Edge of Tomorrow (2014) (1 Viewer)

[Tino]

While it didn't bomb this weekend Chuck, I too am disappointed that it didn't open bigger. Hopefully it will have decent legs and word of mouth helps it. From boxofficeguru.com

Not setting career records, Tom Cruise's latest big-budget action film Edge of Tomorrow opened in third place with an estimated $29.1M which was about right for what he attracts these days in these kinds of movies. The Warner Bros. release averaged $8,340 from 3,490 locations and played to a crowd of sci-fi-loving adult men. Studio research showed that the crowd was 61% male and 73% over 25.Film critics were praising Edge but popcorn crowds thought it was just ok. The CinemaScore was a decent B+. Now in his fourth decade of entertaining the masses, Cruise does not attract as broad of a moviegoing audience as he used to, in North America at least. Plus this was the fourth action tentpole in just six weeks. But the fans that did come out for Edge spent solid amounts on the PG-13 film's premium options. 47% of the gross came from 3D screens and 14% came from the 349 IMAX locations. Both are impressive shares by today's standards.Overall, the $178M-budgeted Edge opened in the same range as two of last summer's star-driven futuristic sci-fi action films which were also non-sequels. Will Smith's critically-panned After Earth bowed to $27.5M while Matt Damon's R-rated Elysium debuted to $29.8M. Tomorrow opened 22% below the $37.1M of Tom Cruise's last film Oblivion which was also a sci-fi action flick set in the future. Doing similar movies back to back may have led some audiences to feel as if they did not need to check in this other time around.Edge of Tomorrow was built to make the bulk of its money from around the world and so far the action pic is delivering strong numbers. This weekend saw a solid $82M in sales boosting the international take to $111M including the handful of markets which debuted a week earlier. This weekend was ruled by strong bows in China, Korea, and Russia. With $140.1M to date and Japan (a big market for Cruise) still to come on July 4, Edge should be able to surpass at least $350M globally.

 

[Malcolm R]

I think the opening speaks more to the fading appeal of Tom Cruise than the movie itself. I know a couple people who have dismissed the film completely because Cruise is the star.

 

[Tino]

My wife is one of those people. Too bad. It's one of Cruises best performances. I will wear her down.

 

[Cinescott]

I agree that Cruise is at his best here (or near best). Nice role for him.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I think the opening speaks more to the fading appeal of Tom Cruise than the movie itself. I know a couple people who have dismissed the film completely because Cruise is the star.

Right, I know a lot of women that still hold a grudge against him for his comments. He really pissed off his biggest demographic that really supported his films in the past.

 

[Tim Glover]

I loved it. But I am a pretty big Tom Cruise fan. This film IMHO is a very smart film that probably won't do well in a summer release. Just seems like people want brainless films and stupid comedies. Edge of Tomorrow deserved a better release date. Nov/Dec would be my choice.

The local Cinemark 17 didn't even have it on its 2 biggest screens. Wow. It was an ok sized one but that kind of blew me away. Theater was maybe a 1/3 full for a 6:10pm showing.

Loved the premise, and Cruise like many here have said, was on his A game. Really the whole cast was good. Not many other characters though. I thought the Mimics were bad ass and reminded me a little of one of the most cool "bad guys' ever. The Matrix Sentinels even 15 years later scare me. These mimics had that vibe.

Blunt and Cruise had really good chemistry. Well done. Want to see again.

9.5/10

 

[Edwin-S]

It blows me away that people will write off a potentially good movie because of who is acting in it. I'm glad I go to films because my interest gets piqued by the potential story, not by who is acting in it.

 

[Ejanss]

I think the opening speaks more to the fading appeal of Tom Cruise than the movie itself. I know a couple people who have dismissed the film completely because Cruise is the star.

Although, at the time, every analyst acted like Fault in Our Stars would be the unstoppable Next Twilight, "because it had such a strong YA cult-reader base!"
Ho ho, most of us thought, fangirls lining up for cancer clinics, how gullible can analysts get?...Um, guess it has a FEW fans.

And then...I can't be the only person who's ever made the joke about the exciting, gripping, edge-of-your-seat title pulling in audiences on the marquee:
"Will Cage defeat the aliens? Will Rita admit her love for Cage? What about the aliens, caught in the middle of a doomed love triangle? And...(organ sting!)...what about Naomi? For the answers to these and other questions, tune in next week, for the continuing trials and heartbreaks for our characters, on....Edge of Tomorrow."

 

[Robert Crawford]

Interesting that Edge of Tomorrow did 82M box office internationally which smoked the other films.

 

[TravisR]

Interesting that Edge of Tomorrow did 82M box office internationally which smoked the other films.

Yeah, Tom Cruise is still a major movie star in America but he's probably the biggest movie star everywhere else in the world.

 

[Alan Tully]

$29 million opening weekend in the US with a budget of $178 doesn't look good, esp. as there's been so many great reviews of this film.

 

[Bobby Henderson]

I get annoyed at those numbers from box office guru and other media outlets gushing about how big a percentage of box office revenue came from premium priced options like IMAX branded d-cinema screens, other big screen concepts and 3D. If these media people would bother to screw on their heads straight and think a little teeny bit they might figure out what they're reporting is actually not a big deal whatsoever and only incidental.

On opening week a new movie like Edge of Tomorrow is going to be put on a multiplex theater's big screen. These days the biggest houses in the theater complex often carry some kind of premium fee for entry -even for 2D shows. Those houses usually have significantly higher seat counts than the other auditoriums in the complex. So even if the same movie is playing on another screen or two and those smaller houses are getting filled the big screen house is still going to make the numbers look like everyone is just dying to pay extra to see the show on the biggest screen. On top of this, the biggest houses are usually given the best show times, such as the 7:30 early evening show. A customer not wanting to pay that premium fee might have to chose an odd show time like 8:30 and may not have as many late show options.

A big screen alone does not equate to an automatically better show. For one thing most of these premium priced theaters, particularly the IMAX-branded ones, are showing the same 2K resolution HDTV quality imagery on the screen. With very few exceptions, they're not showing anything more than what you could see on a regular priced screen. 2K imagery can be blown up only so big before it starts looking either really fuzzy or jaggy (and that's depending on how the theater tweaks the focus knob on the projector). I have yet to see any giant screen digital presentation anywhere that showed a tack sharp image -like I could see with native 15/65mm imagery in 15/70mm film projection.

I've personally soured on the whole 3D thing. Too many of the 2D to 3D conversions are ill-advised, poorly executed and disappointing in the theater. 3D doesn't tend to work very well on dark movies -with Malificent being the latest example. And even if the 3D is exceptionally well done it can have the effect of making the movie look like a miniature model. This problem even exists with 15/70mm film-based IMAX-3D. I've seen several special venue movies in that format and they all exhibited the miniature look problem -not to mention the entire giant scale of the IMAX screen was completely removed with the 3D effect.

I do like watching movies on big screens, but I'm perfectly happy with 2D. At least big things keep their sense of scale in 2D. But I am getting quickly spoiled to other new developments like Dolby Atmos. I could have watched Edge of Tomorrow in IMAX Digital 3D at the Moore Warren Theater, but I chose to drive a little farther to downtown OKC, watch it from a 4K projector in 2D and Dolby Atmos and pay just $10 per ticket.

 

[bryan4999]

I loved this movie and had a great time. I thought that Cruise and Blunt really inhabited their roles well. He had a refreshing breeziness about him that I found very appealing and contrasted well with Blunt's hard as nails portrayal. It was good to see Bill Paxton, who was terrific also.

The only thing that marred the experience somewhat was that something was out of alignment at the theater where I saw it (Regal chain) and there was red and blue fringe in the image. It reminded me of those rear projection TVs where you had to bring up the grid of white lines and adjust the convergence. I actually spoke to the projectionist but he claimed he couldn't see the problem. Whatever! I am looking forward to the Blu-ray so I can see it on my home projector.

I had no issue with the plot device at the end, but the ending did remind me of

Spoiler

the end of the release version of Bladerunner with Deckard and Rachael sailing through beautiful blue skies and white puffy clouds. I would have been OK without the romantic ending, although I loved the way Tom smiled at the end.

 

[Vic Pardo]

Right, I know a lot of women that still hold a grudge against him for his comments. He really pissed off his biggest demographic that really supported his films in the past.

I'm betting that right about now, Warner is wishing they'd cast Channing Tatum instead.

 

[Ejanss]

I get annoyed at those numbers from box office guru and other media outlets gushing about how big a percentage of box office revenue came from premium priced options like IMAX branded d-cinema screens, other big screen concepts and 3D. If these media people would bother to screw on their heads straight and think a little teeny bit they might figure out what they're reporting is actually not a big deal whatsoever and only incidental.


A big screen alone does not equate to an automatically better show.
I do like watching movies on big screens, but I'm perfectly happy with 2D. At least big things keep their sense of scale in 2D. But I am getting quickly spoiled to other new developments like Dolby Atmos. I could have watched Edge of Tomorrow in IMAX Digital 3D at the Moore Warren Theater, but I chose to drive a little farther to downtown OKC, watch it from a 4K projector in 2D and Dolby Atmos and pay just $10 per ticket.

Our Cinemark has their big XD (smaller floor-to-ceiling faux-IMAX) screen showing it, but I've started avoiding the big-screen shows:
I have to use the handicap seats, which are put out away in front from the back stadium seats, and almost squished up to the lower front rows. Being too close to the big screen isn't "immersive", it's like having your face pushed up against a glass office window on the 20th floor--Ermff, I'd like to step back and admire the view, thank you.
And that's leaving aside the theater's desire to pump up the stereo to show you how much better the audio system is than the regular screens.

But again, a low opening like this wasn't the fault of 3D vs. 2D, it was more about post-sofa Tom Cruise, the generic story, and the vague title. And the teen cult novel.

 

[Ejanss]

Interesting that Edge of Tomorrow did 82M box office internationally which smoked the other films.

Yeah, Tom Cruise is still a major movie star in America but he's probably the biggest movie star everywhere else in the world.

Yes, SFX blockbusters with Tom Cruise, Johnny Depp and/or Angelina Jolie, and CGI comedies with wisecracking animals, both tend to do well in foreign markets where they think this's what an American Hollywood Movie looks like.
(You'll note the Depp reference for the percentage of the "billion dollars" Pirates 4 didn't make stateside.)

You practically spot them as genres now, and studios are very aware of genre conventions.
If an Asian actor shows up as an extraneous supporting character in a blockbuster action movie, or they use Paris as a location...

 

[Tino]

It may be a familiar story but it is not a generic story

 

[Mark Booth]

I have mixed feelings about the box office success (or lack thereof) for 'Edge of Tomorrow'. On the one hand, I think it's an esquisite popcorn flick and I want the studio and actors (some of whom might opt for percentage deals) to make money. On the other hand, the weaker the theatrical box office the sooner it might come to Blu-ray. And I REALLY want it on Blu-ray!

Mark

 

[Ejanss]

It may be a familiar story but it is not a generic story

No, meant in the sense that you could look at the trailers to "Battleship", "2012" and "Madagascar 3", and think, "Oh yeah, this'll be a hit overseas... ", the way we used to say an unfunny comic would be "really popular in France".

With visual flash and not as much of a reliance on dialogue, the blockbusters and CGI critter-comedies translate well, with less competition to suggest why they might not specifically be as good as other movies of their kind.

 

[Tim Glover]

Whats sad is that 22 Jump Street will make a gazillion....Transformers 16 will have lines wrapped around the buildings & Edge Of Tomorrow is "underperforming" Hell my usually un-informed co-worker smarted off today "hey I heard that movie tanked?"

WTF...so now the media is spinning it...theater chains will steadily remove the screens. Really does blow my mind.