CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Culture & Entertainment › Movies › Blockbuster Wars

Blockbuster Wars

Started by slylynx16 · · 👁 4 views · 7 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants slylynx16casualotter21Sandra King86slyrider16nimblemarlin17
slylynx16 slylynx16 MemberOP
22 messages
joined Jun 2005
#1 ·
Oh, mother. Earth.Isn't she beautiful? Take a look at this red one from the other side. I don't follow.Can you tell she’s watching with envy? What? Is she actually going to take that... ahem... point from us?

Humanity just keeps on with its daily grind. Life. It’s happening again, just like it always does in New York City, London, and even Washington, D.C. 😍

Well, here we go.

Americans are stepping out of their houses, looking bewildered. What on earth just appeared? skyOh, no. It's Martians! Run!

Too late...

Well then.

Nothing (yet) ☕ Neither the Martian nor Tomice-meter-and-strawberry-with-all-Katie-Holmes-pride-Cruise, but definitely the first one. Trailer. He showed up...

The budget is $200,000,000. Sandra King86, if we consider Steven Spielberg's appetite for spending as seen in The Terminal—which, let’s be honest, wasn't exactly his finest hour... Not even close. It performed exactly as anticipated at the worldwide box office.

So, (potentially) Blockbuster Wars. I'm here.
casualotter21 casualotter21 Regular
264 messages
joined Feb 2003
#2 ·
However, here we go again: this is already the third thread about War of the worlds in just three months, rather than continuing the previous one. It’s a decent enough movie, I suppose.
Sandra King86 Sandra King86 Active Member
79 messages
joined Sep 2004
#3 ·
That shot of Mars is pretty cool. Reminds me of one I snapped way back at an observatory during an Astronomy class...
👍

I'm not expecting much from War of the Worlds, but I'll probably check it out just in case. Better to keep my expectations low—saves me from getting disappointed later...
Saw the trailer, though. Really hoping there's actually some substance behind all those gorgeous, terrifying special effects.
slylynx16 slylynx16 MemberOP
22 messages
joined Jun 2005
#4 ·
casualotter21 said:Let's be real: this is already the third thread about War of the Worlds in just three months.

Actually, that’s just not true.

Yeah.

The topic isn't about the movie itself—I’m making a distinction here—it’s about the film as a... Mine. Just my two cents! Blockbuster Wars For the current year, 2005.

No, let's take this step by step...

He’s definitely the frontrunner. Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith Based on the data from the $115,000,000 investment, what kind of return can we expect? The NumbersFine, let's say it hits $200,000,000. I'll take those odds. Certainly. Pocketing $500 million to a billion dollars. Not exactly a massive shake-up for the professional bettors and analysts out there, so...

Then they arrive. Batman Begins. At $135,000,000, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire I'm here. Ready when you are. Kingdom of Heaven Starting with a rather ambitious $130,000,000 and, ultimately, King Kong A "modest" $110,000,000.

They’ll all do it, without a doubt. justify Budgeting? Making a return of one to five times your initial investment isn't even up for debate. It's just basic math.

What is what, and what actually is. Initial. The point of this thread is whether one of them actually pulls it off—and if I may be so bold as to offer my own take, I’m betting on... War of the WorldsManaged to replicate exactly what happened with that film. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King?

P.S. Titanic. Well, as you can see, I left out...

It’s not because I think that $1,835,300,000 figure matters—it's about what this actually pulled in compared to that $200,000,000 investment. A little.Not because I actually care, but because I'm wearing a brand-new, crisp white shirt—as white as snow—and I have a feeling tomato stains aren't exactly easy to scrub out.

P.P.S. Put them back in your pockets... (The tomatoes, I mean!) 😍 )
slyrider16 slyrider16 Active Member
60 messages
joined Mar 2006
#5 ·
slylynx16 said:The top pick is definitely Star Wars : Episode II - Revenge of the Sith which should pull in anywhere from $500,000,000 to $1,000,000,000 on an $115,000,000 budget. Not exactly a massive shocker for the bettors and analysts, so...

So you mean half to a full billion in worldwide earnings? Yeah, probably. But hitting $400 million in the US alone seems like a stretch, it could easily stall just under $300... who knows. :P Either way, trying to call all these numbers is impossible, and those budget figures you mentioned are just ballpark estimates with at least a 15% margin of error. That $200 million figure for War of the worlds (which'll let someone buy a Rolls Royce lol) was just some press hype from early production. The actual number is closer to a hundred mil—Steven Spielberg is cheap like that. Plus, the movie itself isn't gonna be some Independence Day sequel, it's more of a drama.

Look, I don't wanna kill the vibe here, but my guess is War of the worlds pulls in maybe $200-$300 million in the US and hits somewhere between $500-$800 million worldwide.

Also, I'm betting Batman Begins stays under $200 million domestically. Kingdom of Heaven already bombed in the States, so if it somehow scrapes together $65 million there, fine. Harry Potter will probably hit around $250 million in the US, and King Kong could go anywhere from $150 to over $300 depending on how good it actually is. There. No biggie... 🙂
slylynx16 slylynx16 MemberOP
22 messages
joined Jun 2005
#6 ·
I assume it goes without saying, but just to clear up any confusion regarding earnings, I was referring to the Worldwide Box Office.

slyrider16 said:That $200 million figure for War of the Worlds (someone’s definitely buying a Rolls-Royce after that one, haha) is just media hype...

Fair enough. 🙄 (Eye roll. Instead of a goat, you know...) Let's call it 100. And you know what?

I still maintain my stance: War of the Worlds will easily be the most profitable film of 2005!

slyrider16 said:There you go. No tomatoes. 🙂

Are you kidding me?!!

So, what is that on your avatar? 🙂
nimblemarlin17 nimblemarlin17 Regular
459 messages
joined Mar 2004
#7 ·
Caught a sneak peek last night. It’s got this dark, gritty vibe that feels really promising. You can always count on Steven Spielberg and Tom Cruise to deliver something solid (laugh all you want, but it’s the truth). 😁
slyrider16 slyrider16 Active Member
60 messages
joined Mar 2006
#8 ·
lepa.pametna@neudata said:Still at it... I'm saying the same thing: War of the Worlds is definitely gonna be the best bang for your buck movie of 2005...

I'm ready. Send over the posts. what... Is that you on your profile pic?... 🙂

Whatever, man. Say what you want, who's even gonna stop you? Honestly, with a smaller budget, he'll probably be even more profitable... 😛 Look, just to make this more interesting... I’m telling you, they won't even see the biggest profits in America. Let alone globally... actually, scratch that, they won't even hit that. Check back with me at the end of the year and we'll see who actually called it... 😁

Look at that avatar... you wouldn't believe it, some weird little sphere thing. Like it's actually trying to pass itself off as a vegetable or something, but whatever...

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads