Weekly Box Office and Film Discussion Thread

[mr3urious]

As expected, Age of Ultron has made a killing at the box office despite opening lower than its predecessor in both the domestic and foreign markets. Let's hope Disney doesn't interpret this as a failure.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=avengersfranchise.htm

 

[Drtooth]

The thing still domestically made nearly twice as much as the best performing movie of last year's opening. It's only a barely 20 million dollar difference, and there's no real competition unless anyone actually wants to see the Mad Max remake until Tomorrowland. If this movie makes slightly less than the first one, it's still going to out perform anything we've seen last year domestically. This thing could have easily opened at the 90 million mark and made money, like Captain America 2 and GOTG.

Not to mention that 207 million dollars is a feat. Getting within 20 million dollars of that isn't a slouch. Some theorize it's that big Boxing match, I swear that FCBD may have shaved several thousand tickets off that. Stopped me from going this week to an otherwise movie I'd see in a heartbeat. Or maybe less theater goers saw it in 3-D. But the fact of the matter is, it still opened twice as much as GOTG domestically, and that was the best performing movie last year. Well, technically American Sniper was by a little bit, but that came out late enough to be split up into last and this year, so...

 

[Drtooth]

Anyone get the feeling that May is a little more relaxed than last year? There are 3 Blockbuster type films coming out. Mad Max and Tomorrowland being 2 of them (I don't see Mad Max being that successful, I'd be surprised if it was). It doesn't have the urgency of last year's Spider-Man, Godzilla, and X-Men opening up close to each other that I swear lead to all three films only doing well instead of great. Glad they didn't shove Jurassic World in May or everything would have been totally screwed up. Makes me wonder why Disney released Tomorrowland relatively close to Avengers. Seems making it come out just at the end of the month is decent breathing room, but it's still close enough to directly compete with itself.

The comedy films don't look like much of a draw. I'm sure Pitch Perfect has a loyal enough fanbase to make money. It's strange to see these sequels of intended for cult audience films. Plus, that comedy sequel ghetto that will either lead to failure or odd success. I'm sure they're dealing with comedy sequel syndrome. Essentially doing the same movie bigger with a larger budget. Pizza Steve's in it, but I don't care to check it out.

 

[mr3urious]

Great to see Age of Ultron staying at the top last week. Hot Pursuit snagged a distant 2nd, followed by Adaline.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/daily/chart/?sortdate=2015-05-10&track=witherspoonvergara.htm

 

[Drtooth]

Sucks that Ultron can't keep up with the first film domestically, but it is edging ahead of the first one internationally. Hasn't even opened up in a lot of markets yet.

Film was freakin' amazing, by the way. I'd say the storyline was a bit more coherent than last time. Seems with the first one, they tried doing too much. I was almost worried that would be the case here, but everything just blended better. Seems they did have some stuff contained that would make a good Hulk solo film (the Hulkbuster armor scene for one).

Anyway, looks like Hot Pursuit is following the trend of low budget comedy movies not being a draw. It's clearly due to Netflix. There's nothing epic and large enough to miss on a small screen.

Supposedly the Mad Max "remake" isn't really. It's a continuation, from what I hear, and it's actually supposed to be good. I may actually check that out at some point.

 

[Drtooth]

Also, they just released the Jem trailer:

Now, I kinda knew they'd go in this direction, but I have to admit, it's pretty disappointing that they completely dumped all the best things about the original series, and whatever's left is just a small reference here and there. I get what they're trying to do, and it sort of works for a lower key, more realistic concept and I'm sure the tweenage girls this was intended for won't seem to mind. But you gotta admit, a movie series that's a direct Jem adaption (obviously with the 1980's-ness stripped away) would have been much more fun.

But hey, if it sells dolls...

 

[mr3urious]

That Jem movie feels very generic, like a proposed Hannah Montana movie script with a brand name slapped on it. It could have been called anything else and tween girls would still eat it up if they could.

 

[CensoredAlso]

I get what they're trying to do, and it sort of works for a lower key, more realistic concept and I'm sure the tweenage girls this was intended for won't seem to mind.

