-

Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo

Okay - which will get the biggest box office - HP, LOTR or Monsters Inc?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
1704 replies to this topic

#1 of 1705 andrew markworthy

andrew markworthy

    Producer

  • 4,766 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 1999

Posted October 26 2001 - 07:00 AM

I'm going to make a guess that it'll be Monsters Inc and that Harry Potter will do well enough to merit a set of sequels. I have a gut feeling that LOTR will be a relative flop. I'll be really pleased to be disproved about the last point (indeed I wish all three movies well), but I've a feeling that once the hardcore element have seen it, you won't get J6P going to see 'some old hippy film where they talk funny', no matter how good the special effects, etc.

#2 of 1705 Brad_W

Brad_W

    Screenwriter

  • 1,361 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 18 2001

Posted October 26 2001 - 07:23 AM

Why do you think Lord of the Rings will flop? From what I heard everyone wants to see this movie. Harry Potter and Monsters, Inc. are kids movies which means they will do good and get sequels. However, the whole LOTR trilogy is nearly complete and everyone will want to see the first installment. LOTR is a classic novel and what Peter Jackson is doing is living up to that novel, visually.

------------------
"I was born to murder the world." -Nix (Lord of Illusions)

My Home Page http://www.geocities...ternix/DVD.html
My List O' DVDs:
http://www.dvdaficio...at=1&id=meshuga


#3 of 1705 Tom-G

Tom-G

    Screenwriter

  • 1,646 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 31 2000

Posted October 26 2001 - 07:29 AM

Quote:
From what I heard everyone wants to see this movie.

Everyone is a bit extreme. My parents don't even know what "Lord of the Rings" is let alone want to see the movie. Posted Image

I'm really not into box office figures, but I do think that "Lord of the Rings" will do well enough to make it's money back and then some. I doubt if it will eclipse most box office records like a lot of the fans are expecting.

------------------
As for the bad rap about the characters--hey, I've seen space operas that put their emphasis on human personalities and relationships. They're called "Star Trek" movies. Give me transparent underwater cities and vast hollow senatorial spheres any day. --Roger Ebert on The Phantom Menace

AIM: Aureus91 / DVDs / ICQ: 58566493

#4 of 1705 Sam E. Torres

Sam E. Torres

    Second Unit

  • 439 posts
  • Join Date: May 31 1999

Posted October 26 2001 - 08:03 AM

i have a feeling monsters, inc. will be the relative flop...this is a year of surprises for people who haven't had one in a while(spielberg with a.i.)...and i have a theory that there comes a point where the streak has to end. the next one to get hit: tom hanks.

------------------
Posted Image
superman7g@aol.com




#5 of 1705 Carlo Medina

Carlo Medina

    Lead Actor

  • 9,567 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 31 1997

Posted October 26 2001 - 08:04 AM

People should not expect LoTR to do phenomenal numbers. Just the running time alone eliminates at least one showing a day at each theater.

It's per-screening numbers should be pretty good, though, and that's what people should pay attention to.

#6 of 1705 Mark Pfeiffer

Mark Pfeiffer

    Screenwriter

  • 1,346 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 27 1999

Posted October 26 2001 - 08:22 AM

Harry Potter is my bet for the biggest. I have the feeling Monsters, Inc. may underperform according to expectations. I liked it but think its the least of Pixar's feature efforts.
Read my reviews at www.dvdmon.com
My blog: Reel Times: Reflections on Cinema

#7 of 1705 Joel C

Joel C

    Screenwriter

  • 1,635 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 23 1999

Posted October 26 2001 - 09:14 AM

The way I see it, Monsters, Inc. will do well, but not as well as Shrek (probably around $175 million). Mostly because family dollars will be slurped up by Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, which will be, IMHO, the biggest film of the year.

Lord of the Rings could go either way, but I see it opening huge and then trailing off. There are lots of fans, yes, but I think the books popularity is somewhat skewed when you look at the Internet audience. At my college, the vast majority of people I've talked to didn't know there were books first, and weren't interested in a fantasy movie with "hokey" TV spots. The one friend I have who is really excited to see it is only doing so because she is obsessed with Elijah Wood. Though, on the plus side, it did make her pick up the Hobbit and the trilogy to read.

------------------
Joel
woemcats@hotmail.com
"I've been very lonely in my isolated tower of indecipherable speech."
digitallyOBSESSED


Joel
woemcats@hotmail.com
"Why I laugh?"

#8 of 1705 Mike Voigt

Mike Voigt

    Supporting Actor

  • 806 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 1997

Posted October 26 2001 - 09:16 AM

I would agree with Mark Pfeiffer: I expect Harry Potter to do best, with Lord of the Rings next, and Monsters, Inc. least...

Reason: HP has a huge fan base to tap into, kids and adults equally. It will take some time to exhaust that supply of moviegoers, and there will be a lot of repeat viewing.

LOTR is one of those that will be viewed a few times, not as much as HP, and by less people. Frankly, the storyline of the books is far more involved than HP (naturally; different audience) and thus will tend to appeal to a smaller audience as well on the Big Screen.

Personally, Monsters, Inc. has the least appeal, hence it goes to the bottom!

Posted Image

Mike

#9 of 1705 AdrianJ

AdrianJ

    Supporting Actor

  • 534 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 01 2001

Posted October 26 2001 - 09:17 AM

Quote:
Harry Potter and Monsters, Inc. are kids movies which means they will do good and get sequels.

I really don't see Harry Potter as a kid's movie. Also, the box office for Harry Potter will not dictate whether it has a sequel or not. My understanding is that the sequel is in preproduction and will begin shooting soon. I was intrigued to see that Kenneth Branagh will be in it.

------------------
Posted Image
Adrian Jones


Adrian Jones

#10 of 1705 William G. Lipe

William G. Lipe

    Agent

  • 40 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 27 1999

Posted October 26 2001 - 09:25 AM

Quote:
People should not expect LoTR to do phenomenal numbers. Just the running time alone eliminates at least one showing a day at each theater.

The same argument was made when Titanic can out, but it didn't seem to have too much trouble. Posted Image


I certainly think(and hope)that Harry Potter and The Fellowship of the Ring will do very well at the box office.
Based on the past success of Pixar's films, I would say Monster's Inc. is going to be a big hit also.

Just my $0.02


WiGgLe Posted Image

------------------
My DVD List


My DVD List

#11 of 1705 Marshall Alsup

Marshall Alsup

    Second Unit

  • 497 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 09 2001

Posted October 26 2001 - 09:33 AM

I am gunning for LOTR. I hope this movie will make a profit so that they will release the sequals. I have the feeling that it will be huge though. As for HP. I love the books. I think the movie will be bigger than LOTR simply because kids like to go to the movies more than adults do. I cant wait to see this one. As for Monsters.inc, I'm not sure. I didn't even hear of it until I read about it on HTF. However, based on Shreks success, I'm sure it'll do fine.

Marshall
Well thats just...like...your opinion man

flickr

#12 of 1705 Joel Mack

Joel Mack

    Screenwriter

  • 2,321 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 29 1999

Posted October 26 2001 - 09:39 AM

Monsters, Inc.

Why? Running time. With HP and LOTR both weighing in at 2:30 or more, MI gets nearly twice the shows in the same amount of time...

------------------
"The internet is a place where people from all over come together to
bitch about movies and share pornography."


#13 of 1705 Brennan Hill

Brennan Hill

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 188 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 10 1998

Posted October 26 2001 - 10:01 AM

No doubt in my mind. Well, very little anyway.

1. Harry Potter
2. Fellowship of the Ring
3. Monsters Inc.

1. As a parent of a child who's obsessed with the Harry Potter series, and as a fan myself, I can hardly imagine a single movie-going family with school age kids in the country that will not go see the Harry Potter movie. I don't think there has ever been a series of books more popular with kids and adults alike then Harry Potter. Not Lord of the Rings, the Oz books, Narnia, etc. Then you have the adult appeal of the books which is considerable as well. To top it all off, it's already got a favorable review from Ron.

2. That said, I myself am a bigger fan of the Lord of the Rings trilogy, and am expecting/hoping that these movies far surpass Harry Potter, but they are not as accessible to kids as Harry Potter is. A movie doesn't have to have kids appeal to succeed of course, but I doubt women are going to be clamoring to see FOTR like they did for Titanic. Moms will be clamoring to see Harry Potter.

3. Monsters Inc will surely do well, but it doesn't have a chance against the legions of fans of the above book series', and its not a giant leap forward like Toy Story.

-B

[Edited last by Brennan Hill on October 26, 2001 at 05:08 PM]
My Equipment:

Panasonic TH-58pz750u Plasma TV
Onkyo TX-SR805 AV Receiver
Monitor Audio Silver 5i Main SpeakersMonitor Audio Silver Center SpeakerMonitor Audio Silver Surround SpeakersSVS 25-31PC SubwooferTime Warner Motorola DCT3416 I Dual Tuner HDTV DVRNintendo Wii

#14 of 1705 Jeff Rogers

Jeff Rogers

    Second Unit

  • 311 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 24 2000

Posted October 26 2001 - 10:02 AM

Herry Potter all the way. Why?

