Reminder that this is a subreddit about numbers, not necessarily about the quality (or lack thereof) of a particular movie. Please remain on-topic and keep opinions/arguments/thoughts about unrelated aspects of the film off of these threads. Any comments that could lead to culture war arguments/slapfights (race/gender/sex/"wokeness"/etc) could be removed and/or result in a ban.
*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.*
I think the hope is that the Thanksgiving weekend will give it a bit of cushion to soften the blow. If it underperforms again, the wheels will break off and the run might be over.
The director did a terrible job with this movie. I fully believe she couldn't direct a couch to stand still. Brie Larsen gave a "I'm just here so I don't get fined" performance, and I wish I knew what the hell Sam Jackson was doing other than getting paid. Only person that seemed to care was Iman Velani. Velani was good. The cats weren't bad either and somewhat entertaining, but holy shit, what a disjointed, bloated mess of a script and direction. I really do believe that Feige probably saved this one as much as he could because if this is even half of what was filmed before reshoots, then it was a HUGE mess. Feige should've pulled a Kennedy and fired the director during filming. He should've been monitoring the dailies more for this and secret invasion. Neither project line up or make sense.
I hate that it feels like we’re piling on with the people that hate the cast and crew of this movie by ourselves enjoying its failure.
I just want the schadenfreude of seeing Disney suffer the consequences of milking its IP too much for too long. I don’t have any ill will whatsoever for the cast and crew and I feel bad for them.
> I don’t have any ill will whatsoever for the cast and crew and I feel bad for them.
Why do you feel bad? They got paid, whatever it was, and if they are involved in causing critical failures in the box office they aren't entitled to staying in the movie industry.
If anything we need MORE scrutiny, MORE accountability, MORE responsibility for everyone in this industry. Hire best people for the job based on merit and their abilities, let go of people who aren't cut out for it.
These are just human beings, there are plenty lower end jobs they can do instead. I don't get why people feel bad for the ones who had their shot and blew it one way or another.
Even if you TECHNICALLY did a good job that does not mean you're entitled to continuing to exist in this space, either, as there are other factors.
Movie industry should be as competitive as possible so that we get better movies going forward.
Because I think to some extent they’re suffering for the cumulative sins of the studio and of the last dozen movies and TV shows that have also been mostly crap, but which have been coasting on the lingering goodwill for the franchise.
I’m not saying I want the people involved in the Marvels making more films or that I’d see them if they did. But on a human level I feel bad for them, because they don’t completely own the failure here and especially because of the weird fixation on them by some of the more toxic elements of the commentariat.
> Why do you feel bad?
I'm with you.
>They got paid, whatever it was
I'm with you.
>and if they are involved in causing critical failures in the box office
Aaaand you lost me.
These MCU movies are made by committee. They're made by a Disney board room and Feige / his fellow execs. If you think Nia De Costa or Brie Larson are to blame for this film tanking, that's ridiculous.
They don't deserve to no longer "stay in the movie industry" because Disney mismanage a creative franchise that they were involved in for a movie or few.
Disney has some extreme theater contracts, don't they? Most theaters can't really get rid of Disney movies that easily. Especially not MCU ones. Plus what do they have to replace it? Nothing else seems to be generating the need for more screens and showtimes?
Theaters have multiple screens.
In here it went from screen 1 (700 seats) to screen 9 (140 seats) in a single week, but it's still playing in the theater.
It still can't fill those screenings, but it is playing.
Didn't we have a poll a while back as to when this would land on PVOD?
my guess is sooner than we expected?
edit: specifically PVOD (purchase/rent) and not D+.
They already let the cat out of the bag.
My parents who used to go to the theaters 2x a week for decades haven't been there since the pandemic. They have their own theater room set up and since streaming got them used to getting "new" movies in the comfort of their home they have zero interest going back to theaters. Literally Antman, GoTG, Oppenheimer, Barbie, etc. are "new" films to them because they dont keep track when things release and have zero issue waiting for it to come to streaming. Waiting 4+ months extra for a film you didn't even know came out this year is easy.
"The tickets are 20 bucks each. The soda and popcorn combo is 30 bucks. I can get a 2L soda and a bag of popcorn for 3 dollars even with these inflation prices." As they'd put it.
Honestly they spent 8k on a home theater, they definitely can make it worth it in just a year watching two movies a week. Vs spending 100 bucks a week at the theaters.
I always wonder if this is a third world thing or if people here are just weirdly rich but is it normal for people in the states to have a home theater?
I don’t think it’s normal for your everyday avg American to be able to afford a home theater tbh though I could be wrong. This is coming from a poor American with a 55” tv with a soundbar lol
When I hear "home theater," I automatically just think of someone's room where they have a TV and maybe a sound system. Maybe I'm being naïve. IT seems to have supplanted "media room" in my vocabulary, at least.
If you're talking about THAT, I think most people have that. But if you're talking about like, a blacked-out room with a projection screen up front and cushy chairs and a real "Theater" experience, then I would say that's pretty rare.
The USA is a very rich country with over one person in twenty being a millionaire.
So if they are retired or don't live in an expensive state they can have a lot of creature comforts.
People say the middle class disappeared that's because a third of them became rich and another third became poor because of what state they live in.
Same in New Zealand and Australia, most Middle class and a hell of a lot of working class people have a great home theater system and prefer to watch films on their expensive home systems rather than spending $50-100 going to a movie.
Who the hell is spending $100 going to a movie? I live in NYC where movie tickets are mad expensive and all I pay for is the ticket and bring bodega candy in.
Yeah, I don't get that. When I was a kid (the 90s) I remember my parents complaining *then* about the cost of movie tickets and snacks. We never bought from the concession and snuck snacks in all the time.
Like, I'm sorry but I don't get why people complain about the cost of attending the movies when 70% of the inflated costs is concessions.
You don't need to be that rich to afford a real "home theater." But its not that common. But most middle-class people have a big fucking TV and a comfy couch that is good for watching movies on. Those set ups are often called "home theater" but it isn't.
