Comments on: Box-Office Wrap-Up: Mar. 6 – Mar. 8, 2009

By: JM

JM — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 05:20:40 +0000

Laremy, you're way too quick to brand a new movie as a failure. Back when "Benjamin Button' was dominating the top 10, you kept saying its gross would be alright, except that the budget was so high, and that the studios must be really disappointed with it now. Well, with Paramount getting 55% of domestic grosses and 35-50% overseas grosses (though closer to 50, since it's one of the bigger studios), Benjamin Button is now in the green, even before the DVD release!

The same is happening now. You are not seeing the big picture. Yes, Watchmen didn't do as well as we expected. Yes, the overseas weren't amazing. But if we look at it realistically, Watchmen was did EXTREMELY well. It was a 2 hour 43 minute movie with more philosophical dialogue than action. It was morally ambiguous. It didn't have the kind of name recognition that Batman and Superman and Spider-man had. It was dark, brooding, and violent, and very much R-rated. For any other superhero movie, that would have spelled death at the box office and no more than a $10-20 million opening.

By the way, I do not at all believe it cost $200 million to produce. Back in the autumn, all credible sources were saying Watchmen cost $100 million to produce. Around the time of the lawsuit, they said $110 million. And, up until a day or two before the release, nobody was saying higher than $120 million. But then when everyone realized "Watchmen" wasn't breaking the records people were hoping it would break, they pounced on it and yelled: "$150 million! $200 million!" The sad fact is that people love it when a movie doesn't meet expectations, even if those expectations are unrealistic. Watchmen had a first weekend to be proud of. And even if it doesn't make all its money back in theaters, it's more than going to make it back on DVD. After all, only 1/4 of the profits come from theaters. Remember that before you're so quick to label another movie a failure.

By: junjun

junjun — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 19:18:47 +0000

175mil domestic for Watchmen at best, realistically, I see it around 135-150mil. Here's hoping Watchmen manages a semblance of the legs that Taken has on the box office. It was a good but not great imho. It was a pretty solid effort to adapt an exemplary graphic novel that in all honestly could never be done total justice on the big screen. On a side note, I'm happy for Liam Neeson that Taken is doing so well.

By: drew

drew — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 21:53:57 +0000

Well if they decide to blame the R rating then this means that Terminator Salvation might get knocked down to a PG-13.

By: joker47

joker47 — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 21:33:44 +0000

Watchmen will have a "word of mouth" effect like Taken did. This title will garner more and more money as time goes by.

By: Atz

Atz — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 20:49:07 +0000

Zack Snyder said in a recent interview that the movie was made for a "lot less" than the $150 million figure people are citing. So, who knows? It's a great, thrilling, ride that's not your typical mainstream fare. That makes what happens next unpredictable.

By: EnglishGavz

EnglishGavz — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 20:42:15 +0000

Officialy Watchmen had a budget of 150 mill, so with the whole 50 mill advertising thing that makes 200 mill. Watchmen might get lucky and pay off that budget, but right now Snyder should probably be looking to his next 2 projects to make up for this.

By: Steve

Steve — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 20:39:03 +0000

Plus let's add (I did not see the movie) people like "Movie Mom" saying this is a "near NC-17-level" movie. That had to scare people off. Who wants to see a "Saw" movie for two and a half hours plus.

By: malevolentmuse

malevolentmuse — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 18:59:49 +0000

First, I want to say I loved the movie and only have lukewarm support for the book. With that said, who is to blame for this? When you consider the media hype (not to mention the free publicity coming from the Fox-Warner war over the book rights) this movie should have opened north of 70 million. Fault for this debacle has to be put squarely at the feet of Warner Bros marketing department which tried to sell the movie as a dark superhero movie like The Dark Knight made by the guy who did 300. I went to see this with 13 people last night and the group was divided into four fans of the book; three who were familiar with the book, but never read it; two comic book fans and the rest were fans of "superhero movies." Guess who in the group loved it and who hated it? WB's marketing has left a lot of moviegoers feeling lied to because they were presented a vision of the movie to which the story couldn't live up. Warner Bros has no one to blame but themselves.

By: Vince

Vince — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 18:02:43 +0000

Can I toot my own horn Laremy? I called it, I knew it was gonna fall short of expectations!! Not that I'm happy about that, since I liked the movie and all.

Yeah, word of mouth will be pretty bad; It'll drop (i think) like "The Incredible Hulk" from last year and make around $130-140 million when it's out of theaters.

Next weekend though, it'll barely take the throne (mostly by default). "Witch Mountain" will come in at low 20s, "Last House" will open somewhere at mid-to-high teens, while "Miss March" (which I really want to see since it's Zack and Trevor from WKUK) will open to sub-5 million.

By: adnan

adnan — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 17:53:52 +0000

yeah the only people who liked it were the comic fans, although I liked it too. It will probably crash big time next week, unless all those fans manage repeat viewings.

By: chewbaca69

chewbaca69 — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 17:46:37 +0000

There is no way word of mouth from the general public could help this. The only ones who liked it are fans, everyone who hasn't read the book (that I have talked to at least), has hated it.