Posted on 05/27/2018 8:46:45 AM PDT by EdnaMode
Walt Disney and Lucasfilm’s Solo: A Star Wars Story performed at near-worst-case scenario levels this Memorial Day weekend. The film opened with a soft-ish $35.6 million on Friday, including $14m in Thursday previews, before comparatively cratering over the holiday for an $83.3m Fri-Sun and projected $101m Fri-Mon frame. That’s a weak 2.83x four-day weekend multiplier, on par with Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End (2.73x in 2007) and X-Men: The Last Stand (2.71x in 2006). That wouldn’t be a problem if the overall numbers were bigger, as X-Men 3 and Pirates 3 both set Memorial Day records. Solo did not set any (positive) records.
But when your $250-$300 million (thanks to reshoots) sci-fi prequel opens with $101m over four days with a lower weekend multiplier than X-Men: Apocalypse, with awful overseas numbers to boot, the odds are beyond grim. Yes, the reviews are decent and the next two weeks are relatively vacant. But even and arguable best-case-scenario of a 2.5x multiplier (think Men in Black 3 in 2012) gives the Ron Howard-directed film a domestic total just over/under the $248m debut weekend of The Force Awakens.
And there is plenty of precedent for a much-grimmer outcome. That weekend multiplier is terrifying because there are plenty of big Memorial Day releases (the third and fifth Pirates movies, the last three ensemble X-Men flicks, Day After Tomorrow or Fast and Furious 6) that barely earned over/under 2x their four-day gross over their entire domestic run. Yes, there is math that argues that Solo: A Star Wars Story may end up essentially earning about what The Amazing Spider-Man 2 ($202 million) or Godzilla ($200m) did in 2014. And unlike those franchises, Lucasfilm can’t count on an overseas bailout.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
And Dr. Who... sad.
Hey, we’re just like Chewie and Hans!
Yeah I think he would have been the best choice.
Star Wars died when they made the first muppet movie.
Each movie after that has at first progressively worse,
And now exponentially worse.
Its almost as if the directors are settling a bet about how blatantly awful they can make a cherished movie before it starts losing money.
William Holden
Look at it this way. Star Wars has a reputation that precedes it of making money, especially with its movies.
I thought they said Lando was LGBT ,all of them ,LOL
I thought the first rule of making sequels is that the first sequel that does not make money is the last sequel.
I think you are right. And there’s a related rule, that you reach a point of diminishing returns on sequels.
So say you have a bit hit movie, and they decide to do a sequel. The actors and actresses will need to be paid much more for a sequel, in most cases. And since sequels often don’t do as well at the box office, the combination of higher costs to make the movie and less ticket revenue results in diminishing returns over time.
Some franchises run their course, as the fan base doesn’t go to see sequels. I think by the time they got to Rocky 6 or 7, whichever was the last, that series had run out of gas.
Unfortunately, Star Wars was pretty much liberal propaganda since Lucas started writing it in 1973 (he based the Rebels on the Vietcong and the Empire on America in order to push an anti-Vietnam War statement). All this is doing is making the liberal propagandizing all the more apparent. It’s for that reason that I root for the Empire now (and I’m not too happy about it since I generally avoid rooting for the villains). On that note, Star Trek was pretty much promoting globalism and communism.
Not that it’s any good, if anything this is getting even worse. We must stop those liberals from touching any more stuff and turning them into trash.
We saw it yesterday I fell asleep for most of it nice recliners
The third rule of sequels is Hollywood will keep pushing out sequels to a successful movie until the box office return doesn't... return.
That would indicate something around $450-$500 million gross theatrical revenue. Add in video revenue and I’m not seeing how the studio loses money, but they are inventive in Hollywood.
A small part of’Remember The Titans’ was shot in front of our house in Grant Park (Atlanta). They shot for about 3 days and maybe a couple of minutes of film ended up in the movie. They brought around 50 extras over from Birmingham Al., in spite of the multi-millions living in Atl. That was a movie with a relatively modest budget. When they quote these large figures for making a movie, just understand, they throw around money like it’s nothing.
My wife and I went yesterday and found it to be entertaining. More so than the more recent versions.
I am trying to remember any homosexual scenes and can not remember anything in that regard.
Even the girl power garbage was toned down.
Did it have Jar Jar Binks?
“Merchandising....Merchandising...where the real money from the movie is made.”
It’s not star wars anymore, it’s just another Disney flick.
Meh, go into it without politics in mind, or expectations that the main actor could ever recreate Harrison Ford. Just a fun movie. 10x better than The Last Jedi.
Not even another Disney flick. I’ve seen Disney flicks that were actually good, like The Lion King, Sleeping Beauty, The Little Mermaid, Dumbo, etc., etc.
This is more of a... I’m not sure what to call it.
Wasn’t The Clone Wars the first Star Wars film to lose money? I remember seeing an MSN article shortly after seeing it that indicated that it really underperformed.
There wasn't one - why on earth do you think there was?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.