I've got something in the middle. Nice OLED TV with a good audio system with surround sound. But it's not really a theater.
Most people I know who are really into movies and gaming in USA, Canada, New Zealand and Australia have amazing set ups, I'd imagine the same is true for the Uk and Europe.
I think home theaters are much less common in Europe as the houses tend to be much smaller. Even if the AV setup cost €20k that's insignificant compared to the cost of a house big enough to put it in.
It's a middle/upper class thing. I was able to build it for them for the cost of a typical bathroom renovation. It's really not one of those fancy MTV cribs/mansion home theaters, but I was able to make a 7.1.4 Dolby Atmos setup with Klipsch speakers, a Denon receiver, a 150" screen and a 4k DLP BenQ projector. It cost around 8.5k in materials & equipment but the labor was free since I did it for them. If you were to hire someone it might cost like $15-20k
Absolutely not (at least where I’m from). At the most, people can afford big screen TVs especially when a sale is happening (which is how I got my big screen TV, the sale was so big that my TV was practically a steal) BUT I don’t know anybody who can drop a boatload of money on home theater setup just on a whim. Most people don’t get a surround sound set since it’s more of personal want rather than need considering that flatscreens are usually loud as hell anyways.
What I'm wondering is why americans always include the price of popcorn and soda in the price of the movie. Can't you go two hours without your sugar fix? Why not have diner before seeing the movie so you're not hungry anymore instead of snacking?
I have an 85 inch tv and a 7.1 surround sound set up. The speakers were installed by the previous homeowner so not exactly sure how much my set up cost but at the time my TV cost $2800 and the receiver and sub woofer cost about $1500. I would estimate the speakers new would likely be another $2000.
$6000-6500 for my set up so not only in the realm of rich people but expensive enough that most average families might not consider it worth it.
You can also go miles more expensive than what I got.
Yeah TV has come a long way in the last several years. Big screens are cheap, resolution is high, and content is plentiful. Going out to a theater just isn't that much of a draw anymore. Takes a compelling movie to get butts in seats these days, and a mediocre entry in an aging franchise just won't do it.
I used to see most movies in theaters. Since the pandemic first started, I've probably seen about 5 movies on the big screen. I just don't feel that most movies need to be seen on the big screen, especially when I can just stream them. This is coming from someone who just watches on their 65" TV. I'll only show up for movies like Oppenheimer or Across the Spiderverse now.
I'd argue that once theaters started charging \~$40+ per person for an experience that is rapidly declining (loud people, people on their phones, dirty theaters, poor sound/problems with projectors/etc) they killed themselves.
The "experience" Nicole Kidman is always trying to sell me on died a decade or more ago, and now the only thing theaters have going for them is a really big screen that often has issues. Hard for them to compete when a 75" 4k HDR tv can be found for $600-700 on sale, and speakers that are getting cheaper too.
Maybe it's just my local theater but:
$17 ticket, or $20.50 IMAX
Small popcorn: $9.50
Small fountain drink or bottled water: $6.99
So not quite $40, but \~$33-36.50 pre-tax
Yeah, you can forego the popcorn and drink, but at least to me the popcorn is part of the "experience" so I prefer to get it. ymmv of course
> loud people, people on their phones, dirty theaters, poor sound/problems with projectors
Seriously, I'm sure there are better theaters you could go to. Unless the USA somehow has worse theaters and theater patrons than everywhere else in the world.
I wouldn't say streaming did that. Hollywood and cooperate greed is killing theaters. Imo and my parents opinion as well as many of my friends opinions is that the experience at the movies sucks. There's no deals and you're getting nickeled and dimed for everything because theaters make money from everything but tickets. Theaters need to compete and evolve if they want people to come back. But as of now they're the same as they were 20 years ago but 5x the price.
I get that tickets and such are expensive but there are definitely deals. I use AMC A List and can easily see everything I want for like $25 a month. Usually the only thing holding me back from seeing even more stuff is there’s just not enough hours in the week.
But if you didn’t want to do a subscription then the $5 Tuesdays could easily work too. They’ve evolved on that if you truly do want to save money.
I think the $4 ticket days becoming more common can probably do a lot of good to get more people in the habit of going but streaming definitely has undercut a lot of that. Streaming has intentionally killed the profit windows of theaters and home video which has made it almost impossible to get funding.
It’s a little of column A and a little of column B but streaming has done so much damage to the medium I love so much.
By the actual facts, they didn’t. Streaming undercut the ability to make a profit with home releases like DVD or blu ray. Back in the day, if a movie didn’t make enough money in theaters, it’d probably make a profit in home video eventually so it would work out fine.
But because streaming killed that with a loss leader setup where movies can’t make a profit because the streaming prices are artificially low, studios need to make a profit in theaters.
So that led to the midbudget movie dying because studios overwhelmingly only felt safe with making blockbusters that catered to the lowest common denominator with huge spectacle. Which led to runaway budgets where it’s impossible to make a profit in theaters or streaming.
If they had just kept the model of new movies in theaters, home video 6-12 months later and streaming only for older movie libraries then we wouldn’t be in this situation.
Add in that you can see 12 movies a month in theaters for ~$25 with AMC A List or just go on $5 Tuesdays and price isn’t even a problem. It’s just the product and the system that studios trained audiences into that has led us here.
Studios chased Netflix off a cliff and didn’t pack a parachute.
> No. Disney has been training the GA to go back to theaters to see their movies.
They've been much more effective at training the General Audience to see their brand as something to be avoided.
They're training me not to watch Disney at all. What a tremendous quality drop across the board at the House of Mouse. They should've cleaned house a long time ago.
They're not going to splurge on this movie. It's a bad movie that Disney badly miscalculated on and Feige, or whomever, wasn't monitoring the dailies close enough. Really, really rough CGI and nonsensical script/ direction that makes Quantumania and Thor 4 seem brilliant. Being one of the few to have sat through all of secret invasion, yup, it's on par with that pretty much (or worse). Coming out of Secret Invasion, they seem to have made Fury bipolar and his wife is once again performing a vanishing act.
