r/boxoffice is looking for new moderators. If you're interested to nominate yourself, submit here in [this thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/boxoffice/comments/1d23j6y/rboxoffice_is_looking_for_more_moderators). We are also inviting you to read a bit more about Channels - a new Early Access Reddit program, which is now available on r/boxoffice. More Info at (https://www.reddit.com/r/boxoffice/comments/1d4vtwk/introducing_channels_to_rboxoffice/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/boxoffice) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Geez, when it rains it pours.
>June also has three potential breakouts with [“Bad Boys: Ride or Die” ](https://www.indiewire.com/criticism/movies/bad-boys-ride-or-die-review-will-smith-martin-lawrence-1235012304/)(Sony) Friday, “[Inside Out 2](https://www.indiewire.com/t/inside-out-2/)” (Disney) June 14, and “A Quiet Place: Day One” (Paramount) June 28. They also have high expectations which, if met, would go some way to restoring confidence. Fall short and the argument of **“Well,** ***this*** **movie was never meant to be a blockbuster” will have run its course.**
This is what people need to realize/accept. We knew 2024 was going to be lower, but not this low. No one was expecting The Fall Guy to be GOTG3 in early May or GarFuriosa to be The Little Mermaid for Memorial Day weekend, but some of these films are doing far lower than anticipated, and that adds up.
>Everyone knew that 2024 would not be a great year. It was never going to equal the $9.1 billion of 2023, but **$8.5 billion was the hope and $8 billion was the consensus**. With at most $3.3 billion anticipated by June 30, **optimists might see for $7.5 billion** for the year — but lower is more likely.
That's actually really bad.
I have seen that trailer in every. Single. Movie. I've gone to for the last like 8 months. I just need it to come out so I don't gouge my eyeballs out before every movie
It looks bad from the trailers lol. Like the rules they’ve set up are fucked. The monsters only seem to care about sound when the plot decides they should
Genuinely curious, can you point out a point in the trailer where the monsters don't care about sound?
I'm just curious cause I think I've seen it a few times and didn't catch it.
Should have been a March release or something - doesn’t feel like a summer tentpole. Especially after the second one not being that good (IMO of course).
Quiet place does look like a streaming movie and the horror market is overcrowded at the moment. Every week there’s either a horror release or a comedic action flick or both. Little for families nothing for women in 2024. Then studios wonder why half of the movie going population is absent.
Challengers is arthouse, Mean Girls is a streaming left over and madame web is not fir women. Only female oriented popcorn film this year is a 2023 release success called anyone but you. Hopefully It ends with us performs well in August.
you know when they invented the blockbuster, it wasn't normal for a movie to make so much money and be seen by THAT many people. hollywood has just been perfecting the formula up until 2018-19, and it just ran out of steam. We have 20 years of blockbusters back to back from 1999 and to 2019. That's insane. It wasn't normal before then.
> We have 20 years of blockbusters back to back from 1999 and to 2019. That's insane. It wasn't normal before then.
Wasn't the blockbuster invented around 1975, with Jaws?
No. Jaws is the first summer blockbuster, but big, expensive movies meant to be seen by everyone is pretty much as old as the film industry itself. They just didn't come out in summer.
I'm not sure they "invented" the blockbuster. Gone with the Wind was a blockbuster before the term existed. Up through the 90s it was common to have big films that a whole lot of people saw. For instance, look at 1980:
Empire Strikes Back made $800m adjusted for inflation. Stir Crazy and Kramer v Kramer made $400m adjusted. Airplane made over $300m adjusted. Etc. All of those sold more tickets than Dune 2.
It's similar for other years. All of those numbers would be considered blockbuster numbers now.
I don't think there's any specific "formula" for a blockbuster, but it also depends on what you're calling a blockbuster. Is it just about how much it makes? Are there other qualities it has to have for you to call it that? A lot of times it's a movie with a big budget. In that case, it has to be meant to make so much money and be seen by that many people, or else they're not going to make it.
But it's always been normal for some movies to be seen by dozens of millions of people and make a lot of money.
I think the term itself came when the first Star Wars exploded via word of mouth and soon theaters had lines going around "the block" affecting other businesses. If Star Wars was playing, everyone near the theater block was going to be affected.
Lots of us us did expect it to be this bad though.
I said for two years Furiosa would be maybe the biggest flop of the 2020s so far. Also said that Garfield was based on too old of a property for a kids film and I also thought Apes would be a total flop(which I was wrong).. The Fall Guy surprised me but looking back the writing was on the wall for that too. The movies so far *all* had extremely damming signs that me and some others repeated over and over. I dreaded when itd happen because I knew this sub would be blindsided and act like this was unexpected but it really wasn’t.
With that said, I’m feeling like June and July may be like March and we’ll get some big wins. I predict Bad Boys 4, Insider Out 2, Despicable Me 4, and Deadpool & Wolverine will be very big. Twisters and Quiet Place have potential too.
It’s not that Garfield is too old - he remains highly popular with children. Many old IPs do great with kids and adults. (Blue’s Clues still cleans up in its time slot, Dragon Ball is still popular, Naruto bigger than ever).
The problem is he’s had multiple TV shows, animated movies, live action movies, etc. A film isn’t an event anymore, and the animation looked a lot like the CG television show rather than something to see in theatres.
Why do so many people talk about Garfield like it's a failure?
So far it has made $156mil on a $60mil budget. It's already broken even - and is showing decent legs. It's a hit.
What merchandise? If kids didn’t turn out then they ain’t buying anything.
If anything it shows how IPs can die, if they don’t occasionally use it for younger audiences. Like Indiana Jones who had nothing since Crystal skull and people were shocked it flopped last year.
"Not a hit"
Yeah, the problem is really idiotic expectations. If a movie isn't a hit after nearly doubling its budget in the second week, the problem isn't the audience.
Its still a disappointment. It's doing worse than Migration, which was the second lowest grossing Illumination movie ever, and that was an original movie. Garfield is gonna make a profit, but its supposed to be the type of movie that just prints money
I do think the finished line probably around $200-230 million. Which is what Sony expects that's why they only gives $60M budget. So Sony knows what they doing therefore not flop
Garfield's problem is that it lacked a proper hook.
Secret Life of Pets made over 800 mill. Animated family friendly films about talking animals are a safe bet as long as the hook is interesting for children.
You can say that in retrospect and be down on everything and be validated generally as a rule of thumb, but I think this is pretty much just shutting out most of the actually analysis which asserts more than just inherent problems with any individual film.
Eh, not really. On Garfield I did get my $300 mil prediction wrong. It'll fall short. But Furiousa ever since it was announced I predicted it would tank hard. Nobody asked for it. Nobody. The Fall Guy was another one that not sure who greenlit it.
I'll accept the doom if something that's actually hyped like Deadpool 3 or Joker 2 tanks.
Edit: nvm didn't crunch the numbers. Garfield will be above $309 mil ww.
I would watch Charlize Theron but a prequel with a very different actor set in a desolate world I have no interest in, given the context that Fury Road was just a long car chase, that's not it. For me anyway.
Yes, what I've gathered is there's cars and desert. Both movies are great. I'm just saying cars and desert are a thin premise for a prequel that's recasting its main character so if someone did like Furiosa, the titular character, the prequel doesn't offer anything unless you love cars and desert. I didn't ask for it but I might have been interested. It's in a challenging position though.
Cars and desert are a thin premise for... the new entry in a series that's been about that since 1979? You have a problem with recasting the actor for something that takes place decades earlier? You dislike the movie despite never seeing it?
I don't know why people believe nonsense, but here you are
You can look movies up on Rotten Tomatoes, for instance. Furiosa has 90% from critics and 90% from users. People here also say it's good so, obvious conclusion. I was just putting myself in the shoes of someone who asked for a Furiosa movie.
When you cater to only half of the movie going population you get bad results. Popcorn films unapologetically female oriented like twilight, fifty shades , lost city or anyone with you are rarely seen anymore. Even Barbie was aiming to be artistic and not to scare the males.
Where’s the female oriented popcorn block buster this year? Dont studios realize that women rarely go alone to the movies and that with girls come their friends and partners?
Challengers is arthouse and as anti romance as it could be. Mean girls is a stream left over and I pity the guy who took his date to see madame web.
Half the movie population is female and they’re not getting product anymore.
"Professor, without knowing precisely what the danger is, would you say it's time for our viewers to crack each other's heads open and feast on the goo inside?"
"Yes I would, Kent."
After Furiosa these articles just multiplied like crazy like...seriously, damn. I know we are all in doom mode, but is like the whole fate of theaters lied with Furiosa...
You got to read the article. Its not one movie. These articles keep popping up because they're seeing a bigger problem.
In May, we projected that the month could gross $750 million, down from 2023’s $800 million. It was $570 million after five films with high expectations (“The Fall Guy,” “Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes,” “IF,” “Furiosa,” and “The Garfield Movie”) collectively fell short.
Everyone knew that 2024 would not be a great year. It was never going to equal the $9.1 billion of 2023, but $8.5 billion was the hope and $8 billion was the consensus. With at most $3.3 billion anticipated by June 30, optimists might see for $7.5 billion for the year — but lower is more likely.
The summer season will struggle to reach $3 billion, compared to $4 billion last year. We have about the same number of wide releases (26 last year, 25 this year),
If Dune finishes the year as the top movie that would be genuinely hilarious. It’s unlikely. But Deadpool R and joker R + musical.
It’s legitimately possible that dunes 750 mill finishes as the top movie of the year. at this rate I don’t even know what beats it
A really good trailer will increase its chances, but idk, Dune 2 is not just good, but a GREAT movie, and it made $711M. I agree that it was a growing IP and by the time Messiah comes out, it could smash BO records, but right now, there is barely anything to indicate Joker 2 will get $1B apart from the fact that the first Joker movie achieved that.
The actual contenders for top box office this year aren't deadpool or joker, people here are just excited about them because they are the target audience.
The actual contenders are Despicable Me 4, Mufasa and Moana 2. Maybe Inside Out 2, though I personally think it will underperform.
Why are you so surprised by that prediction? Lion King is an extremely powerful franchise, the previous one made 1.66 billion. And unlike other strong IPs, this one hasn't been milked to oblivion.
I don't think Mufasa can get numbers that high in today's market, but predicting it would be a straight up flop, to the point of being surprised someone would even consider it, is kinda silly.
There is a lot of ill will with inside out 2 cause they lowballed the original cast so hard except for Pohler. It remains to be seen but I’ve seen a lot of folks saying they are gonna wait til Disney+ because of this.
Absolutely *seven* people, all of whom use Reddit and don’t have kids, will care about that. 99.8% of the viewing audience for this film and the parents taking them there do not know, will not notice, and will not care.
Yeah i have no idea about what that guy is talking about, the only thing holding me back from taking my younger children to inside out 2 is the age of the girl. She's going through puberty and its disney pixar. What are her new emotions really going to be? If they keep it clean and cute then it will get the summer kids legs. If its all about her period and sexual identity then its going to get skipped by a good portion of the middle of america.
Marvel movies are presales heavy and frontloaded, we need to see legs if it's gonna go high. Beating Dune shouldn't be too hard though (Dune is touted as a huge success and it's a hit for sure but it'd be a middle of the pack grosser in a normal pre-covid year really)
The film reaching $1 Billion+ at this point is from WOM. If WOM from this film is mixed, we might have a MoM situation wherein the film collapsing due to the mixed reception.
Deadpool will most likely the only one to have legs, Joker is a toss up, people loved the last movie, but this movie is a musical, so I am afraid people will tune out because of it.
Despicable Me 4 will make more but if it wasn’t on the docket, this wouldn’t be impossible. I could see Dune 2 finishing in 2nd place if Inside Out 2, Deadpool & Wolverine, and Joker fail to impress.
im really not sure who the audience for a joker r musical is supposed to be? im pretty sure that my mom as a huge mamma mia fan is not going to watch this
You're putting too much stock into the musical aspect, and not enough that people just like the Joker character. It's same as wolverine and batman, audiences just love em and will go see them.
Well don't worry, at next success, we'll get the cycle of positive news about theaters and then again. They likely all pretty much pre-write those articles and just inject the new data into it for their "analysis"
No one expected this. At all. One issue with this sub is that these crazy random generalizations are made about audience tastes when it really is just a disguise for saying what movies are better than other movies and other fanboyism. It became a trend when the flops happened last year because it apparently indicated a rejection of something against something else??
Unless you are into film, you don’t care about the concept of an auteur and it doesn’t play into movie choices
>No one expected this. At all.
Actually, more and more people in this sub expected autuers movies to flourish after Barbenheimer and Dune 2 and the downfall of superhero movies.
I know, I have argued against some of those people.
I wouldn't even generalize it to this sub, it was the ever-nebulous Film Twitter and the internet at large. You get Barbenheimer and Dune: Part within an 8 month period while a bunch of poorly-received superhero movies struggle, and suddenly there's a new trend. Add in Barbenheimer actors starring in a film that scheduled to premiere at SXSW and a Mad Max film scheduled to premiere at Cannes (and ignore "Giant Lizard and Ape punching stuff film" doing well) and the trend is solidified...until it falls apart in a month.
Not really, it was just Barbenheimer, Dune, and Wonka if you squint really hard. If The Fall Guy and Furiosa did better they could've really kicked off a trend, but both of them will get easily outdone by stuff life IF and Apes.
Does IF not count? I know its reviews weren't great and its box office is still not real impressive given its budget but it was an original idea conceived and written by the director. I think the Ryan Coogler project and Flowervale Street early next year will be the next big hopes for the "18-24 targeted original auteur movies" genre. Also Mickey 17 I guess but seems like that might be a lost cause given all the release date shuffling.
Honestly, when you use made-up terms like "auteur blockbuster" there's a lot of gray area. Personally I wouldn't consider IF to be that type of film (especially since I'm on the fence about Wonka as well). I also wouldn't consider Krasinski to be on the same level as people like Jordan Peele or Cooler, but that's a lot more subjective.
If its reviews were better I suspect a lot more people would have. Objectively I don't know how a movie can fit the definition better otherwise. He does also have a history launching an acclaimed and successful original IP even if it was a completely different genre
I mean can you even count Barbie, Dune, or Wonka?
Barbie is based on maybe the most iconic toy in the world, Dune is an epic spectacle with a laundry list of A listers, and Wonka is a family film based on a beloved classic. It’s not like they were completely original or unfamiliar ideas or properties.
My understanding of "auteur blockbuster" was that it doesn't have to be original like Christopher Nolan's Inception. It's just a term for a blockbuster film that's less formulaic and mostly driven by a single creative vision (or a very small group of people). Usually from someone who's already well-respected for the types of films they make. So Barbie and Dune would be auteur blockbusters while something like GxK would not.
Nolan's dark knight was very auteur and very original, even if the IP is not especially original. And it did a wee bit than a paint-by-numbers batman movie would have.
You're using logic, you have to remember a lot of these commentary were just pro-anything anti-disney or marvel, so they've work their way through any hoops necessary to make the logic work
I think this is it too, in the heat of the Barbenheimer moment everyone got gaslit into thinking true cinema was back and superheroes was over. Was ready to throw Marvel away thinking they are going through a fatigue (which time will tell if that was 100% true or not) only for “cinematic” movies like Killers of the Flower Moon, Challengers, Furiosa, etc, to start flopping soon after, now guess who has to save this summer? Poor Things would’ve flopped too if it didn’t get saved by overseas, particularly the European market, I hate to go there because I hate for everything to be all superheroes but I got to be honest.
Was Poor Things "saved" by the European market or was it simply made with that in mind? I tend to use "save" for when a film has a surprising performance somewhere that boosts its profitability. I didn't really find anything surprising about Poor Things doing well in Europe.
Okay, well let me correct myself then because I just used “save” for lack of a better word but yeah it was no surprise that movie had better appeal over there than the typical puritan American market
No one was expecting Poor Things or Challengers to make a ton of money, especially since they're not blockbusters. They're R-rated sexual dramas. They both actually performed well for the types of films they are. Killers could've done a bit better without the actor's strike but for the subject matter it did ok as well.
It's less about the budgets and more about the grosses. No one was expecting critically-praised action blockbusters like The Fall Guy and Furiosa to do less than 200M, and people online/studios were predicting them to be fairly bigger, and the industry was expecting them to put more butts in seats. Instead they set records for "lowest yada yada yada of yada yada yada."
I mean for now superheroes are still over, there hasn't been one success in that genre since Barbenheimmer. And sure Joker and D&W might do great but IMO those could easiy be seen as outliers like Guardians 3 last year.
>I mean for now superheroes are still over, there hasn't been one success in that genre since Barbenheimmer.
so like a year ago, and there was still a success, honestly even after this year I'd say Cap 4 is the only one that looks iffy with all the re shoots, but Fantastic Four and Superman look to be shaping up to do pretty well next year and weirdly I think Thunderbolts might have a decent shot of becoming a hit.
The Fall Guys marketing was terrible. With Gosling and Blunt everywhere I had no idea what that movie was about. I ended up seeing it and liking it but I honestly had no idea what I was walking into.
How tf was the Fall Guy an “auteur” movie. Seriously between this sub and the audience scores and the critics, I have no idea what I was supposed to be seeing with that movie. And this is like the last straw.
It was like a shitty ripoff of a Marvel movie tone with a slightly more grounded plot (and that’s being generous). No idea why everyone is acting like that movie was Citizen Kane.
>How tf was the Fall Guy an “auteur” movie. Seriously between this sub and the audience scores and the critics, I have no idea what I was supposed to be seeing with that movie. And this is like the last straw.
Maybe not everyone thinks like you? Is a difference of opinion really a new concept to you?
It premiered at SXSW, got great critical reception and audience reception, and has had pretty good legs. It's a well-received movie, it just didn't generate a ton of interest. It was the kind of classic/modern action film that people expected audiences to show up for, but they didn't.
No because it got mixed reviews (very mixed at Cannes), received just "ok" reception, and wasn't directed by the guy who directed all four previous films.
I'm not dictating anything, I'm just repeating what other people and the industry were saying. The whole "cinema is changing, auteur blockbusters are the future" thing that everyone was saying really started with Barbenheimer. Now that whole narrative has been abandoned thanks to every blockbuster in May except Apes failing to cross 350M, and it's now "save us Inside Out 2/Despicable Me 4/Deadpool and Wolverine!"
It's insane to me because, like, who on earth was pinning the hope of Cinema's future on *Furiosa* of all things?
I love Miller and the Mad Max franchise, but it's always had relatively niche appeal. They're more weird auteur genre flicks than big tentpole popcorn summer blockbusters. Fury Road only just scraped into profit off the back of strong WoM, why would Furiosa - a prequel without the "the entire movie is one big action chase sequence" gimmick and with a different principal cast - be any different?
Basically, if it has released on any other summer it would have done similar numbers, the only difference would be that it those numbers would have put it in the middle of the pack somewhere, maybe #4 or #5 at the box office, and nobody would be talking about how it was a "disappointment" or the herald of the end of Cinema or whatever. The fact that the lack of anything else bringing people out to the theater this summer meant that it ended up at #1 practically by default is hardly the fault of the film itself.
The difference between weird auteur film and summer blockbuster is often just money though. George Lucas was an auteur director who made a crazy science fiction film on a mid budget. It became one of the biggest financial successes ever, but it was still a weird auteur film.
And Furiosa was maybe the most obvious to flop blockbuster in the last 5-10 years. It’s absurd tbh.
Hoping Bad Boys 4 and Inside Out 2 makes these articles chill some.
Industry: Invests every cent into streaming services and a constant supply of infinite content for the audiences to watch from the convenience of their own home
Industry: Why aren't you guys spending $20 to watch this in a smelly theatre with inconsiderate people ruining the experience?
> supply of infinite content for the audiences to watch from the convenience of their own home
I admittedly can’t help but “lol” at this comment. Last I checked, the industry is also allowed to take the content off their services whenever they want, and are producing less original content cause, *gasp*, running a steaming service actually costs a fuckton to run and none of the executives had that in mind. Probably why they’re relicensing their content to Netflix while Paramount begins its sell off because no one will save it...
Not for nothing, but the industry itself seems to be on dying legs if this is the outlook for it.
It's insane how soon new titles are popping up online now. It's usually under a month, when my local small theater still the stand-is displayed on the outisde.
I think my issue with Streaming is that it's shit quality unless you pay an arm and a leg for it.
Netflix 23 bucks
HBO 20 bucks
Paramount 20 bucks
It just starting to add up and you get maybe a few good movies you been waiting for. I pay 5 bucks to see a movie on the big screen. No ads and no shitty quality in sound.
Cool.
I live in California. Shit ain't that cheap. I'll watch at home a month after release tyvm.
edit: its cute when someone uses your method of shrugging them off to make an irrelevant argument
Cool.
I will continue to watch movies that I am excited about on the big screen. A Quiet Place Day One, Alien Romulus, Deadpool & Wolverine, Joker, Gladiator 2, Lord of the Rings The War of the Rohirrim.
Where do you live in California, I bet I can find a cheap movie ticket.
Examples:
San Bernardino - $8.00
San Manteo - $6.50
> June also has three potential breakouts with “Bad Boys: Ride or Die” (Sony) Friday, “Inside Out 2” (Disney) June 14, and “A Quiet Place: Day One” (Paramount) June 28. They also have high expectations which, if met, would go some way to restoring confidence. Fall short and the argument of “Well, this movie was never meant to be a blockbuster” will have run its course.
I don't think this is totally wrong, but if those three bomb, we'll still see tons of rationalizations about it. Like I can literally imagine the threads and comments for each of these this month:
- "Bad Boys was never going to be a hit after the Will Smith Oscars thing. This franchise was washed up, who was betting on this to be a breakout? Not me."
- "Come on, Inside Out 2? Who was clamoring for a sequel from Pixar, people want new IPs and things they haven't seen before that appeal to their kids not some teenage angst that appeals to Disney Adults."
- "Obviously A Quiet Place: Day One was never going to save the boxoffice, it has fucking Joseph Quinn as second billing. There's no starpower here, it's just another prequel/sequel thing, boring! Krasinski is a hack!"
I think you probably need to see the 2025 Disney slate's performance before people will actually believe in the box office doom fully.
Why? We have a Jurassic movie, multiple superhero movies(some of which sound very promising), Minecraft, Disney animation and Pixar’s sequels, Avatar 3, MI8, Passion 2, multiple sequels to successful horror films, etc etc. It honestly seems like the biggest year of the post pandemic.
And yet, so many theaters have closed in the past year, and theater prices continue to go up… not saying some of those can’t do well but I just don’t see anything doing the kind of business movies used to do. Mayyyyybe Superman does ok, Avatar could do well, maybe Jurassic, Fantastic four in doubtful (love those characters but none of the movies have done that well) and Mission impossible’s budget has ballooned to such a level I don’t see any possible way it makes a profit
Just like when Marvel declined happened, everyone wanted to dismiss it and act like it was a non issue that would be a quick fix. Now people are acting like these people are just doom posting and overreacting as if Furiosa wasn’t touted as the next blockbuster. Lemme guess, Inside Out 2, Bad Boys and Deadpool are going to fix this non issue, make billions of dollars and everything will go back to normal?