Kinda over the "realism" trend at this point and I look forward to the day when the studios are too. This isn't realism. This is "let's take something that was kooky and inspirational and drain it of all personality until only bland teenage angst remains."

Plus there's the usual adaptation mistakes. When you're in campy '80s land, it makes sense that your purple haired boyfriend is named Rio. To keep the same name for modern day JC Penny catalog guy is kinda pointless. They made the same mistake in that new He-Man series.

Plus, the point of Jem is that they were adults, setting an example for children. I guess they're taking a page from Lucas (why I'll never know) and assuming that kids only want to see a movie that has kids in it. And then we wonder why kids seem so emotionally stunted.

I actually do like the actress playing Jem, at least from what the trailer shows. And I'm perfectly willing to entertain the possibility that the movie is better than the marketing. However, I wouldn't be shocked if this movie just ends up quietly disappearing, as many reboots do. The audience they're aiming at has no history with Jem and the original fans aren't going to like the changes or the teeny bopper vibe. Seriously, when will Hollywood buy themselves a clue? Is it really worth it?

 

[Drtooth]

I'd say it's more Josie and the Pussycats the movie. I have to admit, it doesn't look terrible (look at what was done to Bratz... they made something that sucked to begin with into something beyond awful). To me, it's more of Hasbro stripping down the concept and removing all the elements that made the series memorable to appeal to a younger demographic that they think is too jaded to buy into the original concept (among other things, ones that don't get camp). Pretty cynical, I have to say, but it's not like the Hasbro films that keep the original concepts were well received either. Sufficed to say I'm mixed. It's disappointing most of the personality has to be stripped from the franchise to be replaced with more realism. But the goal of this movie is clear. To sell toys.

Here's the thing. Hasbro may have Marvel, Star Wars, Transformers, G.I. Joe, Littlest Pet Shop, and MLP:FIM, but they don't have a fashion doll line to compete with Mattel (much like how Mattel doesn't have a non-licensed action figure line, unless you count the expensive He-Man collectors line). That's why Equestria Girls exists. They couldn't come up with a good doll line themselves without expanding an already popular line... and honestly, the results are mixed. Taking aside it ticked off the obvious part of the fanbase, the dolls... well... they ride a fine line of kinda cute and kinda horrifying. Something is lost in translation. Even the Happy Meal versions of the characters look better. I've been saying the needed to revive Jem for years for purely the toy line aspect. But it's so freaking 80's that there would have to have been a huge overhaul. This was that overhaul.

Some of the aspects are sound. The girls being younger and internet celebrity thing. Then the record label forcing performance personalities on them to sell rec...cd...alb...Pandora radio subscript...COME ON! errr... forcing personalities on them to sell the band. The age group thing gives that added level of fantasy that it could be "you" to the demographic. That stuff seems like a natural update. But some of the fantasy elements could have very well stayed in there. Not rushing to judgement if the Misfits are there or not, doesn't look like they are and that would be a shame and a waste of tension. I'm going to say this isn't quite the relaunch the project should have. Obviously, a cartoon series would have been better. I don't know about the comic and what's going down with that since I flipped through the first issue briefly. And chances are I wasn't going to see this movie anyway, even if it was a direct adaption.

 

[CensoredAlso]

It's disappointing most of the personality has to be stripped from the franchise to be replaced with more realism. But the goal of this movie is clear. To sell toys.

I just don't see that as realism. It's just the extreme opposite of personality. In other words, bland. And I wouldn't buy a toy for any children based on that. It's like everything's backward.

Then the record label forcing performance personalities on them to sell

Cliche and contrived. Their new personalities liberated them in the cartoon. Nowadays, everyone has to mope and whine about how miserable their First World life is. Ugh, you know, now I'm definitely not seeing this movie, lol.

The age group thing gives that added level of fantasy that it could be "you" to the demographic.

"I'll try spinning, that's a good trick!"

appeal to a younger demographic that they think is too jaded to buy into the original concept (among other things, ones that don't get camp)

If you don't get camp, it's not that you're jaded. It's that you're unsophisticated. Normal for children, of course. I'm just sick of Hollywood pandering to that and not inspiring their audience any further.