PDA

View Full Version : Box Office Results


MikeS
06-10-2001, 06:15 PM
Pearl Harbor only pulled in 14.9 million over this last weekend. This is a 50% dropoff from last week and makes it the fastest declining Memorial Day Debut film to date. Mission Impossible 2 and The Lost World were slower to decline over the third week. On it's current course, Pearl will only take in 180 Million for it's whole domestic run.
Swordfish was Number 1 this week Shrek was #2 . Shrek has now passed the Lion King on a week by week comparison, as the fastest rising animated film. Naturally a sequel is in the works.
The Mummy Returns still remains the summer winner so far with 184 Million but Planet of the Apes and Jurassic Park 3 are still out there and so is Tomb Raider.
The Summer is just starting to heat up!

ContempoSMT
06-10-2001, 07:19 PM
Pearl Harbor hands down was absolutely amazing.

Peter Pirate
06-10-2001, 09:07 PM
But even so, PH will make a profit once international & video is complete...So while it was not a successful, blockbuster film is granted...but a bomb? Hardly...

Further, your drum beating of Shrek & Mummy II numbers only serve to show how totally clueless, unpredictable and perhaps stupid the masses truly are...Even AV can probably attest to the ridiculousness of "biz" folks understanding the public...
:cool: :cool: :bounce: :cool: :cool:

Wantogo
06-10-2001, 09:49 PM
mmmmm let me see a film that you say will only make about $180 million domestically then millions more in international markets and video sells. Yet is not considered a successful blockbuster movie.

Perhaps we may be setting our sites a tad bit high here. IMHO of course.:rolleyes:

Spaceman Spiff
06-11-2001, 12:07 AM
Hmmm...I didn't see any PH bashing.

MikeS
06-11-2001, 03:39 AM
I am not PH bashing. I am reporting what the public did. And they did not feel Pearl harbor was that good a movie. Yes 180 million is not bad for a movie to take but Disney was the one who set the goals here. Eisner said 120 million on the first weekend. If a movie costs 90 million and it makes 189 million (Mummy) That's a hit. If a movie costs 140 million and you use 80 million to promote it and it makes 170-180 million it's a failure.Don't forget the Public is the judge here.
I saw Pearl and thought it was OK. IT was not the epic Disney played it up to be. I felt ripped off when I left the theater and I'm sure many others did too.That is why the numbers keep dropping. Word of mouth was not there and THAT is why in 2 weeks Pearl won't be there either.
Yes they will make some back overseas and Video. But there is nothing worse than having to recoup your money from video....the true sign of a failure. In fact some films producers feel won't make money in the theaters go directly to video. You can usually tell if a movie didi good at the BO by how quick it comes out on video.BO failures come out quickly hits take longer.

Peter Pirate
06-11-2001, 06:23 AM
But there is nothing worse than having to recoup your money from video. ...Sure there is! Not recouping your money at all...

:cool: :cool: :bounce: :cool: :cool:

Wantogo
06-11-2001, 06:36 AM
mmmmm i didn't mean to imply anyone was bashing anything. I was just commenting that millions of dollars in profit is not a bad thing.

Time will tell with the final totals. I believe PH overall will make a healthy profit;)

ScroogesNephew
06-11-2001, 08:05 AM
As a clueless member of the masses I can only say that I thought Shrek was pretty good. Same with Pearl Harbor. But then, I only went to be entertained, not to be a critic. We massites are easily entertained.

Peter Pirate
06-11-2001, 08:29 AM
I knew that ridiculous generalization would get me in trouble!

My point wasn't that people shouldn't enjoy Shrek (most of the movies I adore are totally ridiculous). It just seems that Shrek is being catagorized as in 'classic territory' like LK or TS2, when aside from dollars & cents, comparisons to those two classics seem unwarranted...Don't they?;)
:cool: :cool: :bounce: :cool: :cool:

HBK
06-11-2001, 08:42 AM
It just seems that Shrek is being categorized as in 'classic territory' like LK or TS2, when aside from dollars & cents, comparisons to those two classics seem unwarranted...Don't they?


Why is it un-warranted? Because Disney didn't make it?

I can understand your argument for Lion King...it was more of a serious movie, whereas Shrek is more of a comedy....but Toy Story 2?

I'm a huge fan of the Toy Story series, but I don't see how it is head and shoulders above Shrek.

Also, Pearl Harbor has been a disaster for Disney, based on all Media accounts. If the movie cost $140 mill to make, then tack on all of the advertising budget, you're pushing $200 Million. Now to date the movie has had a Box office of $180. Don't forget not all of the 180 belongs to Disney. The movie theaters are chewing up a good chunk of that money.

I say the movie will be lucky to break even after all of the factors are considered.

