<center><img src="http://www.worldofkj.com/Pictures/Portal/fantasticfour.jpg"></center>

Nice picture, Karl.

So, what do you think? Too high? Too low?

http://www.worldofkj.com/Zingaling-Fant ... alysis.php

Good analysis, Zing. =D>

I like your two OW scenarios though I subscribe to the 40/120 one.

Good analysis. I go with the higher scenario. Opening of over $60 million, total around $150 million.

By the way, the marketing effect should actually be named as EXTREMELY positive, heh.

Too high.

The movie has some good things going for it: summery breeziness, humor, comic book heroes are popular lately.

But the negatives are being under-weighed and they are real: cheap look, lack of production values, no high profile actors, run of the mill plot. You did mention the actor thing.

I say about 45m, but I might lower that as we get nearer.

The production values don't look nearly as bad anymore, as they did in the first teasers/trailers.

Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst weren't quite stars either when Spider-Man was released. Same goes for Hugh Jackman and the release of the first X-Men flick.

Run of the mill plot? It's a comic book adaptation, it's as run of the mill as Spider-Man or most others. That didn't hurt the others.

Seriously, if Hulk could open to over $62 million, why can't this one at least top $50 million?

The Hulk did open better than I would have guessed, but that was likely due to ads implying the movie had a lot of action and explosions, a prominent shot in the ads was hulk swinging a tank around. It's like Michael said, most of his age group just cares about explosions boobs and jokes. Have the ads for F4 been showing a lot of action? I haven't seen any TV ads for it yet. If they are making it look action packed it might have a chance. But still it's hard to overcome what looks to me like a general cheapness about it.

I went and looked up to see what was Hulk's competition. The only direct competition was Fast and Furious which had been out 3 weeks, and Matrix Reloaded which had been out a month and a half before. People needed a mainstream action fix I guess. But this summer we have already had Sith, Smiths, Worlds, Batman, it's overloaded with action.

Anyway, just how it looks to me.

I dont mean to be a knit picker, but Julian McMahon may draw some audience because he stars in the very popular show Nip/Tuck...in which is character is portrayed in the same "evil" way.


Other then that, GREAT Analysis. I agree with everything you said.

Well, I think your first sentence pretty much says it all. Hulk opened to more than you'd have guessed. At the same time, pretty much 95% of the predicting world has pegged it way higher than what it opened to. Heck, even Brandon Gray predicted over $80 million, if my memory serves right. So, what I think is that youz just underpredict the genre

Oh and I think the recent trailers have been action-packed.

And out of those Smiths is the only "light" blockbuster. Well, maybe Sith is as well, that's arguable. Batman and War of the Worlds are all of darker atmosphere.

Moreover, if you want to recount the whole summer (since it's not like competition from ROTS or Smiths will matter), then Hulk had X2 to precede it as well.

Hmmm, now where have I heard this quote before?? :wink:

Hmm....

Fantastic Four:

$41,000,000 opening.

I have a weird feeling....although i know it will be big....with over $35M.

The ads (and there's so many of them...) are completely action-packed.

And, general cheapness doesn't really hurt summer blockbuster movies, in my opinion. People go to movies to have fun. I don't even see the "cheapness" look of it, but if people do, I doubt it'll make a big impact on the box office.

Great analasis Zingaling.I am going to go on the higher side and say 60/175.I just think this is going to be a ray of sunshine in an otherwise "dark" summer. :wink:

Hulk doing great on its opening day also had to do with the popularity of comic books skyrocketing. Its opening day success had to do with the X-Men movies and Spiderman doing well. Heck if Daredevil would opened sometime this year, it would of surely bombed because like the Matrix ripoff genres and Ring Clones, most of the comic book movies arent doing as well as its supposed. Its the reason why Batman Begins opened much lower than expected(Batman & Robin also didnt help the movie either), Hellboy and Elektra not doing that well either. If F4 was released probably 2 years ago, it probably would of done better since we werent as oversaturated with comic book movies as we are now. F4 seems like a been there done that type feel to it

80m+ :rock:

I'm actually interested. BJ, how will it make $80 million opening weekend?

Because, you know, it would need a $22,850 PTA to do so. That's higher than X-Men, which I think is more popular than Fantastic Four.

*cough*

Looks like I'm right for once.

There's no way it gets to $155 million, but good job on the opening weekend even though a ton of people are going to be close on it. :wink:

Don't ruin my happiness.

Other than Daredevil... none of the other movies had a bigger cast than F4!

Are you joking? I can't tell.

Really? Who exactly is a big name person in F4? Spidey and X-Men had way bigger casts than F4. Sorry but Alba is not a big name....yet.

Halle Berry wasn't even that big when X-Men came out... about the same as Alba. Hugh and James were basically unknowns. Magneto (damn it his name escapes me! Oh yeah, Ian Mckellon) had a little fanbase, and Patrick Stewert was only a little big, but is pretty known. Other than that, it's not really much bigger than F4 (but yeah, I guess you can say they did have a bigger cast but it still isn't big enough to make a difference, since when has Pat or Ian been a huge draw?). Spider-Man definitely does NOT have a bigger cast, though, except for Kirsten.

But SW, Tobey Maguire and Dunst and Dafoe are all well know. Alba, the Shield guy and the guy from NATM are jut fringe player. Every one of those other films boasted of a bigger cast.