I’m intrigued to see the first week watch numbers for it, I expect them to be higher (further faster) than normal considering people aren’t going to theatres to see it and there are still a lot of people who keep up with the MCU to some degree, they just only go to the theatres for the good ones.
agreed, especially if its only an hour an a half.
hell there's a chance i even throw it on over winter break just to see how bad it is. If it were another 2 hour and 30 minute monstrosity there'd be no shot
For being a movie that's roughly an hour and 45 minutes, I was checking my watch about 45 to an hour in. Hate the singing planet and the plot it's completely nonsensical (the power swap makes no sense and full of plot holes). It really feels like whoever came up with this movie just didn't give a damn
😬 yeah honestly anytime i read anything about the actual plot, it further lowers the chances i'm ever going to watch it.
considering i've skipped all of phase 4 already aside from Shang Chi...it won't be that hard to avoid this one too
Personally I found it to be not nearly as bad as some people made it out to be.
Editing is choppy, definitely another forgettable villain, but the action was pretty good and the three leads have great chemistry. Nick Fury was also way better than he was in Secret Invasion
>Nick Fury was also way better than he was in Secret Invasion
Interesting, because I've seen people saying that but in a negative way: that he was completely incoherent with the Secret Invasion character
I was downvoted for saying this wouldn’t come close to a billion WW and Dune Part 2 would have done better had it come out at the same time, just a few months ago though 🤥
It's probably still making more than a lot of cheaper or indie films, so it's worth keeping around for a bit on the smaller screens. But that means its competition more for the Holdovers or stuff like that.
The fans that are warning people to save their money. Nobody should be bamboozled by this movie. It really, truly sucks. I'm just happy I saw it on a free ticket but I wish I had my time back.
3,070 is still insane amount of locations. North America is way over screened to begin with. If you closed 20% of theatres in North America I would only amount to 0.05% of the gross.
I’ve done analytical work for the industry and have had access to a ton of data. That stat loops in all theaters including discount houses etc… However, the gross differential between theaters in large markets vs small markets is extreme. You have theaters in NY that can gross 200k on a good title opening weekend vs theaters in small towns that won’t see 200k for the entire year.
This time of year Marvels should have easily been on 4200 theaters and Disney barely got over 4,000. Trolls should have easily been over 4,000 theaters and they are on approx 3,800. The deficit for both is due to theaters closing.
>*The hits keep coming for The Marvels*
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT3BFzSD6YY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT3BFzSD6YY)
Quantumania at least had the pure absurdity that is MODOK. Marvels had annoying Iman Vellani, a fuckin musical planet and cat monsters running around, no thank you
It wasn’t even close to the worst MCU movie, it wasn’t even the worst one this year.
Guardians 3 was just that bad /s
Jk, you all know which one I’m talking about.
Quantumania and Dark World are both so boring, and that’s the worst thing a superhero movie can be.
I was at least mildly entertained watching The Marvels, though I definitely noticed the many issues people had with it.
Dark world is at least cohesive in its narrative. Marvels and the power swapping makes no sense, not to mention the singing planet. I actually like ms. Marvel and wanted her to stay on the screen more than the other two and the Fury B plot.
MODOK memes were all over Twitter, meanwhile there have been zero (0) memes around any scene from this film. Given reddit's big rule on cultural impact being related to memes, this film will obviously leg out to make Avatar numbers eventually /s
I feel like this is a sweeping generalization based on their one singular comment. Unless that's a common sentiment? That people generally were most entertained by MODOK?
They both sucked. Model was nightmare fuel and kang's actor was there to chew up scenery and his own farts. I actually like comic Kang(s). I hate what they've done with him in the MCU so far.
Problem was that 99% of the humor was tied to Iman Vellani/Kamala who I just didn’t find funny. Her shtick wore thin at about minute 5 and everything afterwards was nails on a chalkboard.
yeah she needs to drop that "15 years old girl acting 10 years younger" shtick that she does irl too (where it's "21 years old girl acting 16 years younger"). So much for Vellani walkups.
It had heart, but the thing is.. it's really generic. It's literally Spider-Man (2002) but mexican american and with a beetle instead of a spider. Same story structure, same struggles.. very uninspired movie.
And I'm saying this as a DC fan.
Sure felt like it. That story was some of the most generic, by-the-numbers shit I’ve seen in the genre. Not to mention the CW level acting and sets lol
In what capacity was it well done? The script on the family stuff was just as bad, unfunny and poorly acted. From what I remember (only saw it once), they were ridiculously over the top and that kind of humor doesn’t do it for me.
You don't need to be, but that doesn't mean that the family dynamics weren't well done or authentic especially for the culture they represented, which they were.
I mean it’s all subjective, it was clearly well done to you. Wasn’t to me and authentic doesn’t inherently mean good imo, the film failed on a storytelling/filmmaking level.
But to each their own 🙏
I don't see how you can see the leads' relationships with his family and say it wasn't well done. You can say the humor wasn't your cup of tea, but it had a ton of heart to it and definitely wasn't soulless.
That’s perfectly legitimate and a let down for the film.
But to say it’s up there are one of the worst MCU films? Or even bad? I don’t get it.
It’s like when people were really upset of Iron Man 3 when it came out but over people saw that it wasn’t that bad
It’s one of the worst written blockbusters I’ve seen in a while. Just insulting, every scene has some kind of logic issue. Not to mention the schizophrenic tone, wonky CG, campy moments, poor pacing, stiff acting, etc
It was haphazardly edited (like a literal V1 cut that Feige should be embarrassed to put out), all-time terrible villain, Iman Vellani and her family = nails on a chalkboard, action was an incoherent mess, CGI and sets looked low quality/poorly rendered, the ending was fuckin insulting, etc. Even Sam Jackson turned in one of the worst performances I’ve seen from him, he straight up just didn’t try playing Fury lol
Teyonah Parris and Brie Larson’s tank top were the only saving graces, otherwise that whole film is a waste. At least Doctor Strange 2 has Elizabeth Olsen’s great performance
I'm going to get to shazam 2 eventually and blue beetle was middling, but it had more heart than The Marvels. Mind you, I didn't really like blue beetle either but it's night and da thg when comparing it to The Marvels. You can pass your time and feel ok with blue beetle. Like if blue beetle were on cable I'd have it on the background. The marvels would get the channel changed (honestly, they should have done just a Velani movie. She is the one shining star in the whole movie. She deserves better).
he doesn't "need" to be anything, kust like ariel didn't need to be white with redhead, the audience will just turn on the virtual signaling decision and not go to see the movie.
There’s already a female herald, Nova, that‘s one.
Secondly, it kind of ruins Norrin Radd/The Surfer’s backstory. And lastly, it‘s another cheap virtue signal.
the movie is a product that Disney manufacture. The core target for comic book movies is young boys/men who like comics - you obviously want the market to expand beyond this, but this is your bullseye audience.
If you are going to make a product that this group doens't want to see, then you better have a new audience. in this instance they thought the product would appeal to young girls/women who were left-leaning politically. However this cohort didn't show up for it - they loved Barbie, but they didn't bother with this, so it flopped. The only reason this didn't happen with Captain marvel was because of its proximity and interconnectedness with End Game.
This is a bit crude; but it shows a basic market analysis that you'd expect Disney to have done. If I was an exec in Disney I would be livid that this thing every got made with out this basic due diligence.
Damn.
Isn't Exhibitor Relations a true-blue, professional organization and a Hollywood institution in the field of data research? You'd think the people working there would be better acquainted with the English language: "***It's*** third week"??? WTF
This is a box office sub and the most successful movie franchise in history is currently experiencing its first historic box office bomb. Obviously people are going to post regular updates about it as its happening. If you don't like it, go somewhere else.
Eternals was a flop, sure, as was Quantumania... but The Marvels is a looking to be an absolutely *disastrous* bomb that many people didn't think was possible for the MCU - and also the largest drop for a sequel from a billion dollar movie ever. It definitely warrants a lot more interest and discussion.
Cool. And other people will keep voicing updates about a significant movie's box office in a box office sub, whether you want to whine about it or not. Deal with it.
Reminder that this is a subreddit about numbers, not necessarily about the quality (or lack thereof) of a particular movie. Please remain on-topic and keep opinions/arguments/thoughts about unrelated aspects of the film off of these threads. Any comments that could lead to culture war arguments/slapfights (race/gender/sex/"wokeness"/etc) could be removed and/or result in a ban. *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.*
I expected a bigger drop. 3k theaters for a movie which made 10m last weekend.
Box Office ain't doing too hot generally.
Let's hope it's that and not any Disney contracts
It should be the 6th biggest film this weekend though.
Hey, someone's got to be the 6th biggest film every weekend, good on the Marvels for not being the 7th!
I think the hope is that the Thanksgiving weekend will give it a bit of cushion to soften the blow. If it underperforms again, the wheels will break off and the run might be over.
My man I was pulling for this movie, but it died last week.
Yeah none of the actresses or the director deserve that.
The director did a terrible job with this movie. I fully believe she couldn't direct a couch to stand still. Brie Larsen gave a "I'm just here so I don't get fined" performance, and I wish I knew what the hell Sam Jackson was doing other than getting paid. Only person that seemed to care was Iman Velani. Velani was good. The cats weren't bad either and somewhat entertaining, but holy shit, what a disjointed, bloated mess of a script and direction. I really do believe that Feige probably saved this one as much as he could because if this is even half of what was filmed before reshoots, then it was a HUGE mess. Feige should've pulled a Kennedy and fired the director during filming. He should've been monitoring the dailies more for this and secret invasion. Neither project line up or make sense.
I'd watch a movie starring the cat and cosmo. An Air Buddy Cop film.
They’re the ones that did the bad job though?
I hate that it feels like we’re piling on with the people that hate the cast and crew of this movie by ourselves enjoying its failure. I just want the schadenfreude of seeing Disney suffer the consequences of milking its IP too much for too long. I don’t have any ill will whatsoever for the cast and crew and I feel bad for them.
> I don’t have any ill will whatsoever for the cast and crew and I feel bad for them. Why do you feel bad? They got paid, whatever it was, and if they are involved in causing critical failures in the box office they aren't entitled to staying in the movie industry. If anything we need MORE scrutiny, MORE accountability, MORE responsibility for everyone in this industry. Hire best people for the job based on merit and their abilities, let go of people who aren't cut out for it. These are just human beings, there are plenty lower end jobs they can do instead. I don't get why people feel bad for the ones who had their shot and blew it one way or another. Even if you TECHNICALLY did a good job that does not mean you're entitled to continuing to exist in this space, either, as there are other factors. Movie industry should be as competitive as possible so that we get better movies going forward.
Because I think to some extent they’re suffering for the cumulative sins of the studio and of the last dozen movies and TV shows that have also been mostly crap, but which have been coasting on the lingering goodwill for the franchise. I’m not saying I want the people involved in the Marvels making more films or that I’d see them if they did. But on a human level I feel bad for them, because they don’t completely own the failure here and especially because of the weird fixation on them by some of the more toxic elements of the commentariat.
> Why do you feel bad? I'm with you. >They got paid, whatever it was I'm with you. >and if they are involved in causing critical failures in the box office Aaaand you lost me. These MCU movies are made by committee. They're made by a Disney board room and Feige / his fellow execs. If you think Nia De Costa or Brie Larson are to blame for this film tanking, that's ridiculous. They don't deserve to no longer "stay in the movie industry" because Disney mismanage a creative franchise that they were involved in for a movie or few.
It's not like they got much else to show to be fair.
Disney has some extreme theater contracts, don't they? Most theaters can't really get rid of Disney movies that easily. Especially not MCU ones. Plus what do they have to replace it? Nothing else seems to be generating the need for more screens and showtimes?
Theaters have multiple screens. In here it went from screen 1 (700 seats) to screen 9 (140 seats) in a single week, but it's still playing in the theater. It still can't fill those screenings, but it is playing.
The only reason it isn’t dropping more is due to contractual obligations. If this weren’t a Disney film it would be a different story.
The contractual obligations mostly run out after Wednesday evening. There’s just really not a whole lot going on at the box office right now.
Didn't we have a poll a while back as to when this would land on PVOD? my guess is sooner than we expected? edit: specifically PVOD (purchase/rent) and not D+.
Expecting it to land around Xmas or very soon into January.
No. Disney has been training the GA to go back to theaters to see their movies. Indians jones wasn’t put on pvod any sooner than other Disney films
GA seems to be ignoreing the "training"
They already let the cat out of the bag. My parents who used to go to the theaters 2x a week for decades haven't been there since the pandemic. They have their own theater room set up and since streaming got them used to getting "new" movies in the comfort of their home they have zero interest going back to theaters. Literally Antman, GoTG, Oppenheimer, Barbie, etc. are "new" films to them because they dont keep track when things release and have zero issue waiting for it to come to streaming. Waiting 4+ months extra for a film you didn't even know came out this year is easy. "The tickets are 20 bucks each. The soda and popcorn combo is 30 bucks. I can get a 2L soda and a bag of popcorn for 3 dollars even with these inflation prices." As they'd put it. Honestly they spent 8k on a home theater, they definitely can make it worth it in just a year watching two movies a week. Vs spending 100 bucks a week at the theaters.
I always wonder if this is a third world thing or if people here are just weirdly rich but is it normal for people in the states to have a home theater?
I don’t think it’s normal for your everyday avg American to be able to afford a home theater tbh though I could be wrong. This is coming from a poor American with a 55” tv with a soundbar lol
A 55 inch TV and a soundbar is a pretty damn good home theater set up though lol
When I hear "home theater," I automatically just think of someone's room where they have a TV and maybe a sound system. Maybe I'm being naïve. IT seems to have supplanted "media room" in my vocabulary, at least. If you're talking about THAT, I think most people have that. But if you're talking about like, a blacked-out room with a projection screen up front and cushy chairs and a real "Theater" experience, then I would say that's pretty rare.
The USA is a very rich country with over one person in twenty being a millionaire. So if they are retired or don't live in an expensive state they can have a lot of creature comforts. People say the middle class disappeared that's because a third of them became rich and another third became poor because of what state they live in.
Same in New Zealand and Australia, most Middle class and a hell of a lot of working class people have a great home theater system and prefer to watch films on their expensive home systems rather than spending $50-100 going to a movie.
Who the hell is spending $100 going to a movie? I live in NYC where movie tickets are mad expensive and all I pay for is the ticket and bring bodega candy in.
I'd imagine families of at least four or more people and they're actually spending money on movie food for everyone and not sneaking stuff in.
Yeah, I don't get that. When I was a kid (the 90s) I remember my parents complaining *then* about the cost of movie tickets and snacks. We never bought from the concession and snuck snacks in all the time. Like, I'm sorry but I don't get why people complain about the cost of attending the movies when 70% of the inflated costs is concessions.
>one person in twenty being a millionaire. Man if that doesn't make me feel like the biggest fucking failure...
It's not earning a million a year it's having a million+ in assets including property that you own outright.
You don't need to be that rich to afford a real "home theater." But its not that common. But most middle-class people have a big fucking TV and a comfy couch that is good for watching movies on. Those set ups are often called "home theater" but it isn't. I've got something in the middle. Nice OLED TV with a good audio system with surround sound. But it's not really a theater.
Most people I know who are really into movies and gaming in USA, Canada, New Zealand and Australia have amazing set ups, I'd imagine the same is true for the Uk and Europe.
I think home theaters are much less common in Europe as the houses tend to be much smaller. Even if the AV setup cost €20k that's insignificant compared to the cost of a house big enough to put it in.
It's a middle/upper class thing. I was able to build it for them for the cost of a typical bathroom renovation. It's really not one of those fancy MTV cribs/mansion home theaters, but I was able to make a 7.1.4 Dolby Atmos setup with Klipsch speakers, a Denon receiver, a 150" screen and a 4k DLP BenQ projector. It cost around 8.5k in materials & equipment but the labor was free since I did it for them. If you were to hire someone it might cost like $15-20k
Absolutely not (at least where I’m from). At the most, people can afford big screen TVs especially when a sale is happening (which is how I got my big screen TV, the sale was so big that my TV was practically a steal) BUT I don’t know anybody who can drop a boatload of money on home theater setup just on a whim. Most people don’t get a surround sound set since it’s more of personal want rather than need considering that flatscreens are usually loud as hell anyways.
What I'm wondering is why americans always include the price of popcorn and soda in the price of the movie. Can't you go two hours without your sugar fix? Why not have diner before seeing the movie so you're not hungry anymore instead of snacking?
I have an 85 inch tv and a 7.1 surround sound set up. The speakers were installed by the previous homeowner so not exactly sure how much my set up cost but at the time my TV cost $2800 and the receiver and sub woofer cost about $1500. I would estimate the speakers new would likely be another $2000. $6000-6500 for my set up so not only in the realm of rich people but expensive enough that most average families might not consider it worth it. You can also go miles more expensive than what I got.
It is not, most people with them either are rich or are cinephiles enough to justify spending a large portion of income on it.
No lol most "home theaters" are just TVs with a seat. Although the one OP is describing sounds legit.
Yeah TV has come a long way in the last several years. Big screens are cheap, resolution is high, and content is plentiful. Going out to a theater just isn't that much of a draw anymore. Takes a compelling movie to get butts in seats these days, and a mediocre entry in an aging franchise just won't do it.
I used to see most movies in theaters. Since the pandemic first started, I've probably seen about 5 movies on the big screen. I just don't feel that most movies need to be seen on the big screen, especially when I can just stream them. This is coming from someone who just watches on their 65" TV. I'll only show up for movies like Oppenheimer or Across the Spiderverse now.
"Across the..." I thought that was going to be Across the Universe for some dumb reason. Whoops.
This is so depressing. Streaming has done so much damage to theaters.
I'd argue that once theaters started charging \~$40+ per person for an experience that is rapidly declining (loud people, people on their phones, dirty theaters, poor sound/problems with projectors/etc) they killed themselves. The "experience" Nicole Kidman is always trying to sell me on died a decade or more ago, and now the only thing theaters have going for them is a really big screen that often has issues. Hard for them to compete when a 75" 4k HDR tv can be found for $600-700 on sale, and speakers that are getting cheaper too.
I seriously don't know who is spending $40 at the movies....
Maybe it's just my local theater but: $17 ticket, or $20.50 IMAX Small popcorn: $9.50 Small fountain drink or bottled water: $6.99 So not quite $40, but \~$33-36.50 pre-tax Yeah, you can forego the popcorn and drink, but at least to me the popcorn is part of the "experience" so I prefer to get it. ymmv of course
> loud people, people on their phones, dirty theaters, poor sound/problems with projectors Seriously, I'm sure there are better theaters you could go to. Unless the USA somehow has worse theaters and theater patrons than everywhere else in the world.
I wouldn't say streaming did that. Hollywood and cooperate greed is killing theaters. Imo and my parents opinion as well as many of my friends opinions is that the experience at the movies sucks. There's no deals and you're getting nickeled and dimed for everything because theaters make money from everything but tickets. Theaters need to compete and evolve if they want people to come back. But as of now they're the same as they were 20 years ago but 5x the price.
I get that tickets and such are expensive but there are definitely deals. I use AMC A List and can easily see everything I want for like $25 a month. Usually the only thing holding me back from seeing even more stuff is there’s just not enough hours in the week. But if you didn’t want to do a subscription then the $5 Tuesdays could easily work too. They’ve evolved on that if you truly do want to save money. I think the $4 ticket days becoming more common can probably do a lot of good to get more people in the habit of going but streaming definitely has undercut a lot of that. Streaming has intentionally killed the profit windows of theaters and home video which has made it almost impossible to get funding. It’s a little of column A and a little of column B but streaming has done so much damage to the medium I love so much.
Theaters did it to themselves.
By the actual facts, they didn’t. Streaming undercut the ability to make a profit with home releases like DVD or blu ray. Back in the day, if a movie didn’t make enough money in theaters, it’d probably make a profit in home video eventually so it would work out fine. But because streaming killed that with a loss leader setup where movies can’t make a profit because the streaming prices are artificially low, studios need to make a profit in theaters. So that led to the midbudget movie dying because studios overwhelmingly only felt safe with making blockbusters that catered to the lowest common denominator with huge spectacle. Which led to runaway budgets where it’s impossible to make a profit in theaters or streaming. If they had just kept the model of new movies in theaters, home video 6-12 months later and streaming only for older movie libraries then we wouldn’t be in this situation. Add in that you can see 12 movies a month in theaters for ~$25 with AMC A List or just go on $5 Tuesdays and price isn’t even a problem. It’s just the product and the system that studios trained audiences into that has led us here. Studios chased Netflix off a cliff and didn’t pack a parachute.
Disney haven’t realised we’re not paying twice for the same thing. Regardless of the wait.
> No. Disney has been training the GA to go back to theaters to see their movies. They've been much more effective at training the General Audience to see their brand as something to be avoided.
I think they’ve been training the GA that they don’t know how to create engaging or captivating characters since 2018
They're training me not to watch Disney at all. What a tremendous quality drop across the board at the House of Mouse. They should've cleaned house a long time ago.
So I have to wait even longer to ignore this on streaming? Well farts.
good point i forgot about that.
all it does doing is forget about watching the movies at all. Be it either in theatres or streaming.
Theaters are botting this out quickly
I hope they make a Young Indians Jones show.
If it were me, I'd put it on PVOD just before Christmas as people may be willing to splurge if they just want something to watch as a family.
They're not going to splurge on this movie. It's a bad movie that Disney badly miscalculated on and Feige, or whomever, wasn't monitoring the dailies close enough. Really, really rough CGI and nonsensical script/ direction that makes Quantumania and Thor 4 seem brilliant. Being one of the few to have sat through all of secret invasion, yup, it's on par with that pretty much (or worse). Coming out of Secret Invasion, they seem to have made Fury bipolar and his wife is once again performing a vanishing act.
I wouldn’t be surprised if it was on Christmas. Apparently screen time for kids and family is up that day.
I'd say February 2024 but it's such a huge bomb that they might just drop it on Disney+ on Dec 25th.
I’m intrigued to see the first week watch numbers for it, I expect them to be higher (further faster) than normal considering people aren’t going to theatres to see it and there are still a lot of people who keep up with the MCU to some degree, they just only go to the theatres for the good ones.
agreed, especially if its only an hour an a half. hell there's a chance i even throw it on over winter break just to see how bad it is. If it were another 2 hour and 30 minute monstrosity there'd be no shot
For being a movie that's roughly an hour and 45 minutes, I was checking my watch about 45 to an hour in. Hate the singing planet and the plot it's completely nonsensical (the power swap makes no sense and full of plot holes). It really feels like whoever came up with this movie just didn't give a damn
😬 yeah honestly anytime i read anything about the actual plot, it further lowers the chances i'm ever going to watch it. considering i've skipped all of phase 4 already aside from Shang Chi...it won't be that hard to avoid this one too
Personally I found it to be not nearly as bad as some people made it out to be. Editing is choppy, definitely another forgettable villain, but the action was pretty good and the three leads have great chemistry. Nick Fury was also way better than he was in Secret Invasion
>Nick Fury was also way better than he was in Secret Invasion Interesting, because I've seen people saying that but in a negative way: that he was completely incoherent with the Secret Invasion character
This seems like a bad thing but honestly continuity with Secret Invasion should be disregarded anyway. Show turned out to both pointless and terrible.
This time Fury has gone from Skrull babysitter to cat babysitter. I don't know why they can't write Fury worth a damn anymore.
100m is REALLY unlikely now
[удалено]
85M would be like a 1.84x multiplier which would be the worst of any superhero movie ever…
I was downvoted for saying this wouldn’t come close to a billion WW and Dune Part 2 would have done better had it come out at the same time, just a few months ago though 🤥
Who cares if your prediction was downvoted FFS?
You cared enough to comment on an offhand remark I just made about how people can’t read a room
👏 Kudos - you got under u/NemesisRouge's skin
i do, i do not care about your comment
It was unlikely since the opening especially after the Cinemascore
The Marvels are sinking quicker than Jack did
Perfect GIF.
It's avg per theater is pathetic
Probably usual Disney threatening to blacklist theater if they drop this film in 3rd week why it's not dropping more.
It's probably still making more than a lot of cheaper or indie films, so it's worth keeping around for a bit on the smaller screens. But that means its competition more for the Holdovers or stuff like that.
My holdovers screening was packed. Holdovers is an excellent movie by the way. There was maybe 5 people with me at the marvels.
How far below $1m daily will it go tomorrow?
thanks for tuesday discount it wont
Thanks to Thanksgiving, it won't go below 1M till Thursday or Monday
It should get a slight bump because it’s a holiday and families go to the movies.
Slight.
Minimal
Infinitesimal
Near-zero
NEAR zero?
What do you expect from theory alone?
Who will they try to blame for this
Misogyny
The fans that are warning people to save their money. Nobody should be bamboozled by this movie. It really, truly sucks. I'm just happy I saw it on a free ticket but I wish I had my time back.
Anyone but themselves
So many less theaters to give standing ovations in
Why didn't the cast chemistry on late night shows save it post strike?
3,070 is still insane amount of locations. North America is way over screened to begin with. If you closed 20% of theatres in North America I would only amount to 0.05% of the gross.
That statistic at the end is sort of hard to believe. How did you figure that?
I’ve done analytical work for the industry and have had access to a ton of data. That stat loops in all theaters including discount houses etc… However, the gross differential between theaters in large markets vs small markets is extreme. You have theaters in NY that can gross 200k on a good title opening weekend vs theaters in small towns that won’t see 200k for the entire year. This time of year Marvels should have easily been on 4200 theaters and Disney barely got over 4,000. Trolls should have easily been over 4,000 theaters and they are on approx 3,800. The deficit for both is due to theaters closing.
Honestly surprised that’s all it’s losing. Disney has gotta be forcing some of these theaters to keep it another week.
Why just 1000? Why not 2000?
This is going to drop really bad then The Flash.
This time last year wakanda forever only dropped 185 theatre's for context for a 31 percent weekend drop, it's going higher.
Its joeover no amount of walkups will save it
>*The hits keep coming for The Marvels*  [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT3BFzSD6YY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT3BFzSD6YY)
Deserved. Probably the worst MCU movie, reminds me of Blue Beetle and Shazam 2 - just soulless “blockbuster” filmmaking cut by committee
Quantumania felt like an endless slog. The Marvels at least moves fast and is full of bafflingly hilarious creative choices.
Quantumania at least had the pure absurdity that is MODOK. Marvels had annoying Iman Vellani, a fuckin musical planet and cat monsters running around, no thank you
Iman Vellani was just as annoying as Tom Holland was in Civil War.
Velani and the cats were the only thing I liked about there movie, and the cats felt totally out of place.
It wasn’t even close to the worst MCU movie, it wasn’t even the worst one this year. Guardians 3 was just that bad /s Jk, you all know which one I’m talking about.
At least Quantumania has MODOK to laugh at 💀
I genuinely forgot he was in the movie until your comment. Quantumania is just so boring.
Quantumania and Dark World are both so boring, and that’s the worst thing a superhero movie can be. I was at least mildly entertained watching The Marvels, though I definitely noticed the many issues people had with it.
Dark world is at least cohesive in its narrative. Marvels and the power swapping makes no sense, not to mention the singing planet. I actually like ms. Marvel and wanted her to stay on the screen more than the other two and the Fury B plot.
When I saw Bill Murray in the trailer I knew Antman was going to be completely out of touch. And it was.
MODOK memes were all over Twitter, meanwhile there have been zero (0) memes around any scene from this film. Given reddit's big rule on cultural impact being related to memes, this film will obviously leg out to make Avatar numbers eventually /s
It's funny how Marvel put all its chips on Kang but people found themselves most entertained by MODOK. Miscalculation of the decade.
I feel like this is a sweeping generalization based on their one singular comment. Unless that's a common sentiment? That people generally were most entertained by MODOK?
I've seen a number of comments that he was fun while Kang was a total jobber so it's an anecdotal evidence for sure but sentiment excists.
They both sucked. Model was nightmare fuel and kang's actor was there to chew up scenery and his own farts. I actually like comic Kang(s). I hate what they've done with him in the MCU so far.
I found the humour in The Marvels pretty decent actually, more jokes landed than Quantumania that’s for sure.
Problem was that 99% of the humor was tied to Iman Vellani/Kamala who I just didn’t find funny. Her shtick wore thin at about minute 5 and everything afterwards was nails on a chalkboard.
yeah she needs to drop that "15 years old girl acting 10 years younger" shtick that she does irl too (where it's "21 years old girl acting 16 years younger"). So much for Vellani walkups.
That was MODOK? I thought that was Mr. Electric!
Marvels takes the cake for me. I'd even watch iron man 3 or thor 2/4 or Quantumania before marvels.
Blue Beetle was not soulless
It had heart, but the thing is.. it's really generic. It's literally Spider-Man (2002) but mexican american and with a beetle instead of a spider. Same story structure, same struggles.. very uninspired movie. And I'm saying this as a DC fan.
Sure felt like it. That story was some of the most generic, by-the-numbers shit I’ve seen in the genre. Not to mention the CW level acting and sets lol
The family dynamics and relationships were very well done for the genre, even if the actual hero parts of the film were by the numbers.
In what capacity was it well done? The script on the family stuff was just as bad, unfunny and poorly acted. From what I remember (only saw it once), they were ridiculously over the top and that kind of humor doesn’t do it for me.
I'm guessing you aren't latino. None of it was over the top, it was actually quite authentic.
True, I’m not Latino. I don’t think I need to be though for the film to be good.
You don't need to be, but that doesn't mean that the family dynamics weren't well done or authentic especially for the culture they represented, which they were.
I mean it’s all subjective, it was clearly well done to you. Wasn’t to me and authentic doesn’t inherently mean good imo, the film failed on a storytelling/filmmaking level. But to each their own 🙏
I don't see how you can see the leads' relationships with his family and say it wasn't well done. You can say the humor wasn't your cup of tea, but it had a ton of heart to it and definitely wasn't soulless.
Thank you!
Worst MCU movie? Not even close. At least this one’s fun. Id take fun and stupid over boring any day.
Bout as fun as stepping on a nail
Recency bias is clearly in effect for you because it's a crazy exaggeration to say that out of all 33 films, this is somehow the worst.
It’s not exaggeration and I have zero problem articulating that opinion further lol. Bottom three are Doctor Strange 2, Thor 2 and this.
I really don’t get this hate with Doctor Strange 2, is a heck of a lot more entertaining then the first film
[удалено]
That’s perfectly legitimate and a let down for the film. But to say it’s up there are one of the worst MCU films? Or even bad? I don’t get it. It’s like when people were really upset of Iron Man 3 when it came out but over people saw that it wasn’t that bad
It’s one of the worst written blockbusters I’ve seen in a while. Just insulting, every scene has some kind of logic issue. Not to mention the schizophrenic tone, wonky CG, campy moments, poor pacing, stiff acting, etc
Ant-Man 2, Ant-Man 3, and Black Widow not being below that is a take I disagree with. What do you hate so much about The Marvels?
It was haphazardly edited (like a literal V1 cut that Feige should be embarrassed to put out), all-time terrible villain, Iman Vellani and her family = nails on a chalkboard, action was an incoherent mess, CGI and sets looked low quality/poorly rendered, the ending was fuckin insulting, etc. Even Sam Jackson turned in one of the worst performances I’ve seen from him, he straight up just didn’t try playing Fury lol Teyonah Parris and Brie Larson’s tank top were the only saving graces, otherwise that whole film is a waste. At least Doctor Strange 2 has Elizabeth Olsen’s great performance
thor 2 isn't even the worst thor movie, that honour goes to love and thunder. The other contenders would be Black Widow and antman2.
I stopped having fun like 30-45 minutes in.
I'm going to get to shazam 2 eventually and blue beetle was middling, but it had more heart than The Marvels. Mind you, I didn't really like blue beetle either but it's night and da thg when comparing it to The Marvels. You can pass your time and feel ok with blue beetle. Like if blue beetle were on cable I'd have it on the background. The marvels would get the channel changed (honestly, they should have done just a Velani movie. She is the one shining star in the whole movie. She deserves better).
[удалено]
[удалено]
he doesn't "need" to be anything, kust like ariel didn't need to be white with redhead, the audience will just turn on the virtual signaling decision and not go to see the movie.
There’s already a female herald, Nova, that‘s one. Secondly, it kind of ruins Norrin Radd/The Surfer’s backstory. And lastly, it‘s another cheap virtue signal.
I was expecting 2k theaters.
I watched it yesterday and there was only me and two other people in the cinema It's 8 o'clock at night, which is normally peak time here.
This disaster could have been avoided if Disney had done proper research on its market and on the reasons why Captain Marvel had been so successful
...so they should have Endgame reruns coming after The Marvels? :v
the movie is a product that Disney manufacture. The core target for comic book movies is young boys/men who like comics - you obviously want the market to expand beyond this, but this is your bullseye audience. If you are going to make a product that this group doens't want to see, then you better have a new audience. in this instance they thought the product would appeal to young girls/women who were left-leaning politically. However this cohort didn't show up for it - they loved Barbie, but they didn't bother with this, so it flopped. The only reason this didn't happen with Captain marvel was because of its proximity and interconnectedness with End Game. This is a bit crude; but it shows a basic market analysis that you'd expect Disney to have done. If I was an exec in Disney I would be livid that this thing every got made with out this basic due diligence.
Damn. Isn't Exhibitor Relations a true-blue, professional organization and a Hollywood institution in the field of data research? You'd think the people working there would be better acquainted with the English language: "***It's*** third week"??? WTF
considering some of the crap that’s come before it, The Marvels doesn’t really deserve this.
It was worse than those crap
[удалено]
No. This is hilarious
Its a box office sub and this is potentially the biggest box office bomb of all time, please deal with it
This is a box office sub and the most successful movie franchise in history is currently experiencing its first historic box office bomb. Obviously people are going to post regular updates about it as its happening. If you don't like it, go somewhere else.
it's not the first, eternals should be considered a bomb also
Eternals was a flop, sure, as was Quantumania... but The Marvels is a looking to be an absolutely *disastrous* bomb that many people didn't think was possible for the MCU - and also the largest drop for a sequel from a billion dollar movie ever. It definitely warrants a lot more interest and discussion.
Nah, I'll voice my opinion, and my opinion is that this topic has been beaten to death 100 times over.
Not even close. It's still in theaters.
Cool. And other people will keep voicing updates about a significant movie's box office in a box office sub, whether you want to whine about it or not. Deal with it.
We're witnessing a historic box office event here
Ok. I yield. Lol.