Monday Morning Quarterback Part II
By BOP Staff
December 3, 2013
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Jason Barney: We only have to go back to last week when some of the pundits were calling the opening "disappointing" to see how quickly the direction of the wind changes. I didn't think Catching Fire was going to perform THIS well, but I hope anyone who put the "disappointing" label out there goes back and reads their work. With respect to weekend number two, this is truly historic. Holiday weekend or not, when a flick is compared to Avengers with respect to how quickly it has earned money, you know there is a story there.
My opinion of the franchise really hasn't changed. I've been pleasantly surprised and impressed every step of the way. I have not read the books, but I know people who had read them prior to the material moving to the big screen. They loved the books. When Hunger Games appeared in theaters, part of my reaction at the time was that movie going was in a general upswing. This sequel and the extent to which fans are embracing it really show how much this story is liked.
I find myself wanting the franchise to succeed, as the films have totally destroyed anyone's expectations. When this sort of success comes out of no where, and the product appears this good, you can't help but hope people respond in a positive way.
Felix Quinonez: I guess I got a bit carried away a couple of weeks ago when I predicted Catching Fire would beat Iron Man 3's opening weekend gross. Because Catching Fire didn't grow much from the first film's opening weekend I thought that might have been a sign that the series wasn't going to attract many new viewers. But this weekend made me change my mind again. Now I'm even more confident about its legs. Even though the weekend was boosted by the holiday, I still think it's a very strong sign that it will hold on for a while. So, before it came out I thought catching Fire could make it to $500 million domestically; after its first weekend I thought it would end in the same ballpark as the first one, $408 million or so. But now I think it might get to $475-500 million domestically. We'll see if I change my mind next weekend.
Edwin Davies: My overall opinion hasn't changed, though my understanding about just how huge the series has become has expanded. I said last week that the holiday weekend would be kind to Catching Fire, giving it the opportunity to make up some ground after the opening weekend (which, while still massive, was not as high as a lot of people thought it might be) and allow it to gross more than its predecessor, and ultimately become the highest grossing film of 2013. That now seems to be a certainty at this point. However, I didn't expect it to do quite this well, so that puts an end to the idea that the audience for The Hunger Games hasn't expanded much; clearly, it has, but not everyone showed up last weekend. Many of the fans clearly decided to wait for the holiday weekend, and they showed up in their droves.
Tim Briody: I wouldn't have called Catching Fire's weekend disappointing, but it was strange that it didn't increase from The Hunger Games as much as a sequel is expected to do. I had speculated that maybe some were waiting for the holiday weekend to see it, and it turns out I was correct. It needs to not fall completely off the cliff next weekend, but $400 million is still in play, which would mean both Hunger Games movies have reached that mark.
Max Braden: I have to admit that I'm surprised that this series has already...eclipsed... the Twilight series. I can understand the passion for Twilight because I can see the angst and easily imagine teens lapping it up. The passion for Hunger Games is a little more elusive to me, because although I can see the life and death stakes, this looks more like Running Man for teens than something really *for* teens. That said, the continued juggernaut doesn't surprise me.
Kim Hollis: I was a little bit puzzled by the fact that it didn't have a bigger opening weekend, but the honest evaluation is that so far, Catching Fire is a singular beast. It's just not mimicking the behavior of any other films released during similar or other time frames. I think the reason for its big expansion is exactly the thing that "eludes" Max. It's not a teen film even though it's based on a YA series. It's a four-quadrant film with appeal to a tremendously wide-ranging demographic. What this means is that it has a far greater chance for being huge during Thanksgiving weekend than the much more limited Twilight (and to a lesser degree, Harry Potter) films. Next weekend is a box office dead zone, so it will almost certainly see a significant drop, but it's still just an impressive juggernaut.
David Mumpower: Like everyone else, I am dazzled by the historic nature of Catching Fire's Thanksgiving weekend. While the film actually failed to reach $300 million in 11 days (it missed by $302,000), it still ties Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen for the fourth fastest movie to that milestone. Where I take issue with some of the comments above is that numbers well beyond $400 million are slam dunk.
Consider that during the 2000s, the average Thanksgiving number one film released the week before Thanksgiving has a final multiplier of 1.685 after Thanksgiving weekend. That sounds great for Catching Fire because the total is effectively $500 million. The problem is that the titles that are larger in scale, especially the ones released over the past three years, have only managed multipliers in the 1.27-1.35 range. That would put the Hunger Games sequel in the $375-$400 million area. My current expectation is that it slightly exceeds the original, but that is far from a foregone conclusion.
If Catching Fire does reach $400 million, however, the franchise joins rare company. There are only two (!) other franchises that can claim multiple $400 million domestic performers. Those are Batman and Star Wars although we could add Iron Man if we choose to include The Avengers (I don't). In other words, Catching Fire will claim a fascinating box office achievement if it reaches $400 million. In only 18 months, The Hunger Games franchise will have accomplished something that Harry Potter, The Lord of Rings, Pirates of the Caribbean and Spider-Man never have by claiming multiple $400 million titles. It's kind of a big deal.
Kim Hollis: Homefront, a straight-up action movie featuring Jason Statham and Academy Award nominee James Franco, earned $6.9 million from Friday-to-Sunday and $9.7 million over the five-day portion of the holiday weekend. What are your thoughts on this result?
Jason Barney: This is probably a bit disappointing, but honestly, I am not sure if it was really on many people's radar screens. The competition is tough, and this one may hang around over the holidays to get close to its production budget. The opening certainly puts it below where it needed to be, but there may be enough time prior to Hobbit 2 for this one to come close.
Felix Quinonez: I think it was a bit disappointing but not surprising. This really doesn't seem like a movie people would flock to during thanksgiving weekend. Also, the competition was really strong and there didn't seem to be a great marketing job and many people might have just not been aware of it.
Matthew Huntley: Honestly, I saw no possibility of this movie taking any share of the pie this weekend, and not just because of the juggernauts that were Catching Fire and Frozen (although they certainly played a role), but simply for the fact it looked stupid and generic. With its lame title, poor marketing campaign (it paints the plot and character in basic black and white and doesn't even feature Winona Ryder or Kate Bosworth) and uninteresting theme, what did the studio really expect? Homefront seemed better suited for the direct-to-DVD arena, although, to be fair, I haven't seen it, so I can't judge the film outside its advertisements (which don't make me very excited).
Edwin Davies: This isn't terribly surprising. It's in line with Statham's recent work and the addition of Franco probably wasn't a huge selling point for action fans, who probably wouldn't associate him with straightforward, non-comedic action fare, or his own fans for much the same reason. His casting was probably the most interesting aspect of the film, which looked terribly bland and cookie cutter, and simply wasn't likely to be many peoples' first choice when there are so many other options available.
Max Braden: That's surprisingly good, considering Statham's recent movies Redemption and Safe. This movie even matched or outpaced Parker (released at the beginning of this year), which had plenty of advertising because of Jennifer Lopez. The remarkable thing about this movie I didn't realize until now is that Sylvester Stallone - Oscar-nominated-screenwriter Sylvester Stallone - wrote the screenplay for this movie. Hey, maybe he should have written the screenplay for Bullet to the Head!
Kim Hollis: It's a very average performance for a film that really couldn't have been expected to do any better. Frankly, I'm a little surprised it did this well since it looked as generic as possible and really didn't offer much to anyone outside of your typical action fans or Jason Statham fans (a demographic that probably has almost 1:1 overlap). Yes, adding Franco was interesting, but he seemed out of place. I'm not always sure he's a big plus for a movie these days, either.
David Mumpower: Every time Jason Statham stars in a middling action movie, an angel gets its wings. Heaven is starting to have a population problem. All kidding aside, Statham is a brand now and what Homefront's debut demonstrates is that his brand has lost some luster. He seems to be in roughly the same position that Jet Li shared with the release of Unleashed. Saturation has become an issue, and I say that as someone who has been with Statham going all the way back to the Guy Ritchie era of Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch.