MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Weekend 4-Day Chart

Weekend 4 day 2018-01-01 at 12.57.18 PM

40 Responses to “Weekend 4-Day Chart”

  1. PcChongor says:

    tl;dr for the thread:

    “See, TLJ is doing just fine!”

    “But it still sucks!”

    “No it doesn’t!”

    “Fuck you!”

    “Fuck you!”

    And thank the gods PHANTOM THREAD is killing it! It might have Oscar hopes yet. Thought I, TONYA would do a bit better, and I still have no idea who’s going to see GREATEST SHOWMAN. Still blows my mind they made a poppy musical about a dude who collected human beings.

  2. Geoffs says:

    I’ll try to keep it concise: as a movie, The Last Jedi is fine. It’s doing fine at the box office….for anything not directed by Cameron, featuring “Furious” or “Avengers” in the title, it’s doing fine.

    For a Star Wars sequel that apparently every industry reporter and/or film critic is pulling for with no comparative competition of its scale for several weeks before and after release, it’s….. underperforming.

    And if Attack of the Clones is the best, most recent comparison that you can come up with to explain how it’s not underperforming, then you’re just digging a deeper hole for yourself.

  3. Stella's Boy says:

    My in-laws took my kids to see Greatest Showman. Said a lot of families were at the theater and that it was sold out.

  4. Hcat says:

    I took my family to see Greatest Showman (kids choice). They liked it, I thought it was remarkably weak with music video choreography. Still if you are pitching this to an audience that has had a steady diet of Hallmark Christmas movies they might be much easier sells than the cineaste crowd. But for all the mediocre product that is out there on a regular basis I am perfectly fine with one of them being a musical.

  5. Hcat says:

    Geoff, is Jumanji not competition? Hurling toward 200 million after ten days. it’s certainly not nothin, and even with that in the market it doesn’t seem to be slowing Jedi down much

  6. palmtree says:

    “And if Attack of the Clones is the best, most recent comparison that you can come up with to explain how it’s not underperforming, then you’re just digging a deeper hole for yourself.”

    Attack of the Clones isn’t the best example because it was recent. It’s the best example because it’s a direct Star Wars sequel. This establishes the most relevant pattern. That’s how people predict box office. The pattern here would have told them TLJ would drop. The fact that there’s not a more recent example doesn’t invalidate this pattern.

    Having said that, I have no doubt Disney hoped it would buck the pattern and overperform. So I guess by that standard it can be said to be underperforming. But the whole story hasn’t been told yet. If the next one comes out and it goes down, then the pattern will be truly broken and blame can be assigned and adjustments made. Until then, reasons for why it’s doing badly sound just as likely as reasons for why it’s doing fine.

  7. Doug R says:

    Yeah, but a lot of those Jumanji sales could be people who would have otherwise marched back into line for a Star Wars movie.

  8. Geoffs says:

    @Hcat, Jumanji apparently cost a third of what The Last Jedi cost and is based off a much weaker IP headlining a star (Duane Johnson) coming off his biggest box office disappointment in years…so no it’s not on the same scale. And yeah it’s doing very well but so did Sing last year at this time….

    Rogue One had tougher competition last year, also had to fend off Assassin’s Creed which admittedly ended up being much weaker than expected…and the expansion of La La Land.

  9. Geoffs says:

    @Palmtree, the marketplace responds a lot quicker now and I’m fairly confident that Disney and Lucasfilm execs don’t even want to consider ‘Clones as their model right now. Yes objectively it kind of makes sense but those films were released three years apart with nothing in between – they could take some time to make adjustments or at least allow some time to pass to let some of the “I hate sand” stink wear off a bit.

    Episode IX is coming out NEXT year and Luke’s blue milk mustache and Leia Poppins will still be fresh in fan’s minds.

  10. Hcat says:

    Well first, all IP is weaker than Star Wars. Making an argument about competition you can’t say that Jumanji is insignificant because they only spent a hundred million on it and then turn around and say the expansion of LaLaLand which only cost 30 million and grossed a total of 150 over the course of months was a tougher horse to beat. And yes Sing was also a hit, which had an almost identical box office take as Jumanji at this point (while going after a wider demo).

    It just seems your argument is reaching, like referring to a release date that is 23 and 2/3 months away as next year.

  11. palmtree says:

    Geoff, if audiences really wanted to punish the Kennedy/Disney regime they could do it by avoiding Solo, only five months away. No need to wait 23 and 2/3 months.

    Also, Assassin’s Creed is not competitive when it’s a flop. La La Land and Sing are a completely different genre and can’t be considered direct competition. Unless you also thought Alvin and the Chipmunks was going to affect TFA, which sounds equally implausible.

  12. David Adams says:

    I said it before. Sony left a huge amount of money on the table when they they didn’t open it on December 1st or 8th when nothing wide opened.

  13. Hcat says:

    Jumanji is less than two weeks into release and already sits at the 16 slot on Sony’s all time list and will likely top anything not named Spider-Man or Skyfall. I find this astounding, I don’t recall anyone thinking this would be this big, much less think it represents money left on the table.

  14. CG says:

    We took our 9-year-old and her friend to Jumanji yesterday, to a pretty full house. I suspect it’s getting a lot of family holiday outings, and good word of mouth – I knew nothing beyond the one trailer I’d seen, and hadn’t even realized it was a Jake Kasdan movie until the end credits rolled.

  15. Doug R says:

    I was going to say Jumanji is following a Terminator path but it was only 7 years between Terminator and T2. It’s been 22 years since Jumanji in 1995.
    Still some parallels. Inventive property that finds a larger audience on video, so you get two generations showing up for a sequel that has decent reviews and word of mouth.

  16. Dick says:

    Finally saw The Last Jedi, and loved it. Really loved it. Subversive, but also tried to tell new stories.

    The first third had odd pacing problems, but found the overall movie quite fulfilling and refreshing.

  17. Bulldog68 says:

    Jumanji is performing beyond what most had expected. I didn’t see any forecast with a possible $250m as the end result.

    Opening Dec 1 or 8 would have put in the sights of Coco and Justice League, and everyone thought JL would’ve been bigger than it eventually ended up being. That’s two formidable competitive movies directly in Jumanji’s wheelhouse.

    Chances are, it may have been played out by now like Coco and JL, and not benefit from the daily weekend like numbers that you get over the Christmas holidays. I think Sony played this one just right, and the popping champagne on this release is well deserved.

    Also, it’s a brutal lesson that Blade Runner learned the hard way. No one needed to know about the original Jumanji to enjoy this one, plus the original Blade Runner was a box office miss, so why dedicate such a budget that you had to have blockbuster level success in order to turn a profit. There is nothing about the BR IP that screamed boffo box office. Every penny spent on the film was definitely on the screen, but a tighter budget would’ve left less of a stink on what was a good film.

  18. Hcat says:

    But Blade Runner was a direct sequel, while this Jumanji is a remake right?

  19. JBritt says:

    Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle is a sequel. If you watch the movie you will see how it is a sequel but I’m not spoiling anything.

  20. Doug R says:

    Rewatching Rogue One on video yet again I was struck by how much I didn’t really care for the characters in TFA and TLJ. Maybe it was the real actors like Mads Mikkelsen and Felicity Jones and Alan Tudyk.

  21. Bulldog68 says:

    Havent seen Jumanji yet, but from all appearances there is no knowledge of the original required to jump into this latest incarnation and completely get everything that’s going on, BR2049 required a few crib notes.

    I’m wondering why the studio didn’t do a limited theatrical rerelease of the original, or maybe that may have addd to much to the already massive budget.

  22. Hcat says:

    Curious what people think the original Blade Runner’s saturation level is. It found a larger audience on video but not a $200 million blockbuster audience. They had to know that the new one had to be made accessible to viewers that had never seen the original. Seems like they would be shooting themselves in the foot to just assume everyone is familiar with the previous film(s).

  23. Dr Wally Rises says:

    “And if Attack of the Clones is the best, most recent comparison that you can come up with to explain how it’s not underperforming, then you’re just digging a deeper hole for yourself.”

    Okay, I’ll play. Here’s some other examples of sequels to a true box office phenomenon:

    Batman Returns follows Batman – roughly two-thirds of the domestic gross of the original.

    The Lost World follows Jurassic Park – roughly two-thirds of the domestic gross of the original.

    Age of Ultron follows The Avengers – roughly two-thirds of the domestic gross of the original.

    The Last Jedi follows The Force Awakens – you can see where this is going.

    Not underperforming. Par.

  24. Bulldog68 says:

    Currently Jumanji is outpacing Sing, which had a $6m Tuesday in the new year. Jumanji posted a $10m Tuesday and is now about $8m ahead. Sing ended its run with $270m. Could Jumanji leg it out to $300m if it continues to perform so well? This, Get Out, It, and Wonder Woman would be the four box office stories of 2017.

  25. Monco says:

    Let’s play.

    -Spider-man 2 to Spider-man 1 (Spider man was the reason AOTC underperformed, it was the fresher more well loved movie that summer)
    -Dead Man’s Chest to Curse of the Black Pearl
    -Dark Knight Rises to Dark Knight (essentially the direct sequel comparison because TDK so exapnded the gross of Batman Begins but you would use “Box Office Phenom” qualification as not applying to BB)
    -Transformers 2 to Transformers 1

    These sequels all expanded their grosses or grossed more than 2/3 of the original. For just as many examples you can find that it is not underperforming there are just as many that says it is. Jumanji is now beating it daily over two weeks into its release. Not par. Bogey.

  26. palmtree says:

    “For just as many examples you can find that it is not underperforming there are just as many that says it is.”

    If that’s true, then what you’re saying is that it’s inconclusive. Because when you declare “Not par. Bogey.” that just means you’re cherry-picking data just like the guy you just criticized for doing just that.

  27. palmtree says:

    Bulldog, I’d throw Thor: Ragnarok as a notable story too. No one was anticipating that gross, the third in a lackluster movie series, even if it is a Marvel movie. And also, I loved the hell out of it too.

  28. Bulldog68 says:

    Jumanji beating Star Wars is more a reflection of Jumanji’s strength, and not any perceived weakness on the part of Jedi. Ranking is irrelevant. Jedi’s first Tuesday in the new year is $7.8m, TFA, the #1 US grosser of all time, on the same day, did a mere $100k more.

    Palmtree, I’d probably stick in the box office of Wonder before Thor. I think a lot of folks had this one pegged as outperforming Dark World, as the trailer really upped the expectations. And while I agree that it was a great performer, at the end of the day, it opened like gangbusters, but didn’t have the legs you think such a well liked movie would have. It kind of performed like an XMen movie. In fact Logan still had slightly better legs thus far, and I actually thought with this opening it could get to Spider-Man numbers, but even IT, maintained better legs. That’s why I didn’t list Thor.

  29. Spacesheik says:

    All the George Lucas prequels were shit, CGI candy and galactic cheese galore – I ignore them now. They were not STAR WARS, the way these new movies are.

    I don’t understand the hate for LAST JEDI, I understand it didnt follow the path we may have wanted it to follow (SPOILER ALERT): Luke training Rey, Rey going out to kick ass, Luke saving the day (in person) in his X fighter – I understand. Would I have preferred an UNFORGIVEN type ending for Luke where he obliterates everyone, as opposed to the more mystical ending – probably, but I accept the more obtuse climax. (END SPOILER ALERT).

    LAST JEDI was highly entertaining, beautifully shot. dark, exciting, unexpected. And that last shot – wow.

  30. Hcat says:

    Thor certainly got a boost from having the Hulk in there, it was no surprise at all that it topped Dark World.

    With all these Universe titles (Marvel, DC, Star Wars) I think it will be difficult to use the old comparisons we used to (Sequels making 60 percent of original until home video strikes and then Terminator Lethal Weapon Die Hard etc flips that scenario). Is last summer’s Spider-Man the sixth in the series, first in his own or 16th in Marvel? There is no real correlation for that.

    And this will hold true for Star Wars as well. Bulldog raised a very interesting point above. People flocked to Return of the Jedi and Sith partly under the impression this was the last Star Wars they would see onscreen. Knowing they have them coming down the pipeline annually can depress a bit of the repeat business.

  31. palmtree says:

    Thor 3 outperformed its predecessor by over $100m. Sure, the Hulk helped but to the tune of $100m?

    Yeah, the legs turned out to be the same as Thor 2. I blame Justice League for sucking out its oxygen.

    What makes Thor 3 stand out to me though is that it pulled all this out while keep its indie roots entirely intact, making the feat all the more impressive. Other than Justin Lin revitalizing F&F, I can’t think of a more recent example where this has happened to a tired franchise.

