Dom $103; Int $65; Tot $168. Should end up around $500m. [hey trolls, I updated this below]
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=untitledhansolostarwarsanthologyfilm.htm
Big ouch for the house of mouse!
shareActuals: Dom $103; Int $70 (now includes Mon); Total $173.
First week: Dom $120m; Int $82m (Wed); Total $202m
I expect it will end up $400m or more.
BO Mojo is projecting $30m 2nd weekend.
I think it will do better, new openings are crap.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=4403
it won't be close to 500m
in fact they will be lucky to cross 400m
Yeah, no way 500m - I'm thinking 350m at most. It's dropping like a rock
shareSo what if it is? It's about time a Star Wars movie FAILED at the box office. High time.
So now you apologists are not only making the wrong excuses, but now you're saying it's a GOOD thing that a SW movie failed. There is no end to your bullshit.
shareIt's a good thing that a SjW movie failed, because that means that perhaps, only perhaps, there's a chance to have SW movies back.
shareOh, of course - it's great. It's hilarious though that these apologist fanboys are now saying it's a good thing. They'll spin anything to maintain their blind devotion to this brand and keep their view of it absolutely spotless.
shareIt doesn't have to be this brand. I think there's market for some nice space opera pulp (because that's what Star Wars is, at the end of the day).
But modern Hollywood seems unable to do anything else but to reframe existing stories according to the current agenda. And the Star Wars franchise is copyrighted, but the space opera as a genre is not. Just imagine, with a more modern look and the current CGI (as Solo does), there's a huge heap of possible stories:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=pulp+space+opera&t=opera&iax=images&ia=images
...which modern Hollywood seems unable to use.
Sadly, it's not only about Disney.
Well, you always have Valerian. I really thought I'd like it, but I don't even remember anything after the opening sequence. I wonder if I finished it? I may have fallen asleep.
That was just two months ago, and my memory has forcibly purged most of it.
Space Opera is a tough and expensive genre, and if it's not amazing, then people lose money because it takes a lot to turn a profit with that kind of stuff.
Simple, cheap, catchy movies like Happy Death Day, and comedies like Blockers -- Those are where the real profit is at.
The problem with Valerian was the same with modern Star Wars: SJW. The Valerian from the comic is a kind of Han Solo character mixed with James Bond... who ended being played by a soyboy. And the female lead was no better: Cara Devingne was absolutely unfuckable.
Modern political narrative is expensive. Religious cinema is forgettable, and that applies to both Christian and SJW cinema. That's why you can't remember the movie.
And no, Space Opera is NOT such an expensive genre. "A New Hope" budget adjusted to inflation would be about $50 millions in 2018. Empire Strikes Back? $75 millions adjusted. Serenity? $55 millions adjusted. Alien? less and $40 millions. Aliens? $40 million adjusted. And we're talking about bloody masterpieces of space opera and scifi.
Things like 50 and 75 million used to be big budgets, yes, but you can't just adjust for inflation. It's like military costs, many people have jumped onto the moviemaking boat to get as much money out of it as possible, especially the big actors.
Also, you literally went "SJW" on a character who was still a womanizer... simply because the main actor was too thin for your taste in beefy men.
The actress was rated on a fuckability scale... And even though you don't state it outright, you rated the actor on a fuckability scale too.
Well it's good to know you don't know what SJW even is, seems like you're just applying it to anything you dislike now.
You're back to being nuts.
• “many people have jumped onto the moviemaking boat to get as much money out of it as possible, especially the big actors”
Well, one advantage of fantasy and scifi genres is that they don't need known actors.
• “Also, you literally went "SJW" on a character who was still a womanizer... simply because the main actor was too thin for your taste in beefy men”
If you wanna have a womanizer character, you need an actor that can be believable as a womanizer. De Haan can't. The same way that if you write a hot female character and cast Melissa McCarthy, it will Just. Make. No. Sense. And the problem is that screws more than the character: it screws the whole movie, because it breaks the suspension of disbelief.
• “The actress was rated on a fuckability scale... And even though you don't state it outright, you rated the actor on a fuckability scale too.”
Duh, genius. They're main characters in a space opera adventure fantasy. Being fuckable is a must, specially if you write the characters as fuckable... and then cast actors who are not.
• “Well it's good to know you don't know what SJW even is, seems like you're just applying it to anything you dislike now.”
Nope. If we were talking about modern Russian movies, there would be completely different problems. Chinese movies? completely different problems too.
But you don't even need to go outside US movies. In the VERY comment you were answering I talked about problems with other kind of religious movies, not SJW but Christian ones. It was in front of your eyes, and you couldn't even see it. That's a symptom of religious thought, mate.
[deleted]
Toys & merchandise sales, DVD's, Blu-Rays, iTunes, Netflix, digital media, networks, will all propel this further. Hasn't half the profits from all Star Wars movies in the past been the merchandise sales afterwards?
shareThey're lucky if they make $350 million worldwide. Now deduct 40% because that's the movie theaters' cut. $210 million for Disney. I hope they're not counting on merchandise and blu-ray sales for this loser.
$250+ for filming
$50+ for refilming
$150+ for promotion
LOL.