Just like Pixar, Dreamwork vacants November and occupies the following summer.

Link:

The company also announced that it has decided to move its release of Shrek 3 from November 2006 to May 2007.

"We believe there are more than a half a dozen strong release windows available annually for our films," commented Jeffrey Katzenberg. "We look at each film very specifically to determine which of these release windows will best maximize its value in the marketplace based on a number of factors, including its story, the competitive landscape and the overall market potential. The sheer magnitude of the Shrek franchise has led us to conclude that a May release date -- with a DVD release around the holiday season -- will enable us to best maximize performance and increase profitability, thereby generating enhanced asset value and better returns for our shareholders."

Based on this change, DreamWorks Animation's new anticipated release schedule is as follows:

-- Madagascar (release on May 27th 2005)

-- Wallace & Gromit: Tale of the Were Rabbit (release on October 7th 2005)

-- Over the Hedge (release on May 19th 2006)

-- Flushed Away (release in fall 2006)

-- Shrek 3 (release in May 2007)

Holy crap...


May 2007:

Spider-Man 3 vs. Shrek 3


This time, SM3 will be out first, so it will build up nicely before Shrek 3 opens. I'm 100% confident they'll aim for the exact same slot for Shek 3 as Shrek 2, so wknd before MMWDKnd.

So that gives Spidey 2 weeks on its own, a big drop 3rd wknd and nice rebound 4th wknd, with summer weekdays to help its legs in June and July.

So I'm fine with that. DW can do whatever it wants.

Smart move. It'll make a lot more during the summer. Especially with that same release date (week before Memorial Day weekend).

Wow, it will be just like 2004 all over again... Now we just need the Passion 2, a Harry Potter movie, and The Day After the Day After Tomorrow to be a perfect match.

2 1/2 more years

Shrek 3 will not hit 200m

You heard it hear first.

KJ

That's a bit stupid, Eagle.. the DVD sales are huge, and people would be too burned out on Shrek for the next 2 years anyway. 3 years is a good space. The first Shrek was in 2001 I believe, 3 years from Shrek 2's release date. 2007 is the perfect date. Plus, inflation will be bigger by then.

If anything, Shrek 3 not getting 400 million is a pretty bold prediction. I think 500 million is very possible.

You guys are shitting yourself. Shrek 3 won't do nearly as well as the first or second. The fans of the first two will have already grown (i.e Zingaling's/my age group. We all saw Shrek 2 because of the first film and the fact that it could be enjoyed as a film even as a teenager. When the third comes out, we'll all be in college) and DreamWorks will have to push the video release or give away TV rights if they want any chance of even passing $300m. I'm not saying that the early to mid teenage age group had the biggest influence on the film, but, the idea of the release of Shrek 3 being anticipated and us urgently rushing to the theatres to see it is doubtful considering our age at the times.

Not in its first week But should get to 200 mil. by its 2nd weekend on its way to 350+ mil.

Ok even if it gets to 200 million, which I think it will make more, is that bad? No...thats actually pretty good for an animation film

Actually, I think Harry Potter and the OFTF will be out around that same time.

What's OFTF?

I think Chris ment to say FOTF, for Flight of the Phoenix. (I think that's what the book was called).

What would that have to do with anything? I'm very confused...

Because you said that all 2007 needed was another Harry Potter movie, Passion of the Christ 2, etc. So he just said that FOTF should be coming out around 2007 as well.

You have to be kidding me if you think Shrek 3 can fall short of 300m. It generally has had very good reaction from audiences, and they will mostly be back. 90% of the audience rated it very good or excellent.

by then they can't use the same actors. wonder what would happend then :?

Yeah, I have a feeling that after the fourth one, the movies will suck.

DP07,

I'm inclined to predict big numbers as well. But, you've got to consider: When a movie makes $400+ million, it obviously has to do with the scheduling and the timing. A sequel to Titanic will never replicate the success of the first, even by a fourth, because the crowd isn't around, the interest isn't there, and audiences have moved on. It's the same reason why no winter movie for the next 4-5 years or so will ever top the LOTR movies in total gross. It's all gotta do with timing and interest.

DreamWorks got everything right with Shrek 2. Less competition, CGI was still fairly new, the first was a big hit among kids (who will be waay too old come the third) and adults, and strong reviews helped propel the film to the unheard of gross. But, to just suspect that, built on the success of the second film, the third will automatically gross $330m 3 years later isn't the best judgment (well, let's say when adjusted for inflation - since, $300m now will most likely be around $330m in 3 years).

For Shrek 3 to hit on the level of the second, the first two films have to be established "classics" in the animated film genre and be seen by new kids, who, will, in turn, highly anticipate a third film. The audience that lifted the second film to $440m isn't going to be around and interested in the same thing three years later. It's much harder to build a strong kids franchise that lasts, because, kids grow. That might explain the newer grosses in the Harry Potter films too

With Father of the Pride off the air, DW could easily commission some sort of Shrek tv special or specials to lure in new fans before Shrek 3 is released. Add to that the new ride at Universal Studios, I think the audience will be there for the next film.

I do think the audience (mainly new, though) will be there for the next film. I just don't think it's best idea to assume that the film is a lock for $300-350 million. I also think it's a given that the film will suffer compared to the first or second; it might make more money than the first, but once actual profit and inflation is considered, it should be less than the first .

The film could defintely benefit from a title other than "Shrek 3", though. The "3" doesn't bode well for a younger audience that hasn't yet seen the first two because it often indicates that prior knowledge is needed (even though, for a movie like Shrek, it isn't).

I would bet you that something is certain to come along over the next 3-4 years in the winter that will beat ROTK. Grosses have simply been growing at a fast enough pace, and we are at the point where there will never again be another year without a 300m film. The final year without a 200m film was 1995 with Toy Story leading the way.

I also might add that the trend in recent years has been for sequels to do better compared to the originals then in the past. Now a higher percentage outgross the originals, and most that fall short do so by less then 30%. There are just a handful a year that completely bomb, and those are nearly always dumped, given a very weak marketing campaign, or are cases in which the original was unpopular.

None of those will be the case with Shrek 3.



That is exactly what will happen. With the huge number of DVDs already floating round, and the high level of awareness among the population, there is every reason to think that new kids (who were likely too young for Shrek 2) will be exposed to it.

Furthermore, if Dreamworks again markets the film well, something that is probable, then it will be able to gain many kids that did not see Shrek 2. A massive number of commercials tied to all sorts of products does guarantee a certain amount. Need I mention National Treasure? :wink: With the massive success of Shrek 2, you can bet that companies will incredibly eager to have their products associated with Shrek next time around. That will be the case to an even greater extent then it was for Shrek 2, or The Incredibles.



5 year olds will be 8. 8 year olds will be 11. A majority of the audience will be back. Some won't, but they can be replaced.

Besides, if three years were so long a duration that it would lose the fanbase, why did Shrek 2 seem to benefit so much from the original? Exactly 3 years there. It's no different this time around.



There is truth to this, but it can be overcome by the marketing campaigns of today. Plus, Shrek has wider appeal, so it's less likely to lose fans as they grow up.



Poor marketing. WB is the worst with sequels it's amazing the franchise has held up as well as it has.

Besides, with the massive hype and fanbase even before the original there was only one way for it to go after that: down. Many people saw the first film only because of the hype. They were not back for COS.

Also, the gross for Harry Potter 3 was still at nearly 80% of the original. If Shrek were to drop that much with one new film (rather then two), it would still get around 350m. :wink:

Every kid I know doesn't really care about seeing a sequel before the original. Adults are different.

If you are looking for a reason I say it's a lock: Biggest marketing campaign ever. It was the same reason I predicted Spider-man 2 would hardly drop from the orginal with 376m. I might have been right for the wrong reasons, but I don't think so. :wink:

God damnit. I really don't want to respond to all of that

A big marketing campaign is very likely considering the weight on DW's shoulders with Shrek 3 (and, what will be a hefty budget). I don't think you've made the case for $400m+, though. Even if we're in the age where sequels outgross their predecessors, it's doubtful that a film can overcome such a massive pull.

Also, we will begin seeing "CGI Overload" within the next three years. Like the recent case of the epic, it's a con that Shrek 3 will have to deal with. But, with the fanbase, it shouldn't be too big of an issue...

I'll respond to some of the other stuff later...not necessarily in the form of a hostile debate-like post

Sorry, it should've been OOTP for Order of the Phoenix.