Hobbit boxoffice nose-dive: F^^k yeah Murica hates Tauriel!

*Loser alert*

Tauriel made Middle Earth drop under 300M despite 3D and inflation. Fact.

it isn't "fact" at all. The likeliest reason that the final Hobbit film didn't match earlier numbers is series fatigue. Nothing more. A quick survey in the here and now amongst people I know who have watched most/all of Jackson's ME films confirms this, albeit it's only a small survey.

Linking the numbers of BOTFA to a single character is utterly ridiculous. And your apparent satisfaction at your own logic is even more so. What an insignificance you must be.

"He was one mailroute away from being Cliff Claven"

You are wrong. Her arrival did create boxoffice drop because she was unpopular addition sight unseen and turned even worse when movies were seen. Tauriel buzz is bad and her stupid romance is cited one of main reasons why BOTFA is considered the worst of 3 movies. Yes, there is fatigue but useless characters like her are major reason for fatigue.

You are wrong. Her arrival did create boxoffice drop because she was unpopular addition sight unseen and turned even worse when movies were seen.

Don't come at me with your opinion, then link it to business performance with claims that are not substantiated by any factual science, and tell me I'm "wrong". I won't tell you again: repeat telling me I'm "wrong" because I don't share your personal opinion and I'll just block you.

Fine if you don't like her, don't like what she brings and don't like the love triangle (I can't say I am its biggest fan) - that's totally fine as it's a personal opinion. But if you are stating as fact that it is solely responsible for the lower numbers, you need to supply evidence. It's not enough to just make the claim, especially if you want others to agree with you.

See the difference?

"He was one mailroute away from being Cliff Claven"

That's just the domestic numbers. In global box office, the movie would have made more than a billion had it not been for the change in foreign exchange rates:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/how-hobbits-billion-dollar-box-7 69071

The 15 percent drop is the most dramatic example of the precarious financial position Hollywood studios find themselves in because of shifting currencies. Battle of the Five Armies had grossed north of $620 million offshore as of Jan. 29 for a worldwide total of $867 million. Were it not for the exchange-rate debacle, the film could have crossed $1 billion.

Major studios aren't the only ones suffering. The Hunger Games: Mockingjay — Part 1 outperformed The Hunger Games: Catching Fire in both France and Germany, but dollar revenue dipped in both territories. For an independent title like Hunger Games, the currency drop hits the local buyers, who pay in dollars but collect in euros. "If the euro weakens, it will have a real impact," says Al Munteanu, CEO of German distributor SquareOne Entertainment.

LOL, no. There's no such thing as "right" rate. So if rate is less favorable, sell more tickets. But this thing sold less tickets in US while not selling enough overseas to bridge the gap. Also, you can look at it as "if rate was like this in 2012 than AUJ wouldn't have passed 1b either." Ha!

That's why domestic boxoffice is much better indicator of popularity or lack thereof. It's stable so one can follow ups and downs based on fandom increase/decrease instead of getting inconclusive results from expanded markets, fluctuant rates, etc.

And when it comes to Murica, Tauriel arrival = Hobbit drop

And when it comes to Murica, Tauriel arrival = Hobbit drop

Still spinning that one, eh?

What you need to do is flash-survey a small group, say 300 cinema-goers who watched AUJ and DOS but didn't watch BOTFA and ask them why they didn't when they saw the other two. Then, if 150+ cite Tauriel as the reason, you can claim your case right. As things stand, in spite of my asking for some science behind your claim, you have nothing.

In short, your claim is worthless. It's your opinion only, and repeating it ad nauseum doesn't make it any more true. It just makes you look a nutter.


That's why domestic boxoffice is much better indicator of popularity or lack thereof

Typical American-centric thought process. All it does is highlight the trend…in the US. Which is one part of the world. Certain films are wildly more popular outside the States, for example Pirates OTC, Harry Potty and to a lesser degree, LOTR (23%, 28% and 33% of their business respectively in the last film in each franchise, in the US). Others do far more business, proportionately, in the US, such as Batman and The Avengers (both had films that did at least 41% of their overall business in the US). Not one Hobbit film did 30% of its total business in the US. Therefore, using the US box-office as an indicator of popularity is desperate, at best. How can you judge something's popularity based on a set of numbers that make up less than a third of the overall picture?

What the science I've provided tells us is that certain franchises are more popular in the US, proportionately, than others. It also tells us that your point doesn't hold water.

In the end, internet nutters just believe what they want to - and to hell with the statistics.

"He was one mailroute away from being Cliff Claven"

Hi Corsten;

"Don't come at me with your opinion, then link it to business performance with claims that are not substantiated by any factual science."

Exactly.
Correlation does not = causation.
1. Before DOS was released, what was known about Tauriel by the film distributors and wider movie going audience?
Almost all of whom had not read the Tolkien books and who do not discuss Tolkien characters online?
Nothing to almost nothing.
2. "An Unexpected Journey" had lots of book deviations which should be expected since the Jackson LOTR movies had many book deviations. Book deviations alone cannot be a deciding factor for more or less box office.
* Speaking scientifically there is no baseline of a purely accurate Jackson / Tolkien film (compared with the books).
There are too many variables to show that the name Tauriel alone kept people away from theaters.

* And now some numbers from box office mojo.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/showdowns/chart/?view=basic&id=vs-lot r.htm

A. Opening weekend between AUJ, DOS & the LOTR films box office.
"Unexpected Journey" opened in 4,045 US theaters (opening weekend box office = $84,617,303).
"Desolation of Smaug" opened in 3,903 US theaters (opening weekend box office = $73,645,197).
- Obviously 142 fewer theaters helped to reduce box office in the opening weekend for DOS.
But why the fewer theaters before the movie was released?
That would be a decision by studio execs and their accounting people.
Since when would they base their decision on a completely new supporting character who doesn't show up until the middle of the film?
* What makes sense imo is that the accounting people;
- Saw that AUJ underperformed compared with the LOTR movies.
All of the LOTR films had higher US box office compared with AUJ (even without adjusting for inflation).
And I expect that the accounting people also used computer formulas to predict that a second movie in this trilogy would have worse box office. And often they would be right.
- So, that is why DOS had fewer theaters compared with AUJ imo.
Because after AUJ The Hobbit films were expected to underperform the LOTR films and DOS was expected to have less box office as a sequel in a trilogy.

* As for "Battle of the Five Armies"; it is pretty much matching what DOS did.
If Tauriel was completely toxic for the US viewer, then another movie with her character (BOTFA) should have bombed.
But it didn't.

"Fine if you don't like her, don't like what she brings and don't like the love triangle (I can't say I am its biggest fan) - that's totally fine as it's a personal opinion. But if you are stating as fact that it is solely responsible for the lower numbers, you need to supply evidence. It's not enough to just make the claim, especially if you want others to agree with you."

Agreed.
The evidence for the average US viewers hating Tauriel theory is not there.

BB ;-)

it is just in my opinion - imo - 🌈

Linking the numbers of BOTFA to a single character is utterly ridiculous.


^This OP is undoubtedly a blithering idiot.

a мan υnwιllιng тo ғιgнт ғor wнaт нe wanтѕ deѕerveѕ wнaт нe geтѕ