Predicting the Movie Hits and Bombs of 2015

Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by Vidiot, Dec 12, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. And it's up to $360 million worldwide according to Box Office Mojo, so it's been a nice little earner. Which is good to see, as I enjoyed it quite a bit. Not a work of genius, but a fun summer movie for sure.
     
  2. PH416156

    PH416156 Alea Iacta Est

    Location:
    Europe
    I just noticed we already have three billionaires this year (Jurassic World, FF7 and the second Avengers film)

    http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?view2=worldwide&yr=2015&p=.htm

    "Minions" :eek: will be the fourth within some days and then we have "Star Wars" and "Spectre" released before 2015 ends. While I don't know if the new Bond film will top Skyfall, the new SW movie will surely make it to the billion $ club. 2015 may be the first year when 6 movie grossing north of $1B are released, breaking the 2012 record (4 billionaires: Skyfall, The Avengers, The Dark Knight Rises and The Hobbit)
     
  3. Deuce66

    Deuce66 Senior Member

    Location:
    Canada
    I'm not hearing any complaints from the Cineplex chain this year, bring it on. $$$$$$$$$$$
     
    PH416156 likes this.
  4. Mirrorblade.1

    Mirrorblade.1 Forum Resident

    She had that many nominations , But you really believe that she can ever get another
    role that she will be nominated again? I love her acting but her choices
    are least to be desired of late.
     
  5. Scott Wheeler

    Scott Wheeler Forum Resident

    Location:
    ---------------
    Um yeah, I do believe she can get another role that will get her another nomination. If I had to pick one person in the world of acting that is most likely to get an oscar nomination in the future she would be on my short list.
     
    shokhead likes this.
  6. mikeyt

    mikeyt Forum Resident

    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
  7. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits, Abbie & Mitzi: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    Exactly. Streep's been nominated 3 times over the last 5 years - it's not like she's on some dry spell.

    And I wouldn't be surprised if she got another nom for "Ricki". The movie didn't do much, but she got good reviews, and people clearly like to vote for her.

    Mirrorblade's belief that Streep is "done" makes zero sense - that thought has no connection to reality whatsoever...
     
  8. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR! Thread Starter

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    I worked on Postcards from the Edge back in 1990, and the crew told me that Streep really enjoyed singing live and took the role partly for that reason. She did a helluva job on that film, really enjoyable from start to finish. And she can actually sing fairly well.
     
  9. mikeyt

    mikeyt Forum Resident

    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Yeah. She's practically Hollywood royalty, any perceived downgrade in her roles is likely what she has to choose from as an actress her age rather than making poor choices. But if you actually look at her recent movies the roles themselves weren't bad, they're interesting parts in projects that any actress would love to take on.

    Suffregette
    opens in October and is aiming itself right at awards season. It's a Carrie Mulligan vehicle but one can't be surprised if Streep gets a supporting Oscar nom.

     
  10. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits, Abbie & Mitzi: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    Funny, because IMDB says she'll play the lead in "Florence Foster Jenkins":

    "The story of Florence Foster Jenkins, a New York heiress, who dreamed of becoming an opera singer, despite having a terrible singing voice."
     
  11. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits, Abbie & Mitzi: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    If Vegas laid odds on Streep being nominated for an Oscar every year, you'd win money if you bet "yes, she'll be nominated".

    I think Streep can do whatever she wants - within limits. She's never been a box office champion, so she can't get a big expensive movie greenlighted.

    But if there's a role out there for a female character aged between 50 and 70, I suspect Streep pretty much gets first shot at those roles. I think she's regarded as someone who "classes up" any project and she's a virtual lock to give a movie some "Oscar buzz".

    Streep has been nominated for an Oscar 19 times - that's way more than anyone else. I think 12 noms is 2nd place.

    And to repeat, she's gotten 3 nominations in the last 4 years - and 6 in the last 9 years.

    Because "Ricki" didn't do big business, somehow Mirrorblade sees this as an indication Streep is done in Hollywood! :wtf:
     
  12. shokhead

    shokhead Head shok and you still don't what it is. HA!

    Location:
    SoCal, Long Beach
    The Magnificent Seven (2016)

    Figure I'll add this just in case.
     
  13. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR! Thread Starter

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    BTW, earlier I said that Mad Max: Fury Road was disappointing. The final take worldwide was $374M, which under ordinary circumstances would be great, but... the movie cost $150M plus another $50M in ad/pub. I think it will break even with no problem, but it's not the big moneymaker they were hoping it would be. By comparison, Mission:Impossible 5 also cost $150M but has made over $440M, so it's already well into profit.

    It's interesting to note that Spielberg and Lucas criticized Hollywood about 2 years ago saying that there's going to be a time when all the studios come out with a whole slew of huge blockbusters and a bunch of them fail. This could be a catastrophe, particularly if a single studio has (say) three $250M bombs in a row. The safer gamble would be to make a combination of small, medium, and big-budget films, but the studios seem more willing to make fewer films, all of them with very high high costs.
     
  14. soundboy

    soundboy Senior Member

    Vidiot likes this.
  15. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR! Thread Starter

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    And we have a contender on one of the biggest bombs in history:

    Elsewhere, Zac Efron’s electronic dance music drama We Are Your Friends forged few relationships, debuting to a dismal $1.8 million from 2,333 locations, the worst opening ever for a major studio offering in 2,000 or more theaters, not accounting for inflation.

    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/box-office-compton-no-1-818692
     
    McLover and Maggie like this.
  16. Not so surprising - that's one of those movies where you watch the trailer and wonder exactly who the audience is supposed to be. Certainly the EDM crowd would probably rather go to a club than watch a Hollywood movie about the scene starring an aging teen pinup.
     
    Vidiot likes this.
  17. shokhead

    shokhead Head shok and you still don't what it is. HA!

    Location:
    SoCal, Long Beach
    MI is still pulling in 8-9m a week. Pretty strong still.
     
  18. Maggie

    Maggie like a walking, talking art show

    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    I had no idea this one was even coming out. However, it makes an instructive contrast with Straight Outta Compton, which is an enormous surprise hit that no-one in this forum (for obvious reasons) saw coming:

    http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=straightouttacompton.htm

    $134 million domestic, so far, on a $28 million budget. #1 at the B.O. for 3 weeks running. It may be outgrossed by The Transporter next weekend, but that's not guaranteed.

    I must say, after a pretty good 2014, I'm sort of taking a bath on 2015 in terms of box office predictions. I had no idea Compton was going to be as big as it has been. I knew it had promise in terms of the creative team behind it, but I had no idea that it would be as well directed and well acted as it turned out to be. It looked like a cheapo TV biopic on the posters. But it was made with real love and care.

    Regrettably, the Brian Wilson biopic (the two movies have Paul Giamatti in common), which I really loved when I saw it at TIFF last year, was barely released and has more or less bombed despite a modest budget and very positive reviews. I knew it was a challenging movie, but I thought people would come out for it if it was marketed right.

    Which brings something else to mind. I love Don Cheadle and I love Miles Davis, but someone needs to tell Don that the Miles biopic he's working on (and crowdfunding) is not going to make money. I'm sure it will be an interesting film, though! I'm glad he's doing something artistic with his Avengers money.

    And as for the big summer pictures, I was caught off guard by Jurassic World's performance (didn't think it would do anywhere near that much), considerably overestimated how Avengers would do and how it would resonate with audiences (what a frustrating film that turned out to be) and also Ant-Man, for that matter. I thought Terminator had a little more gas in the tank -- not a lot more, but I thought it would hit $100 million at least. I thought Tomorrowland would be bigger than it was (talk about your frustrating films). I knew Fantastic Four was destined to be a disappointment, but I wasn't expecting it to be out of theatres after 3 weeks.

    And, as much as I was looking forward to Inside Out -- which turned out to be pure magic as a movie -- I was not expecting it to click with the public the way it did. It's been a huge hit.

    About the only thing I was bang-on about was Fifty Shades. :shrug:
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2015
    Vidiot likes this.
  19. balzac

    balzac Senior Member

    I think “Love & Mercy” did well considering how they targeted the release. The film never went into super widespread release, and did well for the number of theaters it played at. It peaked at 791 theaters one week. Didn’t do exponentially better than predicted or intended, but other that blowhard Roger Friedman suggesting the film had “bombed”, all other indications is that it has been considered, at worst, a modest success with some amount of awards-buzz to boot.

    I suppose they could have tried to push the film harder, but I’m guessing they probably ended up hitting near the correct sweet spot in terms of budget/marketing costs versus box office receipts. I don’t think this film would have taken in like $25 million in 4,000-theater week, especially considering it came out only one week before “Jurrasic World” (and that was the film’s “soft” release; it had its peak number of theaters up against Jurassic World’s second week).