Mulan
06-11-2001, 12:36 PM
A bit from the L.A. Times:

"Dropping to third place, with its second substantial decline in a row--49%--"Pearl Harbor," which looked to be the blockbuster of the summer, has now fallen to $14.9 million in its third weekend in 3,255 theaters. While a $144-million three-week total isn't chicken feed, the expensive three-hour epic is now faced with a struggle to reach $200 million. Disappointing word-of-mouth and a daunting running time seem to have caught up with the wartime romance. Based on its initial engagements outside the U.S., the usually dependable action audience can't be counted on to make up for the shortfall. While it sounds a bit churlish to quibble about a gross anywhere near $200 million, given the high cost of making and selling "Pearl Harbor"--about $200 million--the movie has to be seen as not living up to its full potential."

Everyone's entitled to an opinion. Some people liked "Titanic," others didn't. It's all subjective. But it looks like most people don't like "Pearl Harbor."

Everyone should also keep in mind that ticket prices today are inflated compared to even just one year ago. I think they should track the number of tickets sold instead of grosses, or at least give both figures. When they list top-selling books and CDs, it's by the units sold, not how much they made. I know there are reasons for why the film industry does this -- I just think the number of tickets sold is also significant.

gary
06-11-2001, 02:12 PM
Worse than Pearl Harbor dropping fast, Atlantis is in for a rough opening. My son and I are both big Disney fans (DVC, APs to both DL and WDW), but Tomb Raider is definitely higher on the "must see" list than Atlantis - for both of us. I think that the following weekends will also have "blockbuster" releases (JPIII, Apes). I can't believe that bodes well for the Atlantis opening. What's worse (in my mind) is that if Atlantis the movie doesn't do well, will we ever see Atlantis the ride?

Gary

HBK
06-11-2001, 02:22 PM
What's worse (in my mind) is that if Atlantis the movie doesn't do well, will we ever see Atlantis the ride?

In fifteen years, Disney will be proud to announce the latest addittion to the Magic Kingdom.

In Atlantis - Ride It! you will be loaded into a small, 4 person boat...spinning around a giant statue of Michael J Fox's character.


So chin up....it's in the works.

gary
06-11-2001, 02:35 PM
But seriously, folks, not all "off the shelf" rides are bad. I wouldn't mind seeing an "octopus" type ride somewhere in DL/WDW, themed, of course, around Ursula. Disney could do it up right - put the ride in a video dome, seat the guests in their "boats", get attacked by the evil Ursula, then have Triton show up, blast her, and let everyone go. Maybe add a little fire, smoke, and water spray to the special effects.

But Atlantis first. Who cares if the movie bombs? If the ride is good, they can sell Atlantis DVD's to the unwary in the omnipresent gift shop.

Gary

DVC-Landbaron
06-11-2001, 03:11 PM
I wouldn't mind seeing an "octopus" type ride somewhere in DL/WDW, themed, of course, around Ursula.Nor would I. There is a place for these type of attractions. I really don't know why they haven't done this already. A nice "B" ticket extra. Fine. But let's not fool ourselves into thinking it's an "E" ticket.
But Atlantis first. Who cares if the movie bombs? If the ride is good, they can sell Atlantis DVD's to the unwary in the omnipresent gift shop.Ahhh. Ei$ner-think at its best! Synergy gone wrong! NO!!! There are hundreds of ideas (if not thousands) that could go into the 20K site. Many of them don't that don't necessarily have to connect to a Disney film (what film connection is there to Pirates, Haunted Mansion, Country Bears, Space Mountain, etc.) And still there are other concepts that could tie into a "classic". Little Mermaid comes to mind immediately. But it has to be a "classic". Personally I'm pretty happy that they don't have a ride based off TRON, The Black Cauldron or any of the Don Knotts - Tim Conway disasters of the 1970's. Now if Atlantis does indeed turn out to be a "classic", then by all means, jump on it. But you have to time test these things. Otherwise you run the risk of tying an attraction, no matter how good, with a 'stink-o' movie. Or mediocre at best. Why do that?

Another Voice
06-11-2001, 03:53 PM
This weekend’s box office firmly plants ‘Pearl Harbor’ in the bomb category. The tremendous drop that the film took is only going to encourage more theaters to pull the film, which will mean an even lower box office, and so on. Disney had expected this film to be strong through the Fourth of July weekend, but the film will be out of general release next weekend. The rumbling you hear from out California-way is the large July 4th ad campaign for the film that’s just come crashing down. And a lot of money had been planned for ‘Pearl’ ads has now gone to ads for ‘Atlantis’. ‘Pearl’ has already opened in Britain and that had been considered its best European market (because of the similar cultures and the "We're Off to Fight the Jerry" sequence). Its performance has been very week and rumors claim that release plans on the continent are being scaled back.