  32. Hcat says:

    From that angle, Thor going with the outside the studio system director and achieving box office and critical success does make it a bigger than usual story.

    Now that Wonder has entered Lionsgate’s highest grossers, eight of their top ten titles are based on books. Sure they are kid lit but I still find it interesting. The only major that comes close is WB with five.

  33. Geoff says:

    “Okay, I’ll play. Here’s some other examples of sequels to a true box office phenomenon:

    Batman Returns follows Batman – roughly two-thirds of the domestic gross of the original.

    The Lost World follows Jurassic Park – roughly two-thirds of the domestic gross of the original.

    Age of Ultron follows The Avengers – roughly two-thirds of the domestic gross of the original.

    The Last Jedi follows The Force Awakens – you can see where this is going.

    Not underperforming. Par.”

    Dr. Wally, did you actually take a second gander at those examples you provided? Because they actually make my point – ALL three of them were widely perceived as disappointments critically and commercially to the point where in each case, the director of that second installment never returned to the franchise again.

    Besides that, ‘Ultron resulted in Ike Perlmutter being demoted at Marvel, ‘Returns resulted in pretty much a soft reboot three years later including re-cast Batman, and the middling reception to The Lost World pretty much dampened enthusiasm for any additional Jurassic sequels for another 16 years.

    Are ANY of these comparable scenarios that should be providing comfort to Kathleen Kennedy right about now?? :)

  34. Geoff says:

    @DrWally and besides that regarding the overseas marketplace, ‘Age of Ultron is the most recent example you listed and probably the most relevant as as a result: domestic box office dropped by a good chunk but overseas growth almost made up for that shortfall – it dropped only 7% worldwide from the first Avengers film. Similar scenarios as well for The Dark Knight Rises, Star Trek Into Darkness, Iron Man 2, and even BOTH supposed “franchise-killers” for Spider-Man, Spider-Man 3 and The Amazing Spider-Man 2….even though domestic box office dropped for all of these films, they either came close to or EXCEEDED the worldwide gross of their predecessor. That’s a good sampling right there and the only one of them that actually dropped WORLDWIDE in that group was The Amazing Spider-Man 2 which dropped 7% worldwide from its predecessor.

    Yup…and seeing where it’s at right now, The Last Jedi is likely to top out at around $1.3 billion which would be a 35% DROP WORLDWIDE from its predecessor….yeah if this were any other franchise right now, heads would be rolling….

    And before you say, “Well $1.3 billion isn’t chump change!” I’ll remind you that BOTH Transformers 3 and Transformers 4 grossed $1.1 billion worldwide….fan complaints were continuously ignored….’The Last Knight did $605 million last year as a follow-up.

  35. Night Owl says:

    I continue to be fascinated by China’s near total indifference to Star Wars. It’s opening in second place to a romantic comedy that’s already been out a week. Not only will it not match Force Awakens box office, it will not match Rogue One’s box office. That’s wild.

    I shudder to think how low Solo’s China box office will be. It seems like every other billion dollar franchise has broken through there, but Star Wars just cannot catch a break.

  36. Hcat says:

    Geoff, you made some good points about the reception of the lower grossing sequels, however I’m not sure they fit your narrative about what is happening with Jedi. You are claiming that Jedi’s lower grosses is a reflection of a deep fan revolt.

    But it wasn’t deep comic fans that slightly shrugged off Returns and Ultron. Batfans loved returns, it was the general audience that thought it was too dark and kinky for kids that caused the course correction. Most fans then and now would have probably preferred a third Burton. And the fans didn’t abandon Ultron due to some problem with how the heros were treated, it just wasn’t the event that Avengers was pitched as. You just weren’t going to get the same cachet out of “Finally all of Earths mightiest heroes together in one movie….again.”

    As for Park, that acts more like a regular movie, sure there are fans of the book, and Speilberg, and dinosaurs in general but there is not the fierce identification with Park as with Batman, Marvel or Star Wars. It was another example of saw it before and it was better.

    And when you look at an even smaller group of fans like say Star Trek or Transformers, when you see a film in one of those series stumble do you think its the FANS that don’t show up, or that it has finally been rejected by the general audience?

