March 1-3 box office estimates, Jack the Giant Slayer tanks - Blu-ray Forum

Batman1980 · 03-02-2013, 04:06 PM

Quote:

New Line and Legendary Pictures are bracing for a tough weekend after a poor showing by 3D tentpole Jack and the Giant Slayer at the Friday box office.

From Bryan Singer, Jack earned a disappointing $7.7 million to top the chart, but it was something of a hollow victory.

That puts the year's first tentpole on course for a weekend opening in the $24 million to $25 million range, not enough considering the movie cost nearly $300 million, including a $195 production budget. Last year, Battleship -- costing in the neighborhood of Jack -- debuted to $8.8 million on Friday for a $25.5 million weekend.

REVIEW: Jack the Giant Slayer

New Line and parent company Warner Bros. are hoping that Jack, loosely based on the classic British story Jack and the Beanstalk, picks up the pace on Saturday as families become available. Although it is rated PG, Warners believes the 3D event pic is well suited for older kids.

Jack, starring Nicholas Hoult in the title role, earned a B+ CinemaScore.

New Line and its parent company Warner Bros. already are counting on strong international business to make up for any deficit in North America. Their hopes are being fulfilled so far in seven Asian markets where Jack opened on Thursday, grossing a total of $2.5 million, ahead of Wrath of the Titans ($2.1 million) and Journey 2: Mysterious Island ($1.3 million), both of which were successes.

STORY: 'Jack the Giant Slayer' Cast on the Challenges of Motion Capture

Moviegoing was soft overall in North America on Friday, with new entries 21 & Over and The Last Exorcism Part II placing No. 2 and No. 3, respectively, with a modest $3.4 million and $3.3 million. Each is expected to post gross in the $8 million range for the weekend.

New independent thriller Phantom, from RCR, is only expected to open to a dismal $500,000, one of the worst openings of all time.

Universal's Identity Thief could beat both films and rise to No. 2 for the weekend. On Friday, the Melissa McCarthy-Jason Bateman comedy became the first movie of the year to cross $100 million.

Source - http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/new...k-giant-425715

johnchatzo · 03-02-2013, 04:11 PM

I seriously doubt that Jack the Giant Slayer cost 300 million.

chris_sc77 · 03-02-2013, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnchatzo

I seriously doubt that Jack the Giant Slayer cost 300 million.

With all the p+A, delays, reshoots total cost prob did get to somewhere around $300 million. I am not someone who green-lights films but I seriously cannot understand how someone greenlit this film. Whoever did needs to be fired. I knew when I first heard about this that this was gonna a huge bomb.

WB is having an awful year LOL (Beautiful Creatures, Bullet to the Head, Gangster Squad and now Jack...). They deserve it by the way they treated Cloud Atlas (in both Theatrical and Home Video aspects) and the reactionary delays and censoring of releases of theirs.

blu-robertfrederick · 03-02-2013, 05:18 PM

Weird.... I heard the movie cost about $195 million. $300 million is way too much.

assydingo · 03-02-2013, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blu-robertfrederick

Weird.... I heard the movie cost about $195 million. $300 million is way too much.

I'm assuming that means with advertising. Around half the production budget isn't uncommon.

danman227460 · 03-02-2013, 05:41 PM

Do you guys even read? It says right in the article that the production cost was 195 million but the cost was 300. So some of you were right that the movie did cost 195 million.

Anyways, I plan on seeing it tonight but without a big lead or even a remotely interesting hook to sway movie viewers, it isn't that much of a must see.

MovieKing101 · 03-02-2013, 06:32 PM

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/...iantkiller.htm

195 million it cost from that website.

I think it will flop because It has to compete with Oz next friday then GI Joe and the Host at the end of the month.

Captain Kirk · 03-02-2013, 07:25 PM

It'll do well overseas, just like how John Carter technically did well overseas and made back the budget cost.

Batman1980 · 03-02-2013, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serendipity

It'll do well overseas, just like how John Carter technically did well overseas and made back the budget cost.

Arguable, pretty sure studios get back a smaller slice of the "gate" from overseas ticket sales so it would have to be quite the overseas coup to save it. Think they're trying to cash in on the recent "fairy tale/Harry Potter" craze but it looks like they failed.

Pounder · 03-02-2013, 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by serendipity

it'll do well overseas, just like how john carter technically did well overseas and made back the budget cost.

Lol

Captain Kirk · 03-02-2013, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth Anakin

Arguable, pretty sure studios get back a smaller slice of the "gate" from overseas ticket sales so it would have to be quite the overseas coup to save it. Think they're trying to cash in on the recent "fairy tale/Harry Potter" craze but it looks like they failed.

I'm beginning to think this is just a bad year for films so far. When Identity Thief is the only film that has made over $100 million, things aren't going well. While smaller budget movies have made a decent profit and are doing well overseas too, it seems the film audiences have left for everything else. Is it bad movies or a bored audience?

Captain Kirk · 03-02-2013, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pgestradasp1

Lol

I didn't say advertising cost and the like. Based off of pure budget, it broke even.

cricepng · 03-02-2013, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serendipity

I'm beginning to think this is just a bad year for films so far. When Identity Thief is the only film that has made over $100 million, things aren't going well. While smaller budget movies have made a decent profit and are doing well overseas too, it seems the film audiences have left for everything else. Is it bad movies or a bored audience?