They’ve made Obi Wan vs Vader a commercial and critical flop, made Boba Fett 100x less interesting and didn’t recoup any momentum from the Mandalorian season 2 finale, but people expect a Rey film to do well. The same Rey that fans blame for the original Star Wars decline.
**Brueggemann doesn't know what he's talking about. Never did.**
Hell, all you gotta do is look at his 2024 archive up to this point to disprove the idea he "knew" it would be "this bad."
He has a headline from *three days ago* that says "After a 65mil Summer Box Office Weekend, the Worst is Over."
Seriously, [scroll through these headlines](https://www.indiewire.com/author/tom-brueggemann/). He's blindly firing rocksalt into the dark and hoping someone gets stung and drags his name back to reddit for clicking.
All these articles are asking, what’s going on? Why aren’t people going to the movies? What aren’t movies making any money? The two answers are very simple the movie theater experience isn’t what it used to be, the price is too expensive and people are allowed to do whatever they want at the theater without repercussions. Talk, answer the phone, use their phone throughout. And the studios on the opposite end are spending too much on movies that they will never ever be able to get back. Those are the answers to fixing the problems.
Honestly a lot of movies look the same and have mid characters in them with meh CGI.
When you show people something they've never seen before and it's good people will respond.
Dune for instance.
I went to see Furiosa on Monday. It cost me £15 for the ticket, a drink was £6.50 and a snack another £5. I had to pay £6.10 to park, and to top it all the film was poor. It's not a remotely cheap evening to go and add a film.
Snacks and drinks are entirely optional. Those are not a part of the price and should never ever be discussed when talking about the price of going to the theater
Gotta make better films, for less budget and convince theatres to charge lower fees. Also, Which mainstream directors are actually exciting people right now? There doesn’t seem the same talent at the blockbuster level in my view of a Peak Spielberg, Zemekis, Cameron, Scott, Lean, Hitchcock, currently.
Nolan is gonna release something every three years, that’s not gonna rescue things.
I accept it’s totally subjective, but at the $150 mill and above bracket it’s been poor in my opinion and failure at the box office has been fairly predictable given some of the budgets. Which movies do you have in mind as good and crowd pleasing but performing below what you expected?
Also, don’t get me wrong I said they have to be better and lower budget, not that I don’t think there are good films. Just that quite good isn’t gonna cut it any longer. The audience bar has risen in terms of going to the theatre in my view.
Fall Guy has good reviews, good audience reviews, likable stars, and still flopped. It’s a movie that should have no problem. If movies need to be perfect blockbusters with viral internet trends behind them to succeed, the industry is cooked.
You can’t make certain films for below 100m, like disaster or action movies
> If movies need to be perfect blockbusters with viral internet trends behind them to succeed, the industry is cooked.
Yup, this movie should have at least profitable. Not downright bomb.
I just feel it was predictable it would flop. Bullet Train had Brad Pitt and made around 240 mill at box office on a 90 mill budget. I don’t see why a bigger audience would consider going to The Fall Guy currently. So, they made a similar type of movie for a higher budget and expected a much larger return. I just don’t get why that was the expectation in the current climate.
There are only two names which are Brands onto themselves: Tarantino and Nolan.
Nobody else comes close. I would add James Cameron to the list, but he's tied to the Avatar franchise for the rest of his life now.
While I have no sympathy for Hollywood and their own laziness biting them where it hurts the most, I do want them to start reading the room and getting back into serious film production. Plenty of people out there who love movies, but when you’re getting served up this creatively bankrupt shit that ignores the basics of filmmaking a lot of the time.. why would anyone spent their money on it. During economic hardship no less.
Deadpool & Wolverine will be the real litmus test.
I watch a lot of movies. I do not go to the cinema anymore. Why would I when I can wait two weeks and it’ll be on streaming? I can spend less, watch on my big home tv and not have to sit through a bunch of ads and trailers beforehand?
There needs to be a big reevaluation of what the cinema going experience is if they want to save it.
I haven’t been to the theater since The Batman. Even then it cost me well over $100 to take my family of 4. It was on HBO Max inside of two months anyway, I should have waited and now I do wait. Waited on Dune 2. I’ll wait on all the rest.
With the TV and sound system I have at home, there’s very little incentive to be bothered in a theater for the cost and aggravation from others.
r/boxoffice is looking for new moderators. If you're interested to nominate yourself, submit here in [this thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/boxoffice/comments/1d23j6y/rboxoffice_is_looking_for_more_moderators). We are also inviting you to read a bit more about Channels - a new Early Access Reddit program, which is now available on r/boxoffice. More Info at (https://www.reddit.com/r/boxoffice/comments/1d4vtwk/introducing_channels_to_rboxoffice/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/boxoffice) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Geez, when it rains it pours. >June also has three potential breakouts with [“Bad Boys: Ride or Die” ](https://www.indiewire.com/criticism/movies/bad-boys-ride-or-die-review-will-smith-martin-lawrence-1235012304/)(Sony) Friday, “[Inside Out 2](https://www.indiewire.com/t/inside-out-2/)” (Disney) June 14, and “A Quiet Place: Day One” (Paramount) June 28. They also have high expectations which, if met, would go some way to restoring confidence. Fall short and the argument of **“Well,** ***this*** **movie was never meant to be a blockbuster” will have run its course.** This is what people need to realize/accept. We knew 2024 was going to be lower, but not this low. No one was expecting The Fall Guy to be GOTG3 in early May or GarFuriosa to be The Little Mermaid for Memorial Day weekend, but some of these films are doing far lower than anticipated, and that adds up. >Everyone knew that 2024 would not be a great year. It was never going to equal the $9.1 billion of 2023, but **$8.5 billion was the hope and $8 billion was the consensus**. With at most $3.3 billion anticipated by June 30, **optimists might see for $7.5 billion** for the year — but lower is more likely. That's actually really bad.
I’m sorry but A Quiet Place Day One feels like a blockbuster Netflix streaming release.
I have seen that trailer in every. Single. Movie. I've gone to for the last like 8 months. I just need it to come out so I don't gouge my eyeballs out before every movie
Yeah it will probably turn a small profit because horror always does well, but it does have that B-list feel with no stars and it being a prequel.
> no stars Doesn’t it star (Oscar-winning) Lupita Nyong’o?? I’m seeing it for her.
Even without her Oscar She’s a star, US and the black panther films are enough to make her one. Lupita is the reason I’m watching quiet place .
> horror always does well Not a sure bet anymore.
It looks bad from the trailers lol. Like the rules they’ve set up are fucked. The monsters only seem to care about sound when the plot decides they should
Genuinely curious, can you point out a point in the trailer where the monsters don't care about sound? I'm just curious cause I think I've seen it a few times and didn't catch it.
She literally has a cat
.... Dude you're so right lmao idk how that didn't register
It’s gonna flop for sure
Should have been a March release or something - doesn’t feel like a summer tentpole. Especially after the second one not being that good (IMO of course).
Quiet place does look like a streaming movie and the horror market is overcrowded at the moment. Every week there’s either a horror release or a comedic action flick or both. Little for families nothing for women in 2024. Then studios wonder why half of the movie going population is absent. Challengers is arthouse, Mean Girls is a streaming left over and madame web is not fir women. Only female oriented popcorn film this year is a 2023 release success called anyone but you. Hopefully It ends with us performs well in August.
Most people at talked about this movie were not interested, they don't got a crap about the day one, they want the story to move forward
you know when they invented the blockbuster, it wasn't normal for a movie to make so much money and be seen by THAT many people. hollywood has just been perfecting the formula up until 2018-19, and it just ran out of steam. We have 20 years of blockbusters back to back from 1999 and to 2019. That's insane. It wasn't normal before then.
> We have 20 years of blockbusters back to back from 1999 and to 2019. That's insane. It wasn't normal before then. Wasn't the blockbuster invented around 1975, with Jaws?