  37. Dr Wally Rises says:

    Geoff, thanks for your response. If counter argue that none of those movies you mentioned, save The Lost World, were following up the highest grossing movie of all time. And not just the highest grossing movie of all time, but the highest grossing movie of all time by a margin of nearly $200 million.The bar set by TFA is INSANELY high – everything fell right that Winter in 2015. Even the weather played ball – a point worth remembering while America shivers through a tough Winter in 2017 is that moviegoing doesn’t happen in a vacuum. I just think we need to worry about entering a world where what will most likely be the fourth highest grossing movie in domestic box office history can be considered in any way shape or form a let down.

  38. Geoff says:

    @Hcat and @DrWally – how nice that we can all keep things civil and Happy New Year of course!

  39. Bulldog68 says:

    When TFA made $932m, there were only six other movies on domestic b.o history that made more than half that. Let that sink in. TFA rode the perfect box office storm of pent up demand, release calendar, nostalgia, and abject relief that its sheer sense of joy and tone was so far removed from the last three Star Wars movies.

    If TFA had made $300m less and settled around Avengers numbers, it would have still been viewed as an unqualified success. No one saw almost a billion dollars at the domestic box office coming. Now that climate does not exist for TLJ. No more pent up demand, and yes, a less crowd pleasing sequel. But anyone who looks at more than $600m as a disappointment needs to have their expectations genes taken in for an oil change.

  40. Geoff says:

    @Bulldog, yes it was ABSOLUTE lightning in a bottle no doubt – Disney did a year-long marketing campaign for it that was pitched perfectly at every turn, there was ZERO bad press, demand was pent up, there was zero genuine competition for two weeks in each direction of when it opened….so YES, conditions were perfect for the film to open at $248 million in DECEMBER and gross $936 mill domestic.

    But two years later with rave reviews and ANOTHER pitch-perfect marketing campaign with MARGINALLY tougher competition (Daddy’s Home vs. Jumanji, The Revenant vs…..what? we don’t know yet) to drop more than a THIRD is just not to be ignored. And my point over the past several weeks has been that – guess what? – it’s NOT being ignored! :) Rian Johnson is already walking back some of the more controversial story elements, marketing on Solo is frozen for now, Hamill is issuing apologies for what he has said, etc…..and that’s just the smaller surface-level stuff that you can notice early on.

    Right now I GUARANTEE you that somebody from the top offices at Lucasfilm OR Disney has been on the phone with George Lucas, working out some way to get him more involved as a “creative consultant” at least publicly without having to actually pay him more. Which is fair as far as I’m concerned….

The Hot Blog

Leonard Klady's Friday Estimates
Friday Screens % Chg Cume
Title Gross Thtr % Chgn Cume
Venom 33 4250 NEW 33
A Star is Born 15.7 3686 NEW 15.7
Smallfoot 3.5 4131 -46% 31.3
Night School 3.5 3019 -63% 37.9
The House Wirh a Clock in its Walls 1.8 3463 -43% 49.5
A Simple Favor 1 2408 -50% 46.6
The Nun 0.75 2264 -52% 111.5
Hell Fest 0.6 2297 -70% 7.4
Crazy Rich Asians 0.6 1466 -51% 167.6
The Predator 0.25 1643 -77% 49.3
Also Debuting
The Hate U Give 0.17 36
Shine 85,600 609
Exes Baggage 75,900 62
NOTA 71,300 138
96 61,600 62
Andhadhun 55,000 54
Afsar 45,400 33
Project Gutenberg 36,000 17
Love Yatri 22,300 41
Hello, Mrs. Money 22,200 37
Studio 54 5,300 1
Loving Pablo 4,200 15
3-Day Estimates Weekend % Chg Cume
No Good Dead 24.4 (11,230) NEW 24.4
Dolphin Tale 2 16.6 (4,540) NEW 16.6
Guardians of the Galaxy 7.9 (2,550) -23% 305.8
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 4.8 (1,630) -26% 181.1
The Drop 4.4 (5,480) NEW 4.4
Let's Be Cops 4.3 (1,570) -22% 73
If I Stay 4.0 (1,320) -28% 44.9
The November Man 2.8 (1,030) -36% 22.5
The Giver 2.5 (1,120) -26% 41.2
The Hundred-Foot Journey 2.5 (1,270) -21% 49.4