Originally posted by juggernaut74I think your expectations are a bit unrealistic. Rarely do big budget movies gross 50% of their opening weekend on their second weekend. Man of Steel had a near 65% drop in its second weekend. Iron Man 3 had a near 60% drop. X-Men: The Last Stand had a 67% drop. Based on Dark World's $85.5M opening weekend, hoping for $40M+ just wasn't realistic.
MOS had to go against World War Z and Monsters U it's 2nd weekend. Thor 2 didn't have any competion close to that.
Originally posted by ares834
Furthermore Man of Steel was also a summer movie so it made far more on the weekdays so its not a really good comparison. Still, Thor should get a pretty decent multiplier.
It's an apples to oranges comparison, these release windows. Would Titanic and Avatar have managed to set the modern box office record championship if they had been released in the height of the spring/summer season - rather than at Christmas and have uncontested domination of the winter season, with no other major genre blockbusters opening until early spring? The films do what they do. Star Wars in 1977 opened in what was once thought to be barren box office territory - mid-May, around Memorial Day. High fantasy films like the LOTR series, Harry Potter et al. have found the audience is more in a mood for them in the fall/winter calendar. I think Thor films have found their future release windows will be in November/December, from here on.
Originally posted by ODGNot at all. World War Z and Monsters U are two of the highest grossing films of 2013 so far.
I think your expectations are a bit unrealistic. Rarely do big budget movies gross 50% of their opening weekend on their second weekend. Man of Steel had a near 65% drop in its second weekend. Iron Man 3 had a near 60% drop. X-Men: The Last Stand had a 67% drop. Based on Dark World's $85.5M opening weekend, hoping for $40M+ just wasn't realistic.
The Thunder God challenges the Man of Steel..
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2013/11/17/thor-will-challenge-superman-at-the-box-office/
Originally posted by emporerpants
During the summer weren't people talking about how OS grosses don't matter much at all when they were saying MOS was a failure? So now they do matter? Which is it?
Superman was getting his first reboot in 35 years, and in going a somewhat darker direction (to make a shared universe with Batman and others seem plausible, going forward) MOS did things people did not expect and found objectionable, such as how Zod came to his end. But it was a twist that would make Superman's philosophy about preserving life make sense going forward. So it got a mixed reception by critics (but an A- cinemascore rating by the audience, same as what Thor: The Dark World got.) Superman looked a bit reckless with his power in select clips on the net, but in the context of the whole film it made sense, as he was still inexperienced in fights like this.
The new Thor was following the path established by the previous film and the Marvel Shared Cinematic Universe, so people already knew what to expect. That's just why the reception seems a bit warmer.
I know why people like and don't like each film, but that's not what I was asking. For MOS people were claiming it was a failure and the overseas box office doesn't make a difference because the amount of profit isn't even remotely the same as domestic. Here, people aren't making that claim at all, even though it would be more applicable to Thor 2 because Thor has more overseas sales than domestic.
So I'm just wondering how much the overseas market helps or doesn't help.
Originally posted by emporerpants
I know why people like and don't like each film, but that's not what I was asking. For MOS people were claiming it was a failure and the overseas box office doesn't make a difference because the amount of profit isn't even remotely the same as domestic. Here, people aren't making that claim at all, even though it would be more applicable to Thor 2 because Thor has more overseas sales than domestic.So I'm just wondering how much the overseas market helps or doesn't help.
Who claimed MoS was a failure? Anyone who did was either trolling or knows nothing about movies. It made over 650 million WW and almost 300 MM Dom. That's great for the first movie in a franchise.
MOS wasn't a box office failure, it made a great deal of money, over 600 million. The only people who claimed it was a failure were either idiots/trolling or basing it on the fact that WB executives expected it to do more then it did IIRC and some people claimed it would be doing Avengers numbers (Ridiculous).
Anyways, I still can't believe that Thor has his second movie. And despite coming out in November and having shitty advertising, might actually out-gross what people were calling Superman's version of the Dark Knight. That would have sounded like a fairy tale not too long ago.
I just hope that this movie will get more exposure after it's time in theaters. I constantly saw Iron Man, Spider-Man etc. on TV but never, not once, was I able to manage catching Thor on TV. I remember watching Batman Begins (And the Dark Knight) pretty often on HBO. People underestimate how much that helps imho. Yesterday, I saw more commercials for the Man of Steel coming to Rogers on Demand on channel 1 in one day then I've seen for TDW since it's opening weekend. 😐 Marvel needs to hop on that shit, or maybe I'm just missing it.
Yeah, I have to agree about not seeing Thor on any stations or advertised at all. It is impressive what it's done though, and Marvel may be relying on high visibility for sales, or maybe they're just relying on memes from tumblr 😉. They really should advertise it more though. I'm glad Thor has a second movie, and I'm hoping for more, as Thor is my fav. Avenger. I agree, 4 years ago, who would have thought the comic version of Thor would become what he has become?
Originally posted by Rage.Of.OlympusUsually agree with you rage but I think you might be missing the ads. I've seen plenty of Thor: The Dark World ads in the limited time I watch tv (be it Walking Dead, Shield, football, etc..) Is it advertised as much as IM3 or other DC properties? Probably not though, which is a shame. IMO, Thor 2 > IM3.
Anyways, I still can't believe that Thor has his second movie. And despite coming out in November and having shitty advertising, might actually out-gross what people were calling Superman's version of the Dark Knight. That would have sounded like a fairy tale not too long ago.I just hope that this movie will get more exposure after it's time in theaters. I constantly saw Iron Man, Spider-Man etc. on TV but never, not once, was I able to manage catching Thor on TV. I remember watching Batman Begins (And the Dark Knight) pretty often on HBO. People underestimate how much that helps imho. Yesterday, I saw more commercials for the Man of Steel coming to Rogers on Demand on channel 1 in one day then I've seen for TDW since it's opening weekend. 😐 Marvel needs to hop on that shit, or maybe I'm just missing it.
Originally posted by emporerpants
I know why people like and don't like each film, but that's not what I was asking. For MOS people were claiming it was a failure and the overseas box office doesn't make a difference because the amount of profit isn't even remotely the same as domestic. Here, people aren't making that claim at all, even though it would be more applicable to Thor 2 because Thor has more overseas sales than domestic.So I'm just wondering how much the overseas market helps or doesn't help.
People often offer that theory without any numbers to back it up. Overseas grosses are arguably even more important than domestic, because those are the ones that determine if a film is a franchise tentploe. These films cost so much to make, it's important to have overseas audiences pick up the slack. It's why China has now become the most important overseas territory, and why the makers of Star Trek Into Darkness tweaked the story to better appeal to overseas audiences; it's been considered too American in its appeal. Historically, the films have done little overseas business. So that's why part of it got set in London.
If it was true, a vast amount of blockbusters the past 15 odd years would be money losing efforts, if domestic grosses counted way more than overseas ones.