Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by StarTrek1701, May 31, 2011.
So, it's a minor major discontinuity?
I don't think so... if you recall right before she tells Shaw about what's going on, she's on the bridge with Azazel looking for any other boats or subs. The reason she knows that he's amplifying his powers is because they couldn't find any vessels nearby that he could be on.
That's right, so that doesn't explain why they know where the CIA base of operations is. But it does explain that they knew he was trying to recruit.
However, his many contacts in the government, as previously stated, is enough of an explanation, I would think.
That's actually a respectable drop of what, around 50% or so which shows the movie is holding its own fairly good if it was seeing a drop into 60% or more that'd be bad news.
Word-wide total puts this movie now a $173 million which means that in two weeks, world wide, the movie has paid for its production budget.
Not even remotely true.
A movie needs to at least make double its production budget in the worldwide total to make a profit, theaters always get a share of the money and studios spend a ton on adversting, a common fact known by people that follow the boxoffice.
So it has to make $330 worldwide first for any chance at a sequel. It is going to take this movie a while to get there.
This movie is a disappointment at the boxoffice, but I guess it'll make a profit eventually.
Was Star Trek a disappointment because it cost 150 million and earned only 176 million after two weeks?
And if Trekker had said that the film had made a profit, what you just posted would mean something. As it stands, he didn't. So it doesn't.
Not really a good comparison. STXI was a hit and biggest Trek movie when it was released. XMFC made the least out of the X-men movies when it came out.
It still doesn't make my post wrong. The movie isn't doing that hot overseas. It flopped pretty badly in Italy.
FOX recasting so many of the characters for this reboot/prequel/whatever has put off many people.
It'll end up doing okay in the end, but will become the lowest grossing X-men film.
You say Star Trek was a hit, even though it only made 257 million domestic/ 385 worldwide against a 150 million budget. According to what you said about X-Men: FC, it only barely broke even.
Yeah, it was a hit. It end up making $385,680,446 worldwide. Worldwide numbers are the only thing studios care about. It also ended up reviving a dead movie franchise bringing in new fans.
XMFC will end up doing okay, I can't comment on the quality of the movie since I haven't watched it, but even Wolverine will end up making more than it. I'm just saying it has so far being doing disappointing numbers.
The movie made a respectable drop from it's first week to it's second week and this was going up against probably one of the bigger releases this summer (Super 8), the movie is mostly holding its own and getting good word-of-mouth from audiences and professional reviewers. After the theatrical run and with the DVD sales/rentals/Netflix/whatever it should see a tidy profit.
As goofy as that sounds, yeah.
Let me rephrase. The biggest thing is Prof. X's walking. And, on the whole, that is very minor.
Over $223 million worldwide after only 2 weeks.
I think it'll get that $330 million quicker than people think.
Just saw the film a second time...and yes I think it's possibly trumped "X2" as my favorite film in the franchise. I do see what people have against January Jones, she looks the part and is hot but really I would have preferred Alice Eve in the role.
Alice Eve vs. January Jones...I really don't think it would have made much of a difference. The character wasn't given anything really to do other than to sit around and look at the interesting things other characters are doing.
As I said before, movies need to be HUGE overseas in order to actually make a profit from foreign ticket sales. According to some articles I read on the subject back in the day, not even 15% of overseas grosses end up in studios' pockets, and as for the domestic grosses, if I remember correctly, when everything that needs to be deducted IS deducted, the studios keep roughly just over one half of it.
With home video and TV it's a whole different story, this is where the studios get a much much bigger cut, and that's why ST XI is a huge success (the DVD/BR sales numbers are quite stellar).
For "Super 8" to beat it out IMO shows that X-Men isn't getting the mass repeated viewings.
The sad fact is that the general public is burnt out on X-Men, especially with how poor the previous two films were. It's just a shame that this excellent film has to pay for the sins of its predecessors.
Separate names with a comma.