Box Office Results: 6/09-6/11
06-11-06, 03:50 PM
#26
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by jaeufraser
Yeah I don't think anybody can argue with the financial performance. It'll make good money for Fox. There have been bigger movies, but X3 is still successful.
King Kong ended its run with over $540 million worldwide, and if X3 cost $210 million it was more than Kong, yet Kong was perceived by almost everybody as the better movie, but yet with both that and better ticket sales, not to mention pretty good DVD and profits, it's still seen as a bad business decision. Go figure.
Cars will be #1 again next weekend, and Nacho Libre will have a strong second place. In fact, I see Cars staying at #1 until Superman Returns.
06-11-06, 04:03 PM
#27
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sand Point
Posts: 2,249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dr_Evil
X-Men 3's worldwide gross is currently at around $331 million
06-11-06, 05:43 PM
#29
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 4,551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dr. DVD
King Kong ended its run with over $540 million worldwide, and if X3 cost $210 million it was more than Kong, yet Kong was perceived by almost everybody as the better movie, but yet with both that and better ticket sales, not to mention pretty good DVD and profits, it's still seen as a bad business decision. Go figure.
It's funny how that works. Kong got a ton of press for being the most expensive movie ever made, yet really...assuming that X3 number is true (I've heard everything from 160 to 210...I should find out for sure) there are three films this summer that cost more than Kong. And at least one film last year that cost within 10 million of what Kong cost.
Things get labeled, even if the bottom line performance doesn't really paint the picture the media might. It's why Waterworld is still considered to be one of the biggest bombs ever made...even though in reality, it's far from it. Or why Troy is considered a box office flop by some, even though really...it made half a billion at the box office and is far from a financial loser.
06-11-06, 06:05 PM
#30
DVD Talk Legend
I am sure the media are just foaming at the mouth for Superman Returns to underperform so they can write about the "$300 million disaster that it is(or so they want people to perceive)", even if it gets lots of good press from critics.
06-11-06, 07:17 PM
#31
DVD Talk Legend
I still think it's completely retarded that financials of afilm are discussed.
Who cares?
The measurement should be # of tickets sold. Period.
The music industry charts are basedon album sales, that works great. I don't need to know the financials or which albums made aprofit (since each one costs different depending on studio time, etc).
In music, we count the number of units sold and we're satisfied. Why are movies different?
Who cares?
The measurement should be # of tickets sold. Period.
The music industry charts are basedon album sales, that works great. I don't need to know the financials or which albums made aprofit (since each one costs different depending on studio time, etc).
In music, we count the number of units sold and we're satisfied. Why are movies different?
06-11-06, 09:04 PM
#32
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Originally Posted by GuessWho
I still think it's completely retarded that financials of afilm are discussed.
Who cares?
The measurement should be # of tickets sold. Period.
The music industry charts are basedon album sales, that works great. I don't need to know the financials or which albums made aprofit (since each one costs different depending on studio time, etc).
In music, we count the number of units sold and we're satisfied. Why are movies different?
Who cares?
The measurement should be # of tickets sold. Period.
The music industry charts are basedon album sales, that works great. I don't need to know the financials or which albums made aprofit (since each one costs different depending on studio time, etc).
In music, we count the number of units sold and we're satisfied. Why are movies different?
06-11-06, 09:51 PM
#33
DVD Talk Legend
and some stores charge $10 for a cd while others charge $18 for the same thing... yet the ranking go by units sold
i don't have any investments in movie companies, so why would i care if th ticket stubs "pay the bills" -- i just wanna know what was popular this weekend and what wasn't.
i don't have any investments in movie companies, so why would i care if th ticket stubs "pay the bills" -- i just wanna know what was popular this weekend and what wasn't.
06-11-06, 10:23 PM
#34
DVD Talk Legend
Also, if you go by tickets sold as a measurement of a film's success then many smaller movies would most likely be considered flat out failures despite how well they did in the long run. None of Kevin Smith's movies have sold tickets like gangbusters, but yet they are all considered hits for the most part by the fanbase (except Jersey Girl).
Maybe a new measurement should be how many DVD units a movie sells, since it's obvious that the people who are buying it must have really liked the movie to want to own it, and almost all movies are priced to own nowadays when they street.
Maybe a new measurement should be how many DVD units a movie sells, since it's obvious that the people who are buying it must have really liked the movie to want to own it, and almost all movies are priced to own nowadays when they street.
06-12-06, 01:44 AM
#35
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Originally Posted by Legolas
On another message board, some idiot is trying to proclaim that the box office intake of The Da Vinci Code, the X-Men trilogy and The Lord of the Rings trilogy is a testament that Ian McKellan is a bigger actor than Tom Cruise.
boxofficemojo
Tom Hanks is number 1. Tom Cruise is ahead of Ian McKellen. For a while, I think Samuel L. Jackson was #1 because he was in Star Wars and Jurassic Park.
06-12-06, 02:47 AM
#36
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sand Point
Posts: 2,249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chowderhead
Here is the chart of highest total gross by actor
boxofficemojo
Tom Hanks is number 1. Tom Cruise is ahead of Ian McKellen. For a while, I think Samuel L. Jackson was #1 because he was in Star Wars and Jurassic Park.
boxofficemojo
Tom Hanks is number 1. Tom Cruise is ahead of Ian McKellen. For a while, I think Samuel L. Jackson was #1 because he was in Star Wars and Jurassic Park.
It's like how Steve Guettenberg's movies have grossed over a billion dollars. Or Vince Vaughn taking credit for the monster opening The Lost World had. After the Harry Potter movies are through, will their box office success indicate that Alan Rickman is one of the most popular actors of all time?
Last edited by Legolas; 06-12-06 at 12:32 PM.
06-12-06, 02:51 PM
#41
DVD Talk Godfather
And you thought only you were concerned with box office results...
That means that people thought Disney (as a company) was worth anywhere from $700MM to $2BN less based on a poor opening for Cars.
Talk about pressure.
Disney shares take a tumble after 'Cars' debut
Computer-generated film's opening is weaker than Street expected
By Russ Britt & Angela Moore, MarketWatch. Last Update: 1:33 PM ET 6/12/06
LOS ANGELES (MarketWatch) -- Shares of Walt Disney Co. stumbled Monday after the company's new film, "Cars," made a healthy debut over the weekend but didn't live up to expectations of previous releases through its Pixar unit.
Shares (DIS) fell as much as 3.5% soon after the markets opened. But they recovered and were off 1.4% in recent action to $28.91.
Early box office estimates put opening weekend receipts for the film, which uses computer-generated imagery, at $62.8 million, well below the $70 million opening for other hits "Finding Nemo" and "The Incredibles."
Banc of America analyst Doug Shapiro said the opening weekend was "hardly a failure" for Disney, a Dow component, though it does have negative implications.
"Based on the recent performance of CGI films and its mixed reviews, the film could struggle to gross $230 million domestically," Shapiro wrote in a note to clients. "More significant, it also raises questions about the rationale for the Pixar deal and, as a result, raises a central question about the Disney bull case."
Made on an estimated $70 million budget, "Cars" appears to be well on its way toward profitability. The film is the seventh collaboration between the creative forces at Pixar and the distribution muscle of Disney, though it is the first film released since the two entities merged. The $7.4 billion deal was announced in January and completed in May.
"Cars" would have been the last film the two companies worked on had they not merged, as Pixar had been looking for another distributor to market its films after it had a falling out with previous Disney management. That all changed with Robert Iger took over as chief executive from longtime Disney chief Michael Eisner in 2005.
The "Cars" opening is still better than Dreamworks Animation's (DWA) film "Over the Hedge," which opened recently to $38.5 million in weekend receipts, and almost in line with Fox's sequel "Ice Age: The Meltdown," with an opening weekend of $68 million, Lehman Brothers analyst Vijay Jayant wrote in a note to clients. But he said Disney shares could still be weaker in Monday trading because of the "Cars" opening.
Disney's stock drop comes on the heels of a rating cut by Citigroup, which in a note dated late Friday had cut the company's shares to hold from buy.
