Predicting the Movie Hits and Bombs of 2017

Maybe someone could convince one of the 12 year olds running the studios that "Jean Luc Godard would be perfect director for F+F10. "He's, like, an action director from France. He made, like a big traffic jam movie called 'Weekend'".

 

I'm going to go with the theory that Monte Hellman of "Two Lane Blacktop" fame will come back for a future "Fast and Furious" installment where Vin Diesel drives around the country while dealing with a personal, somber, existential crisis. They'll even get James Taylor to return to reprise his "Two Lane Blacktop" role.

Quick, someone mock up some artwork!

 

Toting up "franchise" grosses doesn't really reflect the cultural conversation, IMO. With very few exceptions, people don't go to "franchises" -- they go to individual movies. Story recognition certainly helps. But a true blockbuster is compounded of story recognition, star power, reviews, word of mouth, and a favorable cultural moment. Just one of those is not enough. Two of those is not enough. For this reason, franchise averages over time are completely meaningless.

The Star Wars movies are the only really obvious exception. But even then, episodes 2 & 3 performed below what you'd expect a "Star Wars" movie to make because people didn't enjoy them that much. The 7th film and "Rogue One" were huge successes because people seemed to enjoy those movies (although I didn't). Even there, the average is meaningless, since it folds together both Episode VII and something like Battle for Endor or The Clone Wars.

The Marvel "universe" is a good example of how franchise identity doesn't guarantee blockbuster success. There have been financial disappointments along the way. Not necessarily at the movies (though Ant-Man and the first two Captain America movies performed under expectations), but the TV series have almost all been disappointments in terms of viewership. Not enough people are watching Agents of Shield, hardly anyone watched Agent Carter, and the first season of Daredevil seems to have been the only really successful Netflix endeavor.

The assumption that audiences will turn up for a movie out of a sense of obligation (the sunk cost of previous entries in a series) is as likely to get studios into financial trouble as it is to be rewarding. A lot of people saw the 7th Fast & Furious movie because of the promotional blitz exploiting Paul Walker's ironic death ("one last ride," the posters said).

 

I guess that John Cowsill could again play the 'Dennis Wilson' role?

 

The final scene with the film 'literally' burning will look great in 3-D.

 

Stamos or nothin'.

 

The Fate of the Furious breaks global box office record - BBC News

Saw the 'Fate of The Furious' movie over the weekend with some friends in from out of town. Cars went fast. Things blew up. Acting gravitas was demonstrated. Cars went fast. Things blew up. There was a submarine. I ate a couple of really good hot dogs & some nachos with cheese dip. Cars went fast. Things blew up. Then it ended.

 

Anyone surprised by "Fast and Furious 8" beating the worldwide opening weekend record (just by a hair) of "The Force Awakens" should look at the domestic/foreign breakdown on the two films. Long story short, Star Wars isn't as popular in some other parts of the world as generic action flicks with big stars are:

The Force Awakens:
Domestic: $936,662,225 45.3%
+ Foreign: $1,131,561,399 54.7%

The Fate of the Furious:
Domestic: $98,786,705 18.4%
+ Foreign: $437,226,146 81.6%

And before anyone mentions it, the opening weekend of "Force Awakens" was very similar to the film's final totals, with domestic actually doing about 47% versus 53% foreign ($281 million and $248 million).

I'm sure the new F&F film will continue shocking numbers, but I'm guessing it won't easily break $2 billion worldwide, and certainly isn't poised to bring in another $800 million in the US.

The domestic/foreign split on F&F 8 is actually not too much better than the split for two other films infamous for having lopsided totals in favor or foreign markets: "Warcraft" and "The Great Wall."

Obviously, if the overall totals are that huge, it's not anything like those other two films. But the similar lopsided split is interesting.

 

It won't crack $2B - no chance, this franchise is usually very hot out of the gate and fades fast - Furious 7 lasted 11 weeks domestic in the theatre, that's it. Force Awakens lasted 24 weeks.

 

'Fate of the Furious' Hits $1B; Tom Hanks and Emma Watson's 'The Circle' Disappoints

 

Actually, Episodes 1-2-3 producer Rick McCallum told me he felt all three movies were big successes and liked by the public because they made a lot of money: $1.027 billion, $649 million, and $848 million, respectively. Almost any movie that grosses in those ranges is going to be a commercial hit, especially if their budgets were in the $100M-$120M range (which these were). The filmmakers were totally happy with the success of those films, though they did get generally mediocre reviews. The films also generated an enormous amount of ancillary income; some have said that Lucas profited even more from the merchandising than he did the films. I didn't ask.

I always say, there's four kinds of films: commercial successes, films I personally like, films the critics like, and films the public likes (but didn't necessarily make money). It's not that often the Venn diagram intersects on all four levels. I don't try to pretend everything I like is good -- I like all kinds of bad films, and there are some legitimately good films I didn't enjoy watching. Some were just too wrenching; I'd put Schindler's List in that category. Great film, but I ain't gonna watch that again.

 

food for thought ..

Fast action tummy grumble,toilet exploded.

 

And it looks like Charlie Hunnam's new King Arthur movie (directed by Guy Richie) is going to be an enormous $175 million bomb this weekend...

Box Office: ‘King Arthur’ Looks Like an Epic Flop

 

I figured as much, but I am seeing it anyway on Friday. LOL

 

Looks like a poor man's Game Of Thrones. Sword in the stone, not.

 

Oh goody another over blown flop of King Arthur...
a lot people will lose jobs because this movie..
Some writers and directors should be black listed because poor choices
and lack creativity..

 

Lock, Stock & Drawbridge.

 

I can kind of understand wanting to make another King Arthur movie, but what I can't understand is spending $175 million on it.

 

Nothing will ever top Excalibur, IMO. That was perfect. But I like Arthurian Legends and see every movie related to them, no matter the reviews.

 

IMDB gave it a 7.2 rating.

 

What about Hunnam's "
Lost City Of Z " or is that Zzzzz?

 

Already bombed and went.

 

McCallum was obviously being a little disingenuous there; when the second part of your trilogy earns over $300m less than the first part, that's not a success even if the film itself was profitable.

 

Yea, I read that, too. I saw the trailer looked at the wife and shrugged. I almost had to restrain her to make her agreeable to rent Excalibur. But after 5 minutes, she was hooked and she still remembers it vividly, which is something for her. Too bad they didn't learn from that one what works and what didn't.

 

Hey, chain mail armor ain't cheap!