Harry has sold over 100 million copies in RECENT years. Thats probably 100 million different people. You know at least everyone who has read the book will go. Not to mention their parents, friends, and people such as myself who have not read the books but will see the movie. At least 350 million domestic take for HP.

Monsters inc will do brisk buisness just b/c it's from the "creators of Toy Story". But you know what? It aint Toy Story. 195 mil tops.

Now to my personal favorite. LOTR. As much as I'm drooling over this one I have a bad feeling about its performance. I guess it boils down to--the people I know who even have a vaugue sense of what it is, want to see it. But there are A LOT of people out there who have no freaking clue what it is.

My parents don't even know what it is. I constantly poll people that I know regarding what they want to see, what they've heard about and what they like. About more than half say they have no idea what LOTR is. Not good for the movie thats supposed to break all records......

I've even had someons say. "oh..yeah......thats the movie with theg uy with the funny hat!!"


------------------
If I could go back in time, I'd meet Snoopy

" Maam....maybe you don't understand, you ripped my clients arm off "

#15 of 1705 Adam Lenhardt

Adam Lenhardt

    Executive Producer

  • 14,076 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 16 2001
  • LocationAlbany, NY

Posted October 26 2001 - 10:29 AM

Tough call for second, but I think Harry Potter will take a clear first.

------------------
My DVD Collection
My Preorders
My Wishlist

#16 of 1705 Chad R

Chad R

    Screenwriter

  • 2,174 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 14 1999
  • Real Name:Chad Rouch

Posted October 26 2001 - 10:45 AM

Harry Potter is the clear winner. As for second that's tougher. I can only see Monsters Inc. doing the same type of numbers as 'A Bug's Life' which are good, but not Toy Story figures. Not to mention a majority of its audience will be clipped by Potter.

But, I have to agree with the possiblity that LOTR will do less than expected. It's core audience is very vocal on the interent when it comes to filling out polls on USA Today and such, but as far the general audience it doesn't track that well. It's just not as accessible, and far too many people think wizards and such are for geeks and will stay away. Fantasy movies have not historically performed well. I think it'll do okay, but not especially well.

#17 of 1705 Sean Bryan

Sean Bryan

    Screenwriter

  • 2,555 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969
  • Real Name:Sean

Posted October 26 2001 - 02:42 PM

"I hope this movie will make a profit so that they will release the sequals."

Ummm.......I don't think we really have to worry about that.

They are filming all three movies back to back as one big production. The second and third installments are already filmed.

They will be released regardless of how the first film performs. That is part of the beauty in the deal that was struck to do these films. Not one big film, not two combo-films, but three films for three books.....all done in one big production.

So I hope they do well, but it really doesn't matter if what you are worried about is box office performance affecting whether the next two will be made. So just relax and enjoy them.

Sean

"Welcome, to the Federation starship SS: Butcrack!"
- John Crichton
I don't believe in transcending the genre, I believe IN the genre - Joss Whedon

#18 of 1705 Sean Bryan

Sean Bryan

    Screenwriter

  • 2,555 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969
  • Real Name:Sean

Posted October 26 2001 - 02:46 PM

"and far too many people think wizards and such are for geeks and will stay away."

Well, if you want to use that argument, what does that say about Harry Potter? Wizards anyone? Here's a crazy thought. Maybe the release of Harry Potter will actually spark an interest in wizard/fantasy type stories that "The Fellowship of the Ring" will do better than it would have had harry Potter not been released.

Sean

"Humans ARE superior!"
- John Crichton
I don't believe in transcending the genre, I believe IN the genre - Joss Whedon

#19 of 1705 Ken_McAlinden

Ken_McAlinden

    Producer

  • 6,065 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 20 2001
  • Real Name:Kenneth McAlinden
  • LocationLivonia, MI USA

Posted October 26 2001 - 03:08 PM

They will each get $16 from my wife & I. Monsters Inc. will get an extra $5.50 from my 5 year old daughter. So Monsters Inc. wins the McAlinden Box Office championship.

Regards,

------------------
Ken McAlinden
Livonia, MI USA

Ken McAlinden
Livonia, MI USA

#20 of 1705 Matthew Chmiel

Matthew Chmiel

    Screenwriter

  • 2,284 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 26 2000

Posted October 26 2001 - 03:09 PM

Harry Potter
Gross: $275 million

The Fellowship of the Ring
Gross: $225 million

Monsters, Inc.
Gross: $140 million

------------------
Posted Image
My DVD Collection / AIM: MrMatthew / ICQ: 96444542
"I'm a firm believer in the philosophy of a ruling class. Especially since I rule."






Forum Nav Content I Follow