Soundwave said:
I guess why do even care so much about the box office? It's not like Disney is sharing any of that money with you. And it's not like Star Wars movies are ever going to stop being made ... Star Trek is only a fraction as successful as Star Wars box office wise and there's another Star Trek in development by Quentin Tarantino no less (which makes it the 14th Star Trek movie, lol). So really there's no danger of that. Maybe it underperformed a tad, but it's still the no.1 movie domestically and internationally for 2017. It's not even a low point for Star Wars either, since AOTC and Revenge of the Sith and Rogue One all grossed less to boot inflation adjusted. |
@ bold
That's the most ridiculous thing to say in an argument. It just shows you have little argument, so have to use strawmen. I mean if you're going to be like that, why even have ANY argument about ANY topic, unless it directly affects you monetarily. And obviously, you care about it, as you continue to come in here to defend the film. Does people hating/disliking the film have any real impact on you? No. Does people seeing how poorly it performed against expectations really matter in your life? No. So why continue to come in this thread to defend the movie?
A tad is in understatement. If analysts thought it was going to still do $1.6B after the 68% drop, then you know they fully expected it to do at least $1.7B-$1.8B before that drop. This would have had it outperform Avengers by ~$200M-$300M. Instead its going to be under that movie by ~$200M. And the fact that we have to continually compare it to a prequel (ROTS) that wasn't that well received, which TLJ will end up outdoing it by ~$100M (which really could be explained away by the much expanded market we have seen since the prequels), a poorly received prequel (AOTC), and a spinoff, just shows how low we have to go in the franchise to make this one seem like it did great. ESB did $1.5B, adjusted, with an even smaller market than the prequels. For TLJ to fall even short of that is telling. Especially when we already have an example of how a main installment of SW can perform in this expanded market, TFA. Well, if it's a decent flick.
A_C_E said:
2. Cool story. You just committed the Appeal to Probability fallacy, good job. Back to reality, that huge weekend exists, none of your "stories" are going to change that. 3. (Another fallacy? This is three already.) What a strawman, lol. No one is saying they are ecstatic about being down, but they aren't unhappy about making the amount of money they just made, that would be stupid to think. Your argument is flawed, fallacious and pessimistic, try to be realistic. |
1. Uh, not sure if you know this, but much poorer than expected performance at the BO, a lowered image of the franchise by many WW, which will most likely hurt box office sales going forward (they already expect Han Solo to perform poorly), and lower merch sales than even RO does affect ROI. Unless you want to come up with some great argument about how it doesn't...?
2. That one just went over your head, I guess. The point wasn't "Hey, we should just ignore the opening weekend because it was mostly hype." The point was "Hey, look at how poorly this film is performing outside of opening weekend. It's barely doing any better than RO, a spinoff. In fact, in the later weeks, RO is having much better legs. Meaning in the end, TLJ may only have outperformed RO's numbers for the weeks outside of its opening by <5%."
3. Read #1. They're not just down in BO revenue for one film.
I'd say, I'm the one being the realist. Looking at the big picture. No flaw or fallacy in that. 
