land of the Scots
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

Cool Breeze, you must remember that this film was in 3D and Imax, both of which costs more than 2D, which the first film was. This means less people are have been to see it, therefore, while it is not a failure, it has still underperformed. It still should have made more than it is.


Maybe people opted to see it in proper 2D instead of all that 3D nonsense.

Less people have been to see it because it was released in between a post Avengers Iron Man 3 and a post Fast Five Fast 6.The last film didnt have such strong competition.Despite all that it has still proven to have had strong legs at the box office.I remember a few weeks ago people were predicting a disappearing act for the film after the opening weekend because of Fast 6 and Hangover 3 being released the following week.As it turns out,Its Hangover 3 which seems to be the one going down the tubes.

Bloody hell, no one seems to be impressed unless you make a billion dollars these days!


No,you are missing the point. You claim the film is 'a terrific success' because it has made almost $200m domestic but considering it cost around that much to make, it isn't a success at all. You just don't seem to be able to grasp this, despite how many people tell you. It doesn't have to make a billion, but it still needs to make a lot more than it is right now. It was expected to make more than the original compared to its budget and it isn't doing that. A sequel has to outdo the original to be a success.

< Message edited by Shifty Bench -- 3/6/2013 5:03:19 PM >


_____________________________

Extended Edition Podcast- Episode 46:Threads Of Destiny (Star Wars Fan Film)

(in reply to Cool Breeze)
Post #: 220
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 3/6/2013 5:06:25 PM   
Rob


Posts: 2473
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rob


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

The movie still isn't doing great international box office. It is currently at 20M more than the last one, and might, just might, hit 200M international. In this day and age, that ain't amazing.




The movie has actually done terrific international box office.An increase of 80% on the last film.According to box office mojo it is now outperforming Trek '09 than that film did in the same space of time four years ago.It will most likely hit over 200 million domestic.That is a terrific success no matter which way you cut it.It was never going to hit Avengers numbers, especially given the competition it was up against this time.For Star Trek it is an amazing performance especially compared to the TNG films.

I know you didnt really like the film Rgirvan but the film is far from a failure and has proven to have had strong legs at the box office due to good word of mouth.We certainly havnt seen the last of this crew and there is the 50th anniversary coming up in a few years time....


I say this as someone that loved the film and dearly hopes that we get a future installment...it's a bit of a disappointment in terms of revenue.

$200 domestic is all well and good but the production budget was $190 million, the marketing budget would have been significant and the studio obviously doesn't get 100% of the box office.

The rule of thumb is that a film of this scale needs to make 2 or 3 times it's budget back in order to break even. Ultimately it will probably turn a small profit but the question is will Paramount greenlight a sequel on the promise of another small profit down the line.

Unfortunately the film simply can not be classed as a great success in terms of revenue no matter how good it is.



Well by those standards Star Trek '09 was a failure cos it grossed $350 million on a $150 million budget.So the film didnt make a HUGE profit.Yet the sequel was greenlit almost immediately.




It actually grossed $385 million against a budget of $150 million (so approximate total budget of $300) giving Paramount a not to shabby $85 million profit for relaunching a franchise. With those figures of course a sequel was greenlit.

This time around we're looking at $380 million to break even and it's currently on $328 million so in order to match the success of part one in needs to make an additional another $137 million to give a profit of $85 million.

All this figures are estimates and Hollywood is notorious for is rather flexible accounting system. I really really want a sequel but I honestly think it will be touch and go.


_____________________________

Same thing happened to me when I played Neil Armstrong in Moonshot. They found me in an alley in Burbank trying to re-enter the earth's atmosphere in an old refrigerator box.

(in reply to Cool Breeze)
Post #: 221
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 3/6/2013 5:06:39 PM   
jackcarter


Posts: 1870
Joined: 12/1/2006
maybe Star Trek should do its own Avengers type film combining Shatner/Nimoy and some of TNG cast with the JJ cast for the 50th anniversary to compete with all the team up movies and hit the bigger BO numbers

ST09/STID took off from the Batman/Bond reboots & sequels so maybe they should look to the team up films like Avengers/F&F for the next one

(in reply to Cool Breeze)
Post #: 222
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 3/6/2013 5:10:13 PM   
Cool Breeze


Posts: 2351
Joined: 9/11/2011
From: The Internet

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

Cool Breeze, you must remember that this film was in 3D and Imax, both of which costs more than 2D, which the first film was. This means less people are have been to see it, therefore, while it is not a failure, it has still underperformed. It still should have made more than it is.


Maybe people opted to see it in proper 2D instead of all that 3D nonsense.

Less people have been to see it because it was released in between a post Avengers Iron Man 3 and a post Fast Five Fast 6.The last film didnt have such strong competition.Despite all that it has still proven to have had strong legs at the box office.I remember a few weeks ago people were predicting a disappearing act for the film after the opening weekend because of Fast 6 and Hangover 3 being released the following week.As it turns out,Its Hangover 3 which seems to be the one going down the tubes.

Bloody hell, no one seems to be impressed unless you make a billion dollars these days!


No,you are missing the point. You claim the film is 'a terrific success' because it has made almost $200m domestic but considering it cost around that much to make, it isn't a success at all. You just don't seem to be able to grasp this, despite how many people tell you. It doesn't have to make a billion, but it still needs to make a lot more than it is right now. It was expected to make more than the original compared to its budget and it isn't doing that. A sequel has to outdo the original to be a success.


Well by those standards, George Lucas wouldnt have made Revenge Of The Sith given that Attack Of The Clones made a lot less than The Phantom Menace.And there are many other examples of sequels making less than their predecessors but still further sequels are made.

_____________________________

'' Iv played Oskar Schindler, Michael Collins, Rob Roy Mcgregor, even ZEUS for gods sake! No one is going to believe me to be a green grocer! ''

(in reply to Shifty Bench)
Post #: 223
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 3/6/2013 5:19:47 PM   
Shifty Bench

 

Posts: 15398
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Land of the Scots
Sigh. Paramount wanted STID to make a certain amount of money. This amount of money has to be more than the first film in the comparison of budget and profit. STID is not doing that therefore a third film is not guaranteed.

We get it, you like the film but it's not the success you are making it out to be. It's currently not close.

_____________________________

Extended Edition Podcast- Episode 46:Threads Of Destiny (Star Wars Fan Film)

(in reply to Cool Breeze)
Post #: 224
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 3/6/2013 5:30:25 PM   
Cool Breeze


Posts: 2351
Joined: 9/11/2011
From: The Internet
I just found out that After Earth is an M. Night Shymalan film.

Up until now i had no idea cos the trailers didnt advertise this at all.Is this a sign that studios are finally aware that this hacks name is no longer is a draw to movie goers and is in fact now most likely to put people off?

Its certainly changed my mind about seeing it ( Along with the fact that i think it looks like total rubbish ).

It also just broke Will Smiths winning streak of number one summer openings.Debuted at no.02 and the signs are that its not going to last long ( Maybe people are tired of Smiths nepotism by trying to make his son a star ).

_____________________________

'' Iv played Oskar Schindler, Michael Collins, Rob Roy Mcgregor, even ZEUS for gods sake! No one is going to believe me to be a green grocer! ''

(in reply to Shifty Bench)
Post #: 225
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 4/6/2013 2:45:19 PM   
spark1

 

Posts: 7026
Joined: 18/11/2006
quote:

The rule of thumb is that a film of this scale needs to make 2 or 3 times it's budget back in order to break even.


it is no longer the case that you have make that back domestically. the international gross can save a blockbuster and bring it into profit.

(in reply to Cool Breeze)
Post #: 226
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 4/6/2013 3:02:02 PM   
Rob


Posts: 2473
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: spark1

quote:

The rule of thumb is that a film of this scale needs to make 2 or 3 times it's budget back in order to break even.


it is no longer the case that you have make that back domestically. the international gross can save a blockbuster and bring it into profit.


I never said domestically though - I'm talking total worldwide gross. I appreciate t's not an exact accounting method but it still holds.

STID cost $190 million to make. By the rule above it needs to make approx $400 million to break even (worldwide total) and obviously more to make a decent profit. It currently has $328 million worldwide so roughly $70 million away from breaking even and probably $170 million away from making a decent enough profit for Paramount to consider another sequel.

_____________________________

Same thing happened to me when I played Neil Armstrong in Moonshot. They found me in an alley in Burbank trying to re-enter the earth's atmosphere in an old refrigerator box.

(in reply to spark1)
Post #: 227
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 5/6/2013 8:05:03 AM   
NCC1701A


Posts: 4462
Joined: 12/3/2011
From: Space Dock
Star Trek in to Darkness

The film earned $31.7 million from seven foreign markets on its first weekend, which was far superior to what its predecessor managed due to stronger marketing efforts in those regions. It earned $13.5 million on its opening day in the United States, lower than Star Trek's $30.9 million, this was likely due to the confusion caused by a last minute release date alteration. The film went on to earn $22 million the following Friday, also lower than what its predecessor had earned four years before ($26 million). It earned $70.6 million in its opening weekend landing the top spot of the US box office above The Great Gatsby and Iron Man 3. Total weekend earnings equated to $84.1 million with the early showing grosses included. Though below the projected box office earnings predicted by Paramount, the studio's vice chairman Rob Moore stated that they were "extremely pleased" by the sequel's performance. A few weeks after its release, the film had grossed $147 million at the foreign box office, already surpassing the lifetime international earnings of its predecessor. The film also landed the top spot of China's box office with a $25.8 million gross, tripling the overall earnings of the previous film in just its opening weekend.As of June 2013 the film has earned $330 million worldwide


I think it;s safe to say the there will be a Star Trek 13. They are talking about making it for 2016 Star Trek's 50th Anniversary.

_____________________________

Trench: I'll be back.

Church: You've been back enough. I'll be back.

[leaves]

Trench: Yippee-ki-yay.


The Expendables 2 (2012)

(in reply to Rob)
Post #: 228
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 5/6/2013 8:45:01 AM   
Rob


Posts: 2473
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: NCC1701A

Star Trek in to Darkness

The film earned $31.7 million from seven foreign markets on its first weekend, which was far superior to what its predecessor managed due to stronger marketing efforts in those regions. It earned $13.5 million on its opening day in the United States, lower than Star Trek's $30.9 million, this was likely due to the confusion caused by a last minute release date alteration. The film went on to earn $22 million the following Friday, also lower than what its predecessor had earned four years before ($26 million). It earned $70.6 million in its opening weekend landing the top spot of the US box office above The Great Gatsby and Iron Man 3. Total weekend earnings equated to $84.1 million with the early showing grosses included. Though below the projected box office earnings predicted by Paramount, the studio's vice chairman Rob Moore stated that they were "extremely pleased" by the sequel's performance. A few weeks after its release, the film had grossed $147 million at the foreign box office, already surpassing the lifetime international earnings of its predecessor. The film also landed the top spot of China's box office with a $25.8 million gross, tripling the overall earnings of the previous film in just its opening weekend.As of June 2013 the film has earned $330 million worldwide


I think it;s safe to say the there will be a Star Trek 13. They are talking about making it for 2016 Star Trek's 50th Anniversary.


I'm aware that it's made $330 million worldwide but it probably cost $400 million to make that happen. I can't see why people can't understand what some of us are trying to point out here!

However we are never going to agree on this topic and I having thoroughly enjoyed STID I sincerely hope that there will be a sequel.

_____________________________

Same thing happened to me when I played Neil Armstrong in Moonshot. They found me in an alley in Burbank trying to re-enter the earth's atmosphere in an old refrigerator box.

(in reply to NCC1701A)
Post #: 229
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 5/6/2013 10:10:32 AM   
Hood_Man


Posts: 12192
Joined: 30/9/2005
If it does well on DVD and Blu Ray, #13 will be on the way.

(in reply to Rob)
Post #: 230
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 5/6/2013 11:21:57 AM   
MonsterCat


Posts: 7934
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire
Thing is with Star Trek is that it tends to go up and down in terms of success at the box office. I guess for every film like Star Trek 09 that does well, there's a film like Star Trek: Nemesis that doesn't do quite as well.