Could be simple economics. People are concerned about possible lower tax refunds, earnings decreases thanks to SS tax increase to old rates and the sequester going into effect.

But that doesn't mean Jack The Giant Failure isn't earning poorly because it's a bad movie.

cricepng · 03-02-2013, 07:59 PM

Jack the Giant Failure won't be getting any support from my wallet to help boost its earnings. I wasn't keen on this when I first heard about it and the trailers only confirmed my decision to stay home and put that money saved on some blus.

KilloWertz · 03-02-2013, 08:09 PM

It actually looks fine and got decent enough reviews, but this is no surprise whatsoever. It was a near certainty that this film was going to be a bomb at the box office.

A shame, but Warner killed it from the start with a ridiculous budget just like Disney did with John Carter. I realize that it wasn't intended to be quite this high, but still.

EricJ · 03-02-2013, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MovieKing101

I think it will flop because It has to compete with Oz next friday then GI Joe and the Host at the end of the month.

At one point, Oz and The Croods were set to open against each other (they've backed off since), and Jack was set to open BETWEEN them.

After the reshoots got the story stigma'ed as a "troubled" movie, think Warner was set to dump this one in and out of theaters quickly, push the 3D, and hope that action-fantasy March worked for everything. Not high on their agenda, but it can't help either.

Underworld54 · 03-02-2013, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serendipity

I didn't say advertising cost and the like. Based off of pure budget, it broke even.

Haha no it didn't. Are you forgetting that Disney admitted to a $200M loss on John Carter?

fitprod · 03-02-2013, 11:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricJ

After the reshoots got the story stigma'ed as a "troubled" movie, think Warner was set to dump this one in and out of theaters quickly, push the 3D, and hope that action-fantasy March worked for everything. Not high on their agenda, but it can't help either.

Warner execs are just going... "Only one more disaster until The Hangover III opens." - That pending disaster is The Great Gatsby.

Say all you will about Baz Lurhman's style, it doesn't sell tickets many tickets. If the budget was $130 million for Australia back in 2008, I wonder how bloated this film's budget is.

fitprod

Blu Titan · 03-02-2013, 11:43 PM

Warner knew it was going to tank hard...They will make it up with Hangover III and specially Man of Steel.

G:Box · 03-02-2013, 11:44 PM

Yeah, I watched it yesterday and was mediocre at best. Pity, started of soo well.

03-02-2013, 04:11 PM	#2
johnchatzo Senior Member Member since:Oct 2011 4K collection:3 Blu-ray collection:627	I seriously doubt that Jack the Giant Slayer cost 300 million.

03-02-2013, 05:18 PM	#4
blu-robertfrederick Member Member since:Apr 2011 Location:San Diego, California Blu-ray collection:53	Weird.... I heard the movie cost about $195 million. $300 million is way too much.

03-02-2013, 05:41 PM	#6
danman227460 Blu-ray Samurai Top contributor Member since:Jan 2009 Location:Canada 4K collection:907 Blu-ray collection:1094 Trading Score:59	Do you guys even read? It says right in the article that the production cost was 195 million but the cost was 300. So some of you were right that the movie did cost 195 million. Anyways, I plan on seeing it tonight but without a big lead or even a remotely interesting hook to sway movie viewers, it isn't that much of a must see.

03-02-2013, 06:32 PM	#7
MovieKing101 Banned Member since:Jan 2013 Location:Canada	http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/...iantkiller.htm 195 million it cost from that website. I think it will flop because It has to compete with Oz next friday then GI Joe and the Host at the end of the month.

03-02-2013, 07:25 PM	#8
Captain Kirk Banned Member since:Feb 2012 Trading Score:2	It'll do well overseas, just like how John Carter technically did well overseas and made back the budget cost.

03-02-2013, 07:59 PM	#14
cricepng Blu-ray Samurai Top contributor Member since:Jan 2013 Location:alternates between Papua New Guinea and Pennsylvania Home Theater Gallery:14 4K collection:438 Blu-ray collection:1611 DVD collection:311 Digital collection:658 Blu-ray reviews: 4 Trading Score:12	Jack the Giant Failure won't be getting any support from my wallet to help boost its earnings. I wasn't keen on this when I first heard about it and the trailers only confirmed my decision to stay home and put that money saved on some blus.

03-02-2013, 08:09 PM	#15
KilloWertz Blu-ray Archduke Top contributor Member since:Dec 2008 Location:Columbiana, OH 4K collection:61 Blu-ray collection:1042 DVD collection:65 Blu-ray reviews:3 Trading Score:82	It actually looks fine and got decent enough reviews, but this is no surprise whatsoever. It was a near certainty that this film was going to be a bomb at the box office. A shame, but Warner killed it from the start with a ridiculous budget just like Disney did with John Carter. I realize that it wasn't intended to be quite this high, but still.

03-02-2013, 11:43 PM	#19
Blu Titan Super Moderator Top ranked HT gallery Top contributor Member since:Jul 2007 Location:Edo, Land of the Samurai Home Theater Gallery:42 4K collection:41 Blu-ray collection:2864 Blu-ray reviews: 2 Trading Score:92	Warner knew it was going to tank hard...They will make it up with Hangover III and specially Man of Steel.

03-02-2013, 11:44 PM	#20
G:Box Blu-ray Knight Top contributor Member since:Feb 2010 Blu-ray reviews: 5 Trading Score:334	Yeah, I watched it yesterday and was mediocre at best. Pity, started of soo well.

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals