tl;dr Furiosa’s $25 million opening was lower than the expected $40 million that its predecessor Fury Road opened with. Could lose money on its $168 million budget.
Lower budgeted family friendly Garfield well on its way to profit on its reported $60 million budget.
-
“Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga,” $25.6 million.
-
“The Garfield Movie,” $24.8 million.
-
“IF,” $16.1 million.
-
“Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes,” $13.4 million.
-
“The Fall Guy,” $5.9 million.
-
“The Strangers: Chapter 1,” $5.6 million.
-
“Sight,” $2.7 million.”
-
“Challengers,” $1.4 million.
-
“Babes,” $1.1 million.
-
“Back to Black,” $1.1 million.
Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga was pretty good. The CGI was hard to watch though. 35 minutes of ads, made me regret going to the movies and paying $65 for two people. That includes 2 “IMAX” tickets, a water, and some shit pretzel bits. Love some AMC.
So in the era of assigned seats, i wonder if maybe there somewhere I could go to find out each theater’s expected time from nominal start to actual start.
I only see a couple of movies in cinemas per year, but I still have that instinct that I need to be there on time, even though logically I know I have a ton of wiggle room. I think if I knew more going in, I’d be more sanguine about strolling in late like some sort of savvy YOLO Zoomer.
It would be great to know in advance. However, ours was delayed due to the tight run times. The movie let out 5 mins before ours started. They still had to clean the room. At this point I say, watch them at home.
At this point I say, watch them at home.
I do think that Covid accelerated a trend in movies. I think the auteurs and aficionados always overestimated the inherent “magic” of going to a movie theater, and ultimately a decent TV, maybe a little on the big side and definitively in HD, is more than enough for most people to enjoy your average drama or comedy. If people actually want a dark room and no breaks, that’ll do that. If they want to watch with their friends, that’ll do that.
I think over time we’re going to see movie theaters being treated more like live theater or fountain pens, where they continue to exist for the true enthusiasts and those few use cases where their unique traits (for movie theaters, that’s giant screen, giant speakers, dark room, and a culture of STFU) actually enhances the product enough to overcome the inefficiencies. I am quite sure that my inability to appreciate Fury Road stems partly from having seen it on a 7” airplane screen.
I wish movie theaters aggressively enforced the stfu culture, but the bankrupt Arclight is the only theater I’ve been in where a disruptive person was actually told to get the fuck out.
Yeah, my last few theater experiences weren’t great. Toddlers screaming and adults talking on their phone (note: neither we’re kids movies). I’m sorry, but that’s not the experience I shelled out a bunch of money for. The home 65" might not be as immersive, but it’s quiet and I can pause it to to go pee and that’s a massive win in my book.
Be in your seat 15 minutes after the published start and you will be fine.
Why did you pay $65 instead of 20?
$17.98 for Imax tickets x2 $20 Water and Pretzel bits Convience fee $6
Who keeps ordering god damn Garfield Movies!
I want names damn it!
Good.
Let them burn money on nonsense projects. Maybe if they loose enough money they will finally learn to stop it with the franchise milking and remakes.
I’m not sure you can call Furiosa franchise milking.
Apart from sharing a name the 2015 film came out 30 years after the previous film and has little to actually connect them apart from the main characters name and the general theme. If it wasn’t the same director it would be just a love letter to those films instead of a reboot.
Furiosa is a prequel that came out 9 years later.
Making a film and then a follow up 9 years later is FAR from milking a franchise.
Additionally both stories are completely new and not remakes.
So why didn’t they name it something new instead?
Go on come up with an original name for your story about new characters that aren’t a part of an existing franchise.
Oh wait… they revived a 9 year old brand that’s been dead for 30 years prior to milk some more nostalgia from the fans wallets.
What the fuck are you talking about.
The original director revived a 30 year old movie franchise. In doing so completely reset the story.
Call the film “Fury Road” staring “Mad Matt” and you’d be calling it a visionary new story with tasteful callbacks to 80s action films.
Then we get a prequel to the film 9 years later. In what world is that milking? A follow up to a film isn’t milking a franchise.
In doing so completely reset the story.
Reseting the existing timeline doesn’t mean it’s a new product or a new story. It’s the same franchise still.
Call the film “Fury Road” staring “Mad Matt” and you’d be calling it a visionary new story with tasteful callbacks to 80s action films.
Yes. But it’s not. It’s another sequel. (Prequel is still a continuation of a franchise)
So many shows and movies could have been new standalone stories but have a brand tacked on because of sales and marketing bull.
Lol I agree with you somewhat, but I think you’re too lost in the sauce here. There are plenty of egregious examples of Hollywood and movie studios doing what you dislike (Batman rings some bells…), but this ain’t it chief.
The 2 top grossing movies on that list are milking franchises, though.
The milked franchise is the one burning money and won’t make its 168 million budget.
If you judge quality purely by sales then you must be the reason we’re getting another fast and furious movie.
I’ve got a franchise, Greg.
Can you milk me, focker?
Furiosa was great though. George Miller is actually making original scripts and doing a great job of it. You should support this if you don’t want more Marvel and Star Wars focus group fluff.
Band of Brothers marathon on AMC right now.
I should get some popcorn!
Saw it Thursday night, and there were less than 10 people in the theater. The movie itself was pretty lackluster, but I thought Hemsworth was great.
Lackluster compared to FR is not a surprise. It would have been hard to match.
I saw it Saturday and there were maybe 8 others in the theater at a 6pm showing.
Movie was mediocre at best. I hated that so much green screen and CGI was used for the car battles. Story was lacking as well. Characters went nowhere.
mediocre!
my favorite part was how they showed scenes from Fury Road at the end to remind you about how this is related to an outstanding film.
There is a nonzero chance that the last thing I will see on my deathbed is Chris Hemsworth’s bloody nipples.
I thought it was great though. Not lackluster at all