I'm no industry analyst, but I reckon Paramount will want to continue to be in the Star Trek flick business, and we will see a continuation of the Abrams universe perhaps not straight away but a few years down the line.

< Message edited by MonsterCat -- 5/6/2013 11:22:55 AM >


_____________________________

"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 Hood_Man)
Post #: 231
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 6/6/2013 11:19:13 PM   
azzman1984


Posts: 469
Joined: 24/1/2011
From: Coventry
Fast & Furious 6 has passed the $500 million mark already in record time http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=105171

(in reply to MonsterCat)
Post #: 232
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 7/6/2013 12:49:52 AM   
Mister Coe

 

Posts: 1561
Joined: 20/10/2012

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

I just found out that After Earth is an M. Night Shymalan film.

Up until now i had no idea cos the trailers didnt advertise this at all.Is this a sign that studios are finally aware that this hacks name is no longer is a draw to movie goers and is in fact now most likely to put people off?

Its certainly changed my mind about seeing it ( Along with the fact that i think it looks like total rubbish ).

It also just broke Will Smiths winning streak of number one summer openings.Debuted at no.02 and the signs are that its not going to last long ( Maybe people are tired of Smiths nepotism by trying to make his son a star ).


I also did not know it was an MHS film.

And I agree that people are sick of Smith Senior forcing his talentless little boy on the cinema-going public.

Plus, the film looks shit.

_____________________________

Say what now?

(in reply to Cool Breeze)
Post #: 233
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 7/6/2013 10:31:38 AM   
spark1

 

Posts: 7026
Joined: 18/11/2006
MOS already in profit-

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/27365/-man-of-steel-is-already-near-profit


(in reply to Mister Coe)
Post #: 234
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 8/6/2013 5:40:41 PM   
directorscut


Posts: 10889
Joined: 30/9/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: spark1

MOS already in profit-

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/27365/-man-of-steel-is-already-near-profit




What are the odds of a scene where Superman tries to shave himself, uses a dozen razors that all break before coming to a Gillette, then nods approvingly and says "Smooth." 

_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to spark1)
Post #: 235
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 8/6/2013 8:10:14 PM   
sanchia


Posts: 18306
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
Then he will attribute his powers to a nice breakfast of Kellogg cornflakes, pop to Sears for a replacement costume when his gets a tear (or a new shirt when his gets burnt), and spent his childhood playing with Hot Wheels. I really hope they are subtle with the product placement, i know that an energy drink has a deal with it so would not be surprised if he ends up low on energy after a fight and rather than getting a few rays of the sun will slug down a few cans.

_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 236
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 8/6/2013 8:45:21 PM   
Hood_Man


Posts: 12192
Joined: 30/9/2005
And right at the end he'll see his reflection outside a shop window and think "You know, I do feel a bit exposed..." and then hover above the earth sporting a new pair of Kelvin Klein red briefs.

Bought with a Barclay's debit card, swiped across the scanner at the speed of sound.

(in reply to sanchia)
Post #: 237
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 9/6/2013 7:34:24 PM   
Cool Breeze


Posts: 2351
Joined: 9/11/2011
From: The Internet
Star Trek Into Darkness has now reached the $200 million mark at the U.S domestic box office.Total worldwide gross up to nearly $380 million.Can it break the $400 million barrier before the end of its theatrical run?

After Earth drops a massive 59% on its second weekend in the U.S.Total gross so far only $46 million.Is it safe to call this the John Carter of 2013?

_____________________________

'' Iv played Oskar Schindler, Michael Collins, Rob Roy Mcgregor, even ZEUS for gods sake! No one is going to believe me to be a green grocer! ''

(in reply to Hood_Man)
Post #: 238
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 9/6/2013 7:41:12 PM   
Deviation


Posts: 27284
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ
It was safe to call it that ever since the first trailer was released a couple of months ago.

_____________________________

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 Cool Breeze)
Post #: 239
RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates - 9/6/2013 8:13:17 PM   
sanchia


Posts: 18306
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
I have to admit it was one of the least inspiring or appealing trailers in a long time.

_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to Deviation)
Post #: 240
Page:   <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie Musings >> RE: 2013 Box Office Estimates Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   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

0.141