Why is a movie that made $180 million a bomb – because the final domestic costs are around $215 million (that’s production costs, marketing and advertising). And of the box take, Disney is going to get a less than half. Not only do the theaters take a cut, but Disney signed many “back end” deals with the producers, directors and “talent”. In lieu of salary, they get a certain percentage of the revenue. These keeps the initial production costs down, but hits the studio after the movie’s released. As for the video sales, they mirror the box office results very closely. Home video will bring in more money, but not enough to make a profit for ‘Pearl Harbor’.

I got my hands on the early draft of the script for ‘Pearl’. It’s clear that at every opportunity the film was tweaked to make it more “commercial”, more “popular”. What’s worse is that a few tweaks the other direction, and the film could have been good. The comment was made that Hollywood doesn’t understand the public. I don’t quite agree with that. I think public tastes are well known, it’s just that few filmmakers have the talent and the abilities required to make movies that meet those tastes. ‘Pearl’ was certainly pandering the public, but lacked the talent in front of the camera, behind the camera, and on the studio lot to pull it off.

MikeS
06-11-2001, 05:26 PM
First off. Pearl hasn't made 180M as I was quoted as saying. I said the BEST it could do was 180 Million. As Voice has said , with a $215 M pricetag that puts it in the bomb category. The public just didn't take to the film largely due to Disney's promotion. It's was a B picture touted as a EPIC.
Atlantis opened in La and NY with a good opening but I feel that was largely studio induced. Against Tomb Raider it won't fare so well.
What is all this talk about TS2 being a classic. TS maybe but not 2. I found it fun but hardly a classic. Shrek was far far better. IMHO.
This next weekend will find TombRaider #1 and Shrek 2 or 3. Atlantis maybe 4th. Let's wait and see.

HBK
06-12-2001, 06:20 AM
TombRaider #1 and Shrek 2 or 3. Atlantis maybe 4th

I bet somewhere, the midget (and I don't mean faraquat) will be hopping up and down if his movie outlasts two of the oger's movies.....

It's karma....

ScroogesNephew
06-12-2001, 07:36 AM
. . . make comparisons in the first place? Ya pay yer money, ya kill a couple of hours that could be better spent reading. Ya like it or ya don't or yer indifferent (at least the popcorn was mediocre).

Oh, MINE is bigger than YOURS, by the way.

wdwguide
06-12-2001, 08:04 AM
Contrary to what previous posts indicated, Pearl Harbor seems to be doing exceptionally well overseas. It opened at #1 in all countries, and has made some $45 million. It set opening week records for BVI in six countries.

HBK
06-12-2001, 09:20 AM
Originally posted by wdwguide
Contrary to what previous posts indicated, Pearl Harbor seems to be doing exceptionally well overseas. It opened at #1 in all countries, and has made some $45 million. It set opening week records for BVI in six countries.

Yes....and if it was a "normal" movie, that would be great. But this is a movie which cost around 200 mill.

And don't forget....Pearl opened big here too....it's the staying power which shows how "exceptional" a movie this is. So far it's history shows it's not exceptional.

wdwguide
06-12-2001, 09:43 AM
Originally posted by HBK


Yes....and if it was a "normal" movie, that would be great. But this is a movie which cost around 200 mill.

And don't forget....Pearl opened big here too....it's the staying power which shows how "exceptional" a movie this is. So far its history shows it's not exceptional.

It will be quite interesting to see what the final numbers for PH will say. I don't think it was very smart for Disney to produce such a mediocre film at such a high cost by themselves, but Disney should profit from it in the long term. They probably expected more, but overestimation of demand seems to be a common problem in the current Disney management (but they seem to be learning; they just delayed the opening of the Pop Century by several months).
I definitely couldn't agree with you more that this won't be a "cult" movie that most people will remember after a few years.

All Aboard
06-12-2001, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by wdwguide
they just delayed the opening of the Pop Century by several months

Huh? The initial plan was to open in Spring of 2002. Then, in January of this year, it was announced that it would open on December 15, 2001. Then, in February, WDW began booking. Where did you hear this? How are they going to accomodate all of the current reservations (like mine)? Any info would be greatly appreciated.

wdwguide
06-12-2001, 11:52 PM
Originally posted by gcurling


Huh? The initial plan was to open in Spring of 2002. Then, in January of this year, it was announced that it would open on December 15, 2001. Then, in February, WDW began booking. Where did you hear this? How are they going to accomodate all of the current reservations (like mine)? Any info would be greatly appreciated.

I unfortunately don't have any idea what they'll so with the reservations - probably transfer people to the All Stars or give them upsells for the moderates. They should be contacting you in the near future. The resort should open in March of 2002.