Citigroup analyst Jason Bazinet said Disney shares are less attractive at current levels following a strong run and could have trouble achieving consensus earnings-per-share estimates for fiscal 2007. Bazinet also raised his price target on Disney to $32 a share from $30, citing the acquisition of Pixar, as well as more robust syndication revenue and Internet advertising growth.
Russ Britt is the Los Angeles bureau chief for MarketWatch. Angela Moore is a MarketWatch editor based in New York.
Computer-generated film's opening is weaker than Street expected
By Russ Britt & Angela Moore, MarketWatch. Last Update: 1:33 PM ET 6/12/06
LOS ANGELES (MarketWatch) -- Shares of Walt Disney Co. stumbled Monday after the company's new film, "Cars," made a healthy debut over the weekend but didn't live up to expectations of previous releases through its Pixar unit.
Shares (DIS) fell as much as 3.5% soon after the markets opened. But they recovered and were off 1.4% in recent action to $28.91.
Early box office estimates put opening weekend receipts for the film, which uses computer-generated imagery, at $62.8 million, well below the $70 million opening for other hits "Finding Nemo" and "The Incredibles."
Banc of America analyst Doug Shapiro said the opening weekend was "hardly a failure" for Disney, a Dow component, though it does have negative implications.
"Based on the recent performance of CGI films and its mixed reviews, the film could struggle to gross $230 million domestically," Shapiro wrote in a note to clients. "More significant, it also raises questions about the rationale for the Pixar deal and, as a result, raises a central question about the Disney bull case."
Made on an estimated $70 million budget, "Cars" appears to be well on its way toward profitability. The film is the seventh collaboration between the creative forces at Pixar and the distribution muscle of Disney, though it is the first film released since the two entities merged. The $7.4 billion deal was announced in January and completed in May.
"Cars" would have been the last film the two companies worked on had they not merged, as Pixar had been looking for another distributor to market its films after it had a falling out with previous Disney management. That all changed with Robert Iger took over as chief executive from longtime Disney chief Michael Eisner in 2005.
The "Cars" opening is still better than Dreamworks Animation's (DWA) film "Over the Hedge," which opened recently to $38.5 million in weekend receipts, and almost in line with Fox's sequel "Ice Age: The Meltdown," with an opening weekend of $68 million, Lehman Brothers analyst Vijay Jayant wrote in a note to clients. But he said Disney shares could still be weaker in Monday trading because of the "Cars" opening.
Disney's stock drop comes on the heels of a rating cut by Citigroup, which in a note dated late Friday had cut the company's shares to hold from buy.
Citigroup analyst Jason Bazinet said Disney shares are less attractive at current levels following a strong run and could have trouble achieving consensus earnings-per-share estimates for fiscal 2007. Bazinet also raised his price target on Disney to $32 a share from $30, citing the acquisition of Pixar, as well as more robust syndication revenue and Internet advertising growth.
Russ Britt is the Los Angeles bureau chief for MarketWatch. Angela Moore is a MarketWatch editor based in New York.
Talk about pressure.
06-12-06, 03:30 PM
#42
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 7,937
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by The Bus
That means that people thought Disney (as a company) was worth anywhere from $700MM to $2BN less based on a poor opening for Cars.
Talk about pressure.
Talk about pressure.
06-12-06, 10:51 PM
#43
DVD Talk Godfather
Originally Posted by bravesmg
And that's only if you buy that a $63m opening weekend is "poor." I mean, I know $7m is a lot of dough, but if it opened at $70m, investors would have been happy? Doesn't make much sense to me, I'll be seeing it with the wife on Tuesday night, I've heard only good things.
There's always an overreaction.
06-12-06, 11:01 PM
#44
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Originally Posted by Dr. DVD
Also, if you go by tickets sold as a measurement of a film's success then many smaller movies would most likely be considered flat out failures despite how well they did in the long run. None of Kevin Smith's movies have sold tickets like gangbusters, but yet they are all considered hits for the most part by the fanbase (except Jersey Girl).
Maybe a new measurement should be how many DVD units a movie sells, since it's obvious that the people who are buying it must have really liked the movie to want to own it, and almost all movies are priced to own nowadays when they street.
Maybe a new measurement should be how many DVD units a movie sells, since it's obvious that the people who are buying it must have really liked the movie to want to own it, and almost all movies are priced to own nowadays when they street.
