2005 at the Box Office (1 Viewer)

[Kevin Grey]

I do. I think all four of the previous Batman films have aged poorly but at the time I enjoyed Batman Forever a fair amount. Schumaker's overly cartoonish and gaudy visual style for the series was still somewhat rooted in Burton's vision so it wasn't a huge change from the first two and it did have a nice sense of fun about it missing from Batman Returns.

Batman and Robin, on the other hand, had Schumaker's bizarre visual sense fully unleashed to the point that it was a disaster. And the series was so intent on introducing new villains (Freeze, Poison Ivy, Bane) as well as Batgirl while still dealing with both Batman and Robin that, more than an hour into the film they were still doing introductions with no plot in sight.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

This is probably the right thread for this image. A picture is worth a thousand words. Please keep in mind also that the other film contained (TPM) had what is definitely considered a very leggy and strong run.

But here are two freaks of nature:



I'd love to see that contrasted with the Hulk or Pearl Harbor.

Take care,
Chuck

 

[Shawn_KE]

Forever is my favorite of the orignal 4 movies. It has a few dark spots with a little camp thrown in. Kilmer was great as Batman and Odonell rocked as the edgy Robin, Carey was a nice fit for Riddler, but Jones stunk it up with 2Face.

Batman and Robin is pure camp from start to finish. Nothing was interesting and Clooney sucked as Bats. Arnold's Mr Freeze would have been great if it wasn't for the camp.

 

[Alex Spindler]

I agree with Kevin. B&R is sunk under the weight of all the excess. The decision to once again add to the character count despite the heavy burden of characters in BF meant none of them turned out well. Throwing three all new villains at us with yet another new hero added to the roster meant we got a really shoddy Bane, a terrible plant creature for Ivy, and some terrible attempt to make Freeze into the Joker/Riddler quipster of the movie. From there everything went haywire. Batnipples, Batgirl (why introduce yet another hero so soon after Robin, who hasn't even settled in), and a Batman credit card.

Forever is not perfect, but B&R is the a spiraling disaster. Even the trailers were unimpressive to my recollection.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

I put this in the Software Batman thread, but perhaps the abject lesson is still needed here in movies.



Never Forget

Never Forgive

Take care,
Chuck

 

[EricW]

off the top of my head, movies with good runs include Dirty Dancing, My Big Fat Greek Wedding, Forrest Gump, Home Alone?

it seems that the ones that last the longest are the 'surprises'... are there any tentpole movies that actually do have exceptionally good runs (aside from TPM)? Titanic was a big budget movie but many thought it'd crash and burn.

 

[TerryRL]

Jim Cameron did relinquish his director's fee, producer's fee, as well as his piece of the profit-pie during the making of "Titanic". After the movie went through the roof, Fox reinstated his backend deal (which included a piece of the international home video sales) and threw in a bonus for delivering the biggest box office hit in history.

Apparently, Fox wanted Paramount to fork over half of the fat bonus ($100 million) for the director. Paramount naturally dragged their feet and thought that Fox should handle most of the bonus situation. Paramount bought the domestic distribution rights from Fox for $65 million and they didn't want to fork over any more coin since they weren't the ones that had the relationship with Cameron.

In the end, Fox got Paramount to pony up an additional $35 million for Cameron (Fox also gave him $65 million). With his fat bonus and his profit participation, Cameron ended up pocketing about $200 million at the end of the day, along with the three Oscars he won (Best Picture, Best Director, Best Editing).

And as Adam pointed out, Linda Hamilton ended up with a fat settlement after she and Cameron split.

 

[Tim Glover]

Interesting graph Chuck. Titanic had a modest opening of $33 million or something. Very low opening considering. The legs of Titanic were phenomenal and will NEVER be equaled.

The pic of B&R made me ill. :p)

 

[TerryRL]

This is what "Titanic" earned during its first 26 weekends in theaters (the length of time it finished in the Top Ten)...

#1 $28.6 million (#1)
#2 $35.4 million (#1) +23%
#3 $33.3 million (#1) -6%
#4 $28.7 million (#1) -13%
#5 $30.0 million (#1) +4%
#6 $25.2 million (#1) -16%
#7 $25.9 million (#1) +2%
#8 $23.0 million (#1) -11%
#9 $28.1 million (#1) +22%
#10 $21.0 million (#1) -25% (passes 'E.T.')
#11 $19.6 million (#1) -6% (passes $1 billion worldwide)
#12 $17.6 million (#1) -10%
#13 $17.5 million (#1) -0.2% (passes "Star Wars")
#14 $17.1 million (#1) -2% (wins 11 Oscars)
#15 $15.3 million (#1) -11%
#16 $11.5 million (#2) -24% ("Lost in Space" opens at #1)
#17 $8.5 million (#3) -25%
#18 $7.4 million (#4) -13% (passes $1.5 billion worldwide)
#19 $4.9 million (#4) -33%
#20 $4.0 million (#6) -18%
#21 $3.1 million (#4) -20%
#22 $2.1 million (#6) -33%
#23 $2.9 million (#7) +40%
#24 $1.7 million (#9) -40%
#25 $1.6 million (#8) -7%
#26 $1.2 million (#10) -26%

 

[Haggai]

What happened during that ninth weekend, where it suddenly earned more than it had than in each of the previous three?

 

[Mark Hawley]

Valentine's Day weekend. Boxofficemojo lists that weekend as February 13-15.

And/or maybe Oscar nominations were announced around that time and that gave it a push.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Oscar noms? Valentine's Day?

Both?

Speculating,
Chuck

EDIT: Mark beat me to it.

 

[MikeRS]

Because it edged out James Bond that first weekend, it wasn't percieved as a "modest" opening. It's 3+ hour running time actually made it come across as a big (even shocking) victory.

And a harbinger of things to come...

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Mike is correct. They both made about $27M, but Titanic was on far less screens (it expanded as it kept selling out - it expanded pretty fast). The second weekend is what shocked the world (Christmas weekend). It was a big deal, keeping pace with Bond.

Keep in mind that if you put any other film (except Shrek 2) in that graph with TPM, TPM would look absolutely amazing. Not only the opening, but the legs it had. This was the first SW movie in 16 years with the most absurd amount of prerelease hype. That's why I thought a "blockbuster" like Planet of the Apes would be telling. Using standard 50+% drops would make TPM look like the marvel it was. Which would make Titanic look like what it actually was.

Take care,
Chuck

 

[Tim Glover]

Wrong word :b Modest should never be used to describe Titanic's box office legendary take.

 

[TerryRL]

"Tomorrow Never Dies" opened with $25.1 million from 2,807 theaters, behind the $28.6 million debut mark of "Titanic" from its 2,674 locations.

 

[Kevin Grey]

The sad thing is that somewhere in Hollywood there is probably a ledger somehow showing that Titanic never made a profit.

 

[ThomasC]

WHAT. THE. FUCK. They didn't actually wear those in the movie, did they? They didn't even agree to work as a team until the end. I guess they could've been wearing them at the end when we couldn't really make out what they were wearing. DAMN.

 

[Kevin Grey]

Count me as another who has no recollection of those outfits from my one and only viewing of the movie. The overwhelming horror of it must have caused me to repress it.

I feel *so* sorry for George Clooney in that pic.

 

[DavidPla]

If I remember correctly, it was their snow suits *shudder* when Mr. Freeze froze Gotham at the end of the film. Maybe it's better to just assume there was NEVER a fourth Batman film.