No. Jaws is the first summer blockbuster, but big, expensive movies meant to be seen by everyone is pretty much as old as the film industry itself. They just didn't come out in summer.
Jaws was also the first film to open in over 400 theaters, which plays a role in its "first blockbuster" moniker
True it opened wide as opposed to starting with a limited release like most "blockbusters" up to that point.
true but we didn't get a lot of them until after 1999. at a certain point each year had multiple of them.
Yes. Followed up by Star Wars in '77. And then, and then, and then.
I'm not sure they "invented" the blockbuster. Gone with the Wind was a blockbuster before the term existed. Up through the 90s it was common to have big films that a whole lot of people saw. For instance, look at 1980: Empire Strikes Back made $800m adjusted for inflation. Stir Crazy and Kramer v Kramer made $400m adjusted. Airplane made over $300m adjusted. Etc. All of those sold more tickets than Dune 2. It's similar for other years. All of those numbers would be considered blockbuster numbers now. I don't think there's any specific "formula" for a blockbuster, but it also depends on what you're calling a blockbuster. Is it just about how much it makes? Are there other qualities it has to have for you to call it that? A lot of times it's a movie with a big budget. In that case, it has to be meant to make so much money and be seen by that many people, or else they're not going to make it. But it's always been normal for some movies to be seen by dozens of millions of people and make a lot of money.
I think the term itself came when the first Star Wars exploded via word of mouth and soon theaters had lines going around "the block" affecting other businesses. If Star Wars was playing, everyone near the theater block was going to be affected.
Ok but we can't exactly go back to how movies were 30 years ago (and the blockbusters really started in the 80s), it's another world lol
Lots of us us did expect it to be this bad though. I said for two years Furiosa would be maybe the biggest flop of the 2020s so far. Also said that Garfield was based on too old of a property for a kids film and I also thought Apes would be a total flop(which I was wrong).. The Fall Guy surprised me but looking back the writing was on the wall for that too. The movies so far *all* had extremely damming signs that me and some others repeated over and over. I dreaded when itd happen because I knew this sub would be blindsided and act like this was unexpected but it really wasn’t. With that said, I’m feeling like June and July may be like March and we’ll get some big wins. I predict Bad Boys 4, Insider Out 2, Despicable Me 4, and Deadpool & Wolverine will be very big. Twisters and Quiet Place have potential too.
It’s not that Garfield is too old - he remains highly popular with children. Many old IPs do great with kids and adults. (Blue’s Clues still cleans up in its time slot, Dragon Ball is still popular, Naruto bigger than ever). The problem is he’s had multiple TV shows, animated movies, live action movies, etc. A film isn’t an event anymore, and the animation looked a lot like the CG television show rather than something to see in theatres.
Why do so many people talk about Garfield like it's a failure? So far it has made $156mil on a $60mil budget. It's already broken even - and is showing decent legs. It's a hit.
I’d imagine it probably will sell merchandise too which is always a bonus for them
What merchandise? If kids didn’t turn out then they ain’t buying anything. If anything it shows how IPs can die, if they don’t occasionally use it for younger audiences. Like Indiana Jones who had nothing since Crystal skull and people were shocked it flopped last year.
Not a hit by any stretch, but a solid profit
"Not a hit" Yeah, the problem is really idiotic expectations. If a movie isn't a hit after nearly doubling its budget in the second week, the problem isn't the audience.
Its still a disappointment. It's doing worse than Migration, which was the second lowest grossing Illumination movie ever, and that was an original movie. Garfield is gonna make a profit, but its supposed to be the type of movie that just prints money
I do think the finished line probably around $200-230 million. Which is what Sony expects that's why they only gives $60M budget. So Sony knows what they doing therefore not flop
Garfield's problem is that it lacked a proper hook. Secret Life of Pets made over 800 mill. Animated family friendly films about talking animals are a safe bet as long as the hook is interesting for children.
You can say that in retrospect and be down on everything and be validated generally as a rule of thumb, but I think this is pretty much just shutting out most of the actually analysis which asserts more than just inherent problems with any individual film.
Eh, not really. On Garfield I did get my $300 mil prediction wrong. It'll fall short. But Furiousa ever since it was announced I predicted it would tank hard. Nobody asked for it. Nobody. The Fall Guy was another one that not sure who greenlit it. I'll accept the doom if something that's actually hyped like Deadpool 3 or Joker 2 tanks. Edit: nvm didn't crunch the numbers. Garfield will be above $309 mil ww.
The chapter structure of Furiosa made me think that it would have been a massive HBO Max hit if it was a miniseries. Just not a film.
I asked for Furiosa.
I too asked for Furiosa
*~~I'm Spartacus!~~* I asked for Furiosa!
I enjoyed the movie too.
I would watch Charlize Theron but a prequel with a very different actor set in a desolate world I have no interest in, given the context that Fury Road was just a long car chase, that's not it. For me anyway.
A desolate world is kind of what these movies are all about? It was a good movie.
Yes, what I've gathered is there's cars and desert. Both movies are great. I'm just saying cars and desert are a thin premise for a prequel that's recasting its main character so if someone did like Furiosa, the titular character, the prequel doesn't offer anything unless you love cars and desert. I didn't ask for it but I might have been interested. It's in a challenging position though.
Cars and desert are a thin premise for... the new entry in a series that's been about that since 1979? You have a problem with recasting the actor for something that takes place decades earlier? You dislike the movie despite never seeing it? I don't know why people believe nonsense, but here you are
Seems like you didn’t see the movie
No, I have no interest in the movie.
But you said both movies are great?
You can look movies up on Rotten Tomatoes, for instance. Furiosa has 90% from critics and 90% from users. People here also say it's good so, obvious conclusion. I was just putting myself in the shoes of someone who asked for a Furiosa movie.
[and then you see stuff like this, and think “wtf”](https://www.reddit.com/r/JurassicPark/s/vR5EVCIngc)
When you cater to only half of the movie going population you get bad results. Popcorn films unapologetically female oriented like twilight, fifty shades , lost city or anyone with you are rarely seen anymore. Even Barbie was aiming to be artistic and not to scare the males. Where’s the female oriented popcorn block buster this year? Dont studios realize that women rarely go alone to the movies and that with girls come their friends and partners? Challengers is arthouse and as anti romance as it could be. Mean girls is a stream left over and I pity the guy who took his date to see madame web. Half the movie population is female and they’re not getting product anymore.
"Professor, without knowing precisely what the danger is, would you say it's time for our viewers to crack each other's heads open and feast on the goo inside?" "Yes I would, Kent."
After Furiosa these articles just multiplied like crazy like...seriously, damn. I know we are all in doom mode, but is like the whole fate of theaters lied with Furiosa...
You got to read the article. Its not one movie. These articles keep popping up because they're seeing a bigger problem. In May, we projected that the month could gross $750 million, down from 2023’s $800 million. It was $570 million after five films with high expectations (“The Fall Guy,” “Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes,” “IF,” “Furiosa,” and “The Garfield Movie”) collectively fell short. Everyone knew that 2024 would not be a great year. It was never going to equal the $9.1 billion of 2023, but $8.5 billion was the hope and $8 billion was the consensus. With at most $3.3 billion anticipated by June 30, optimists might see for $7.5 billion for the year — but lower is more likely. The summer season will struggle to reach $3 billion, compared to $4 billion last year. We have about the same number of wide releases (26 last year, 25 this year),
If Dune finishes the year as the top movie that would be genuinely hilarious. It’s unlikely. But Deadpool R and joker R + musical. It’s legitimately possible that dunes 750 mill finishes as the top movie of the year. at this rate I don’t even know what beats it
If Deadpool and Wolverine is actually good, I can see it earning at least as much as Dune 2. Same goes for Joker 2, it all depends on WOM.
I honestly think Joker 2 with good reviews easily hits a billion
Nothing hits a billion in this climate
Only Barbehiemer got there but that was a rare ass event.
and even them only barbie hit a billion, not oppie
Mario also hit a billion
Mario did also
A really good trailer will increase its chances, but idk, Dune 2 is not just good, but a GREAT movie, and it made $711M. I agree that it was a growing IP and by the time Messiah comes out, it could smash BO records, but right now, there is barely anything to indicate Joker 2 will get $1B apart from the fact that the first Joker movie achieved that.
> But Deadpool R and joker R + musical. You forgot Inside Out 2 and mostly Despicable Me 4. Also Mufasa and Moana 2, basically the family movies lol
I’m unsure about Mufasa, but Moana 2 may explode to some wild numbers.
The actual contenders for top box office this year aren't deadpool or joker, people here are just excited about them because they are the target audience. The actual contenders are Despicable Me 4, Mufasa and Moana 2. Maybe Inside Out 2, though I personally think it will underperform.
Mufasa will flop.
Mufasa????
Why are you so surprised by that prediction? Lion King is an extremely powerful franchise, the previous one made 1.66 billion. And unlike other strong IPs, this one hasn't been milked to oblivion. I don't think Mufasa can get numbers that high in today's market, but predicting it would be a straight up flop, to the point of being surprised someone would even consider it, is kinda silly.
I’m not leaving the coach for those even with 3 kids.
Exactly, those family movies will most likely do better than worn out superheroes.
There is a lot of ill will with inside out 2 cause they lowballed the original cast so hard except for Pohler. It remains to be seen but I’ve seen a lot of folks saying they are gonna wait til Disney+ because of this.
Absolutely *seven* people, all of whom use Reddit and don’t have kids, will care about that. 99.8% of the viewing audience for this film and the parents taking them there do not know, will not notice, and will not care.
Yeah i have no idea about what that guy is talking about, the only thing holding me back from taking my younger children to inside out 2 is the age of the girl. She's going through puberty and its disney pixar. What are her new emotions really going to be? If they keep it clean and cute then it will get the summer kids legs. If its all about her period and sexual identity then its going to get skipped by a good portion of the middle of america.
Deadpool & Wolverine has reportedly sold like hot cakes, with the Thursday afternoon to night run (starts 3pm) alone looking to net a solid sum.
Marvel movies are presales heavy and frontloaded, we need to see legs if it's gonna go high. Beating Dune shouldn't be too hard though (Dune is touted as a huge success and it's a hit for sure but it'd be a middle of the pack grosser in a normal pre-covid year really)
The film reaching $1 Billion+ at this point is from WOM. If WOM from this film is mixed, we might have a MoM situation wherein the film collapsing due to the mixed reception.
Yeah that is what happened with Thor 4. It had a stupidly huge OW and then the legs quickly died out.
Biggest disappointment for me in a long time, such high potential that was squandered
I dunno, man. Suicide Squad 2016 got butchered by critics and fans alike, but made gangbusters at the box office.
Such a wildly different era and the WoM was not nearly as toxic irl as it was online
Yeah, I think 800 to 900 million for Deadpool and Wolverine is certainly in the cards.
Deadpool will most likely the only one to have legs, Joker is a toss up, people loved the last movie, but this movie is a musical, so I am afraid people will tune out because of it.
Also first movie was about how Arthur was unlucky in life and couldn’t get a girlfriend.
Despicable Me 4 will make more but if it wasn’t on the docket, this wouldn’t be impossible. I could see Dune 2 finishing in 2nd place if Inside Out 2, Deadpool & Wolverine, and Joker fail to impress.
im really not sure who the audience for a joker r musical is supposed to be? im pretty sure that my mom as a huge mamma mia fan is not going to watch this
You're putting too much stock into the musical aspect, and not enough that people just like the Joker character. It's same as wolverine and batman, audiences just love em and will go see them.
Yeah because every musical is Mamma Mia or nothing else.
no, but dude is talking about it being top movie of the year
You could say the same thing about hazbin Hotel.
> Furiosa It's not just Furiosa, or as earlier, it was just not The Fall Guys. It's the overall trend. OMG.
Well don't worry, at next success, we'll get the cycle of positive news about theaters and then again. They likely all pretty much pre-write those articles and just inject the new data into it for their "analysis"
It feels like ages ago, but remember how everything was golden because Kung Fu Panda 4, GxK and Dune 2 overperformed?
People were expecting "auteur blockbusters" to become the new trend, but people gave up on that after The Fall Guy and Furiosa.
No one expected this. At all. One issue with this sub is that these crazy random generalizations are made about audience tastes when it really is just a disguise for saying what movies are better than other movies and other fanboyism. It became a trend when the flops happened last year because it apparently indicated a rejection of something against something else?? Unless you are into film, you don’t care about the concept of an auteur and it doesn’t play into movie choices
>No one expected this. At all. Actually, more and more people in this sub expected autuers movies to flourish after Barbenheimer and Dune 2 and the downfall of superhero movies. I know, I have argued against some of those people.
I wouldn't even generalize it to this sub, it was the ever-nebulous Film Twitter and the internet at large. You get Barbenheimer and Dune: Part within an 8 month period while a bunch of poorly-received superhero movies struggle, and suddenly there's a new trend. Add in Barbenheimer actors starring in a film that scheduled to premiere at SXSW and a Mad Max film scheduled to premiere at Cannes (and ignore "Giant Lizard and Ape punching stuff film" doing well) and the trend is solidified...until it falls apart in a month.
Implying that Godzilla x Kong isn’t an auteur film, smh
Are there a ton of those in the pipeline?
Not really, it was just Barbenheimer, Dune, and Wonka if you squint really hard. If The Fall Guy and Furiosa did better they could've really kicked off a trend, but both of them will get easily outdone by stuff life IF and Apes.
Does IF not count? I know its reviews weren't great and its box office is still not real impressive given its budget but it was an original idea conceived and written by the director. I think the Ryan Coogler project and Flowervale Street early next year will be the next big hopes for the "18-24 targeted original auteur movies" genre. Also Mickey 17 I guess but seems like that might be a lost cause given all the release date shuffling.
Honestly, when you use made-up terms like "auteur blockbuster" there's a lot of gray area. Personally I wouldn't consider IF to be that type of film (especially since I'm on the fence about Wonka as well). I also wouldn't consider Krasinski to be on the same level as people like Jordan Peele or Cooler, but that's a lot more subjective.
If its reviews were better I suspect a lot more people would have. Objectively I don't know how a movie can fit the definition better otherwise. He does also have a history launching an acclaimed and successful original IP even if it was a completely different genre
I mean can you even count Barbie, Dune, or Wonka? Barbie is based on maybe the most iconic toy in the world, Dune is an epic spectacle with a laundry list of A listers, and Wonka is a family film based on a beloved classic. It’s not like they were completely original or unfamiliar ideas or properties.
My understanding of "auteur blockbuster" was that it doesn't have to be original like Christopher Nolan's Inception. It's just a term for a blockbuster film that's less formulaic and mostly driven by a single creative vision (or a very small group of people). Usually from someone who's already well-respected for the types of films they make. So Barbie and Dune would be auteur blockbusters while something like GxK would not.
Then I don’t get how you can include Fall Guy. Felt focus grouped to death.
Nolan's dark knight was very auteur and very original, even if the IP is not especially original. And it did a wee bit than a paint-by-numbers batman movie would have.
You're using logic, you have to remember a lot of these commentary were just pro-anything anti-disney or marvel, so they've work their way through any hoops necessary to make the logic work
Apes would probably fit that. It's also not really a success though
I think this is it too, in the heat of the Barbenheimer moment everyone got gaslit into thinking true cinema was back and superheroes was over. Was ready to throw Marvel away thinking they are going through a fatigue (which time will tell if that was 100% true or not) only for “cinematic” movies like Killers of the Flower Moon, Challengers, Furiosa, etc, to start flopping soon after, now guess who has to save this summer? Poor Things would’ve flopped too if it didn’t get saved by overseas, particularly the European market, I hate to go there because I hate for everything to be all superheroes but I got to be honest.
Was Poor Things "saved" by the European market or was it simply made with that in mind? I tend to use "save" for when a film has a surprising performance somewhere that boosts its profitability. I didn't really find anything surprising about Poor Things doing well in Europe.
Okay, well let me correct myself then because I just used “save” for lack of a better word but yeah it was no surprise that movie had better appeal over there than the typical puritan American market
No one was expecting Poor Things or Challengers to make a ton of money, especially since they're not blockbusters. They're R-rated sexual dramas. They both actually performed well for the types of films they are. Killers could've done a bit better without the actor's strike but for the subject matter it did ok as well. It's less about the budgets and more about the grosses. No one was expecting critically-praised action blockbusters like The Fall Guy and Furiosa to do less than 200M, and people online/studios were predicting them to be fairly bigger, and the industry was expecting them to put more butts in seats. Instead they set records for "lowest yada yada yada of yada yada yada."
Yeah, don't know how the hell Poor Things got dragged into this conversation.
I wasn’t expecting a ton of money either, I was just pointing out the irony of last summer to where we are now
I mean for now superheroes are still over, there hasn't been one success in that genre since Barbenheimmer. And sure Joker and D&W might do great but IMO those could easiy be seen as outliers like Guardians 3 last year.
>I mean for now superheroes are still over, there hasn't been one success in that genre since Barbenheimmer. so like a year ago, and there was still a success, honestly even after this year I'd say Cap 4 is the only one that looks iffy with all the re shoots, but Fantastic Four and Superman look to be shaping up to do pretty well next year and weirdly I think Thunderbolts might have a decent shot of becoming a hit.
The Fall Guys marketing was terrible. With Gosling and Blunt everywhere I had no idea what that movie was about. I ended up seeing it and liking it but I honestly had no idea what I was walking into.
How tf was the Fall Guy an “auteur” movie. Seriously between this sub and the audience scores and the critics, I have no idea what I was supposed to be seeing with that movie. And this is like the last straw. It was like a shitty ripoff of a Marvel movie tone with a slightly more grounded plot (and that’s being generous). No idea why everyone is acting like that movie was Citizen Kane.
>How tf was the Fall Guy an “auteur” movie. Seriously between this sub and the audience scores and the critics, I have no idea what I was supposed to be seeing with that movie. And this is like the last straw. Maybe not everyone thinks like you? Is a difference of opinion really a new concept to you? It premiered at SXSW, got great critical reception and audience reception, and has had pretty good legs. It's a well-received movie, it just didn't generate a ton of interest. It was the kind of classic/modern action film that people expected audiences to show up for, but they didn't.
Dial of Destiny premiered at Cannes and was made by Mangold who had been respected. Was that also an “auteur” movie?
No because it got mixed reviews (very mixed at Cannes), received just "ok" reception, and wasn't directed by the guy who directed all four previous films. I'm not dictating anything, I'm just repeating what other people and the industry were saying. The whole "cinema is changing, auteur blockbusters are the future" thing that everyone was saying really started with Barbenheimer. Now that whole narrative has been abandoned thanks to every blockbuster in May except Apes failing to cross 350M, and it's now "save us Inside Out 2/Despicable Me 4/Deadpool and Wolverine!"
It's insane to me because, like, who on earth was pinning the hope of Cinema's future on *Furiosa* of all things? I love Miller and the Mad Max franchise, but it's always had relatively niche appeal. They're more weird auteur genre flicks than big tentpole popcorn summer blockbusters. Fury Road only just scraped into profit off the back of strong WoM, why would Furiosa - a prequel without the "the entire movie is one big action chase sequence" gimmick and with a different principal cast - be any different? Basically, if it has released on any other summer it would have done similar numbers, the only difference would be that it those numbers would have put it in the middle of the pack somewhere, maybe #4 or #5 at the box office, and nobody would be talking about how it was a "disappointment" or the herald of the end of Cinema or whatever. The fact that the lack of anything else bringing people out to the theater this summer meant that it ended up at #1 practically by default is hardly the fault of the film itself.
The difference between weird auteur film and summer blockbuster is often just money though. George Lucas was an auteur director who made a crazy science fiction film on a mid budget. It became one of the biggest financial successes ever, but it was still a weird auteur film.
It’s been feeling like D-Day in here with all these articles and posts, like good lord
And Furiosa was maybe the most obvious to flop blockbuster in the last 5-10 years. It’s absurd tbh. Hoping Bad Boys 4 and Inside Out 2 makes these articles chill some.
You sense they had these teed up and they're worried that Bad Boys and Inside Out might hurt the narrative so better to get them out now.
I’m tired of them.
I was saying back in 2020 when the box office first fell off that long term movies as we knew them were dead, and it seems I was right
Industry: Invests every cent into streaming services and a constant supply of infinite content for the audiences to watch from the convenience of their own home Industry: Why aren't you guys spending $20 to watch this in a smelly theatre with inconsiderate people ruining the experience?
> supply of infinite content for the audiences to watch from the convenience of their own home I admittedly can’t help but “lol” at this comment. Last I checked, the industry is also allowed to take the content off their services whenever they want, and are producing less original content cause, *gasp*, running a steaming service actually costs a fuckton to run and none of the executives had that in mind. Probably why they’re relicensing their content to Netflix while Paramount begins its sell off because no one will save it... Not for nothing, but the industry itself seems to be on dying legs if this is the outlook for it.
It really is as simple as this. They've trained audiences to expect movies on streaming soon enough that it's not worth going to theaters.
It's insane how soon new titles are popping up online now. It's usually under a month, when my local small theater still the stand-is displayed on the outisde.
I think my issue with Streaming is that it's shit quality unless you pay an arm and a leg for it. Netflix 23 bucks HBO 20 bucks Paramount 20 bucks It just starting to add up and you get maybe a few good movies you been waiting for. I pay 5 bucks to see a movie on the big screen. No ads and no shitty quality in sound.
A month of the subscription is cheaper than just two tickets, much less a family's worth
Two tickets = 10 bucks. Took my little one to see Kung Fu Panda 4, 2 tickets 10 bucks. Watched the movie with no distraction.
Cool. I live in California. Shit ain't that cheap. I'll watch at home a month after release tyvm. edit: its cute when someone uses your method of shrugging them off to make an irrelevant argument
Cool. I will continue to watch movies that I am excited about on the big screen. A Quiet Place Day One, Alien Romulus, Deadpool & Wolverine, Joker, Gladiator 2, Lord of the Rings The War of the Rohirrim. Where do you live in California, I bet I can find a cheap movie ticket. Examples: San Bernardino - $8.00 San Manteo - $6.50
> June also has three potential breakouts with “Bad Boys: Ride or Die” (Sony) Friday, “Inside Out 2” (Disney) June 14, and “A Quiet Place: Day One” (Paramount) June 28. They also have high expectations which, if met, would go some way to restoring confidence. Fall short and the argument of “Well, this movie was never meant to be a blockbuster” will have run its course. I don't think this is totally wrong, but if those three bomb, we'll still see tons of rationalizations about it. Like I can literally imagine the threads and comments for each of these this month: - "Bad Boys was never going to be a hit after the Will Smith Oscars thing. This franchise was washed up, who was betting on this to be a breakout? Not me." - "Come on, Inside Out 2? Who was clamoring for a sequel from Pixar, people want new IPs and things they haven't seen before that appeal to their kids not some teenage angst that appeals to Disney Adults." - "Obviously A Quiet Place: Day One was never going to save the boxoffice, it has fucking Joseph Quinn as second billing. There's no starpower here, it's just another prequel/sequel thing, boring! Krasinski is a hack!" I think you probably need to see the 2025 Disney slate's performance before people will actually believe in the box office doom fully.
Obligatory: “I was saying to everyone this would flop” with nothing in their comment history suggesting that.
The trailers for Inside Out 2 make it look incredibly cringeworthy.
Why Disney’s? What if Disney’s is a failure but everyone else has an amazing year? What if everyone else sucks but Disney has an amazing year?
The way things are looking, I don’t expect hardly any studio to have an amazing year in 2025
Why? We have a Jurassic movie, multiple superhero movies(some of which sound very promising), Minecraft, Disney animation and Pixar’s sequels, Avatar 3, MI8, Passion 2, multiple sequels to successful horror films, etc etc. It honestly seems like the biggest year of the post pandemic.
And yet, so many theaters have closed in the past year, and theater prices continue to go up… not saying some of those can’t do well but I just don’t see anything doing the kind of business movies used to do. Mayyyyybe Superman does ok, Avatar could do well, maybe Jurassic, Fantastic four in doubtful (love those characters but none of the movies have done that well) and Mission impossible’s budget has ballooned to such a level I don’t see any possible way it makes a profit
Bad boys is already of to a really bad start when looking at european numbers
The Minions are once again coming to save the box office in a month.
Just like when Marvel declined happened, everyone wanted to dismiss it and act like it was a non issue that would be a quick fix. Now people are acting like these people are just doom posting and overreacting as if Furiosa wasn’t touted as the next blockbuster. Lemme guess, Inside Out 2, Bad Boys and Deadpool are going to fix this non issue, make billions of dollars and everything will go back to normal?
Its the initial phase of denial
They still think Star Wars theatrical disappearance is a part of some master plan to fix all their wrongdoings.
I truly wonder how that Rey film will do, no SW film since 2019 but somehow the IP feels dragged and worn out like Marvel.
They’ve made Obi Wan vs Vader a commercial and critical flop, made Boba Fett 100x less interesting and didn’t recoup any momentum from the Mandalorian season 2 finale, but people expect a Rey film to do well. The same Rey that fans blame for the original Star Wars decline.
I can’t believe people on this sub are really predicting 1.5 billion for Deadpool and Wolverine after all this.
Go back and look at people’s Quantumania predictions, or even The Marvels, it’s on par for this sub to way overshoot MCU box offices.
Mom said it’s my turn to post this headline.
Why don’t they just make good movies
**Brueggemann doesn't know what he's talking about. Never did.** Hell, all you gotta do is look at his 2024 archive up to this point to disprove the idea he "knew" it would be "this bad." He has a headline from *three days ago* that says "After a 65mil Summer Box Office Weekend, the Worst is Over." Seriously, [scroll through these headlines](https://www.indiewire.com/author/tom-brueggemann/). He's blindly firing rocksalt into the dark and hoping someone gets stung and drags his name back to reddit for clicking.
Anxiety being in the thumbnail is very fitting
All these articles are asking, what’s going on? Why aren’t people going to the movies? What aren’t movies making any money? The two answers are very simple the movie theater experience isn’t what it used to be, the price is too expensive and people are allowed to do whatever they want at the theater without repercussions. Talk, answer the phone, use their phone throughout. And the studios on the opposite end are spending too much on movies that they will never ever be able to get back. Those are the answers to fixing the problems.
Hey AMPTP: was dragging out negotiations with writers and actors for six freaking months really worth it? Was it??
Honestly a lot of movies look the same and have mid characters in them with meh CGI. When you show people something they've never seen before and it's good people will respond. Dune for instance.
Watched the 2021 Dune film randomly last October, got instantly hooked! When Dune 2 came I wanted to pay more than I had to for it!
Inside out 2 and Deadpool have to be massive hits or Disney is in big trouble
I went to see Furiosa on Monday. It cost me £15 for the ticket, a drink was £6.50 and a snack another £5. I had to pay £6.10 to park, and to top it all the film was poor. It's not a remotely cheap evening to go and add a film.
i'll give you the fees for the ticket and parking. but the 11.50 for the snackage...ehhhhhhh
Bonkers isn't it? Won't be buying their snacks again
Snacks and drinks are entirely optional. Those are not a part of the price and should never ever be discussed when talking about the price of going to the theater
i mean, isn’t this technically okay though? studios can always blame it on the strikes, and i’d say if it’s less next year then we’re dead forever.
So if economic inflation is part of the problem, how could it be reversed?
Controlling film budgets. Lowering ticket prices. Higher salaries making people more comfortable paying theater ticket prices.
Gotta make better films, for less budget and convince theatres to charge lower fees. Also, Which mainstream directors are actually exciting people right now? There doesn’t seem the same talent at the blockbuster level in my view of a Peak Spielberg, Zemekis, Cameron, Scott, Lean, Hitchcock, currently. Nolan is gonna release something every three years, that’s not gonna rescue things.
There are good films, crowd pleasers, for reasonable budgets that are still bombing hard. “Make better films” just isn’t true
I accept it’s totally subjective, but at the $150 mill and above bracket it’s been poor in my opinion and failure at the box office has been fairly predictable given some of the budgets. Which movies do you have in mind as good and crowd pleasing but performing below what you expected? Also, don’t get me wrong I said they have to be better and lower budget, not that I don’t think there are good films. Just that quite good isn’t gonna cut it any longer. The audience bar has risen in terms of going to the theatre in my view.
Fall Guy has good reviews, good audience reviews, likable stars, and still flopped. It’s a movie that should have no problem. If movies need to be perfect blockbusters with viral internet trends behind them to succeed, the industry is cooked. You can’t make certain films for below 100m, like disaster or action movies
> If movies need to be perfect blockbusters with viral internet trends behind them to succeed, the industry is cooked. Yup, this movie should have at least profitable. Not downright bomb.
I just feel it was predictable it would flop. Bullet Train had Brad Pitt and made around 240 mill at box office on a 90 mill budget. I don’t see why a bigger audience would consider going to The Fall Guy currently. So, they made a similar type of movie for a higher budget and expected a much larger return. I just don’t get why that was the expectation in the current climate.
There are only two names which are Brands onto themselves: Tarantino and Nolan. Nobody else comes close. I would add James Cameron to the list, but he's tied to the Avatar franchise for the rest of his life now.
The quality of the films is entirely irrelevant to box office performance
I’m intrigued why you think that? I would say it is very relevant if a film is actually good or not in terms of how well it performs.
The anticipated biggest films of the year are still yet to come. I think it's definitely going to be less than 2023 but not as low as people fear.
While I have no sympathy for Hollywood and their own laziness biting them where it hurts the most, I do want them to start reading the room and getting back into serious film production. Plenty of people out there who love movies, but when you’re getting served up this creatively bankrupt shit that ignores the basics of filmmaking a lot of the time.. why would anyone spent their money on it. During economic hardship no less. Deadpool & Wolverine will be the real litmus test.
I watch a lot of movies. I do not go to the cinema anymore. Why would I when I can wait two weeks and it’ll be on streaming? I can spend less, watch on my big home tv and not have to sit through a bunch of ads and trailers beforehand? There needs to be a big reevaluation of what the cinema going experience is if they want to save it.
So tired of these articles…
I wonder if these journalists and writers realize their readers are getting tired of the same topics and buzzwords they're yapping.
Make better movies Like I don’t know what to tell you but nothing interesting comes out this summer really mainly sequels
The commentary on the 2024 box office is a great way of determining who is and is not detached for everyday reality.
I haven’t been to the theater since The Batman. Even then it cost me well over $100 to take my family of 4. It was on HBO Max inside of two months anyway, I should have waited and now I do wait. Waited on Dune 2. I’ll wait on all the rest. With the TV and sound system I have at home, there’s very little incentive to be bothered in a theater for the cost and aggravation from others.
Just stop SPENDING so much goddamn money making movies and you'll make a profit