I don't get your logic. The smaller movies that do well in the long run will reflect that in ticket sales just as much as with dollar values. And DVD units sold should be a totally different measurement and should not have anything to do with the box office success of a movie. I agree that total tickets sold should be the way to judge it. Even better would be total tickets sold over the total number of population. But I doubt it if people could follow it that far.
06-13-06, 08:21 AM
#45
DVD Talk Legend
You know Cars is mainly a family movie and the fact is, it is getting too expensive to take a family of 3, 4, whatever to the movies. And if every week there is a new "got to see it movie", most families are just going to have to pick and choose. I think this is one of the main reason why Cars isnt performing to its peak. We are just going to see more and more of this as it gets more expensive.
06-13-06, 08:34 AM
#46
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by tanman
I don't get your logic. The smaller movies that do well in the long run will reflect that in ticket sales just as much as with dollar values. And DVD units sold should be a totally different measurement and should not have anything to do with the box office success of a movie. I agree that total tickets sold should be the way to judge it. Even better would be total tickets sold over the total number of population. But I doubt it if people could follow it that far.
When I said they did well in the long run I meant to include all of the times the movies sold and/or got rented on video/DVD. A lot of people, myself included, didn't discover Kevin Smith until they rented some of his movies a few years after their intial release. Basically, I didn't mean theatrical run as the long run.
FWIW, a lot of my favorie movies were not theatrical successes (Big Lebowski, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, Almost Famous), so looking at their ticket sales would lead one to the conclusion that they are failures.
06-13-06, 08:48 AM
#47
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like Cars was actually over-estimated by almost 3mil. Ouch.
Actuals from BOM
1. Cars $60,119,509
2. The Break-Up $20,325,790
3. X-Men: The Last Stand $16,078,578
4. The Omen (2006) $16,026,496
5. The Da Vinci Code $10,443,347
6. Over The Hedge $10,221,499
7. A Prairie Home Companion $4,566,293
8. Mission: Impossible 3 $3,020,816
9. RV $1,910,564
10. Poseidon $1,833,493
Actuals from BOM
1. Cars $60,119,509
2. The Break-Up $20,325,790
3. X-Men: The Last Stand $16,078,578
4. The Omen (2006) $16,026,496
5. The Da Vinci Code $10,443,347
6. Over The Hedge $10,221,499
7. A Prairie Home Companion $4,566,293
8. Mission: Impossible 3 $3,020,816
9. RV $1,910,564
10. Poseidon $1,833,493
06-13-06, 10:00 AM
#48
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 2,087
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe there were several contributing factors as to why "Cars" may have performed below expectations this opening weekend . . .
-abundance of family films (computer animated) nowadays . . . Over the Hedge, The Wild, Ice Age: The Meltdown, etc.
-expensive ticket prices = expensive night out for families
-longer than usual run time (I believe this film is close to 2 hours?)
However, the positive reviews and word of mouth should give "Cars" some good legs well into this summer.
-abundance of family films (computer animated) nowadays . . . Over the Hedge, The Wild, Ice Age: The Meltdown, etc.
-expensive ticket prices = expensive night out for families
-longer than usual run time (I believe this film is close to 2 hours?)
However, the positive reviews and word of mouth should give "Cars" some good legs well into this summer.
06-13-06, 10:01 AM
#49
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by needlz
I believe there were several contributing factors as to why "Cars" may have performed below expectations this opening weekend . . .
-abundance of family films (computer animated) nowadays . . . Over the Hedge, The Wild, Ice Age: The Meltdown, etc.
-expensive ticket prices = expensive night out for families
-longer than usual run time (I believe this film is close to 2 hours?)
-abundance of family films (computer animated) nowadays . . . Over the Hedge, The Wild, Ice Age: The Meltdown, etc.
-expensive ticket prices = expensive night out for families
-longer than usual run time (I believe this film is close to 2 hours?)
06-13-06, 07:53 PM
#50
DVD Talk Hero
Originally Posted by joeblow69
From the previews, it looks too nascar-y, which has pretty much killed any interest I had in seeing it.
So there. Now you don't have a reason to avoid it