    Not a great source, but this article calls the film a “hit” for Lionsgate and Roadside Attractions.

    http://www.thewrap.com/22-summer-hits-and-misses-chris-pratts-world-tom-hardys-reboot-and-seasons-most-embarrassing-flop/
     
    Maggie likes this.
  20. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits, Abbie & Mitzi: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    I don't know if anyone anywhere anticipated what a hit "Compton" would become. Yeah, 3 straight weeks at #1 in August isn't like doing it in May, but it's still impressive.

    I sure didn't think it'd be a hit. I figured it might make $30 million total - maybe.

    Universal's having an amazing year. They released 2 of the 5 top-grossing movies internationally of all-time in the span of a few weeks!

    Add to that the big bucks brought in by "Compton" and "50 Shades" and they've been cruising!
     
    Vidiot and Maggie like this.
  21. Squealy

    Squealy Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    Vancouver
    I actually watched a preview of "We Are Your Friends" last week -- a friend got a free pass and I went along for something to do. I was meh about it -- it's not a movie for someone my age -- but there was nothing that would suggest Zac and the filmmakers were in for such a disastrous weekend. I would guess it was more a matter of indifference or bad timing (and too wide a release) than bad word of mouth.
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2015
  22. alexpop

    alexpop Power pop + other bad habits....

    Agree! Prefered Statham in this than 'F7'.Also 'Chris Pratt's ' Statham ' spoof was funny.
     
  23. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR! Thread Starter

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    Yeah, if I had made a prediction on Straight Outta Compton, would said it would do well -- maybe $30M opening weekend and a total of $100M worldwide, which would have been successful. It wound up having a $60M weekend, and it's already past $140M, probably on its way to $200M worldwide, which is pretty much a blockbuster (given the $28M budget).

    I didn't think the movie lived up to expectations and I thought it was muddled, but I liked the 1960s scenes quite a bit and I look forward to seeing the home video. I think as a rule, films about 1950s and 1960s artists rarely do well. For every music biographical film like Ray or Walk the Line, there's a couple of dozen others that just flop. I'm guessing Love & Mercy cost about $20M (minimum), but it only made a total of $13.4M, which ain't gonna hack it. It would've had to have gone far north of $40M just to break even.

    I agree. All very interesting failures (except for Avengers, Jurassic World, and Ant-Man). I guarantee you there have been lots of intense Hollywood meetings going on desperately trying to figure out why Terminator, Tommorowland, and Fantastic Four tanked. Note that Terminator:Genisys has become an unexpected hit in China in the last couple of weeks, so it'll wind up making money.

    I figured We Are Your Friends would not do well, but I would've thought at least $7M-$8M for the first week. But $1.8M is an unqualified disaster. I bet his agent is calling Disney right now to see if they have any more teen musicals planned... :sigh:
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2015
    Maggie likes this.
  24. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR! Thread Starter

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    My opinion is that Love & Mercy is a bomb, at least financially. Critically, I think it did very well. I think we're getting to a time where films about the music of the 1960s are not going to do well as mass-market theatrical releases. I suspect the best way to present them is to make them as $10M HBO movies and show them there. Anything more than that, you're never gonna break even.

    One of my dream projects that I would make if I won De Lotto tomorrow would be to do the authorized Roy Orbison story, provided we could cast it, clear all the songs, and find somebody who could look like and sing like the Big O. I think Orbison's story is incredibly melodramatic, particularly when you consider this was a contemporary of Elvis who still had hits when the British Invasion clobbered other artists on the charts, he toured with Elvis, had several close relatives die, career fizzled in the 1970s, then managed an amazing comeback in the late 1980s only to drop dead a month after his album hit the charts. An incredible story. but I'd only do it as a TV movie. I don't think it'd make dime one in the theater, because the audience is too small. Pretty much everybody under 35 would say, "Roy who?"
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2015
    Pete Puma and PHILLYQ like this.
  25. Maggie

    Maggie like a walking, talking art show

    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    I think it might have cost somewhat less than that. It was privately financed by the director, Bill Pohlad, with no studio support. In that respect it was an amazing looking film, with striking cinematography and period detail. I understand John Cusack took a substantial pay cut for it.It does appear as if they expect to make whatever money is to be made on it through home video and on-demand.

    I'm actually glad to hear some good news about Terminator. I'd like to see a sequel, even if it's scaled down somewhat. It was a silly film, more in line with Doctor Who than the first two, but I enjoyed it and thought Arnold was fun and even sweet in it. By contrast, I thought Tomorrowland was a completely joyless and obnoxious movie.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine