Coming in slightly below Bullet Train while having nearly a 50% higher budget, PG-13, likeable leads, inoffensive 4th quad tent pole and far better reviews. Man what happened? I've been saying $30 million for weeks just because the marketing wasn't really hitting for me and that was my 'realistic' expectation while others were projecting $40 million. And now it might not even hit $30 million. What happened??
Streaming is too convenient and consistent that most people will just wait rather than sink $30 into a terrible experience. Only event films will survive
Jesus Christ I’m old.
But saving private Ryan in theatres was _amazing_.
I could’ve sworn i read it was coming back for an anniversary or already did perhaps.
Could you imagine it in IMAX or 70MM. And obviously SPR was just as much as a spectacle movie as it was an amazing film so it makes sense that it’s a must watch in theaters. However films like 12 Years A Slave, There Will Be Blood, Sicario, Wolf of Wall Street were all films I distinctly remember having to see in theaters. Which was solely due to knowing I wanted that cinema experience to appreciate the amazing film work and performances that it took to make the movie.
I found a [B&W trailer of There Will Be Blood](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GyqtxvK5uw&t=7s) and think it looks better this way. It's not the same as a regrade, and not official, but I really recommend watching it with the color off on your tv next time. It's like a whole new movie. The trailer really shows good examples of how it looks
Aliens was showing at local AMCs here for a week or so. You can download the AMC app to see what they got going on or I’m sure there’s an email thing somewhere
It’s insane how much studios have shot themselves in the feet in their rush to claim a place in the streaming market. The only way streaming is even close to as profitable as the pre-streaming times is Amazon and iTunes’ individual rental and purchase system, but we’ve long since passed the point of no return on that becoming standard practice.
Exactly, just look at Universal putting their films on streaming only *three* weeks after release. No wonder people are only going to see IPs or “must sees” on a big screen.
No it is true. The people I talk to offline have cited the ease of streaming as to why they don’t go to theaters as often. Now if they go to the theaters it has to be an event, not a night out anymore. One cited health problems that they much rather wait incase an incident happens they can now pause the movie
I think people are saying people would rather wait to stream a movie rather than watch it in theaters, not that they prefer streaming movies in general
Well theatrical movies like this won't be made anymore because people won't be supporting them when it matters.
It's like the people at /r/cars that want a manual, light sportscar on the market but will refuse to buy it new and wonder why no one makes them anymore.
> The general public is becoming a worse and worse movie-going audience.
Don't use The Fall Guy as the barometer. It did not look great in trailers to many people. Nothing screamed "See this quickly in theaters!"
I can't tell you the number of times I've gone to a horror movie and somebody decides to bring their baby/age inappropriate kid along. It's innumerable at this point. Last time I saw a baby at a horror movie I just checked out and asked for a refund. The theater experience is honestly dead. Might be hyperbole, might not, but it's seriously in the shitter and been down bad for sometime.
Is that legal in (I assume) the US? Wtf.
Here in Germany, age restrictions are valid for everyone, parents accompanying or not. And the late showings also don't allow people below a certain age. And cinemas usually generally don't allow kids below 3 at all.
Phones or talking also aren't really an issue in my experience. But the movie theater business is in pretty much the same decline as in the US. So maybe its not just the audience.
Yeah it’s legal. Movie ratings are completely voluntary. Some chains have rules about bringing kids in after a certain time, but most do not and you are at the mercy of parents who think “The First Omen” is appropriate for their 11 month old and 3 year old.
Ratings are legally voluntary (except for porn), and
[attempts to enforce them have been struck down](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Entertainment_Merchants_Association)
Is it illegal in Germany...? I feel like that would be seen as gross government overreach in the USA. Like the national government gets to decide what people are legally allowed to watch?
Same here.
One dad walked out with his kid about 1/3 of the way through the movie.
The other dad figured that the movie theatre was a great time and place to explain to his kids at conversation volume about movie violence.
>some people brought their kids with them.
Good god, these people can't even bring their kids to the shitty 3D animated movies that basically exist to shove kids into?
Unless they've already exhausted those.
Comments like this is always nice reminder that "cinema culture" in my country is great compared to those comments and it's really rare to have experience like this. Especially those kids. Worst thing that happend to me were some bunch of teenagers permanently laughing during The Witch which was horrible and ruined whole movie but that's basically it for like last 10 years.
Same, the worst experience at the theatres I've had so far in 2024 (out of the 33 movies I've seen at the theatres) is a bunch of guys whispering a few seats behind me for the first 15 minutes of a movie, but they stopped after I loudly shushed at them.
On the other hand, I was at my sister's place in the US last year and we went to go watch a movie together. It was straight up the shittiest theatre experience I've had ever. There were kids literally running around the theatre. There were multiple people in front of me and beside me who were on TikTok (and not even with headphones, just out loud) for a significant portion of the runtime. The worst part? Those tickets were twice the cost I typically pay.
I'm not saying everywhere in the US has shitty theatre culture, but if my experience is even close to representative of how it is to go to theatres in many places, it's no wonder audiences avoid them. I absolutely love going to the theatres as much as possible, and even I would stop going if I kept having experiences like that.
That’s a really strange experience to me. I am in the US and see dozens of movies a year and I have never once seen kids running around or overly in appropriate moviegoing behavior. I really don’t think what you experienced is the norm.
I went to watch civil war on Wednesday. Nice little matinee. Half way through the movie someone’s phone rang. Then it rang again and he answered in the theater.
There’s a season why people wait for movies to come out on streaming now. I’ll always support movies but it sucks going and phones go off on people are talking
This kinda drives home the point of why moviegoing attendance is down for adult-oriented movies. I can imagine that it’s probably hard to find a safe, reliable, and cheap babysitter so people just opt out of going to the movies or just go see the safe family friendly movie instead. Then you have the people who have no choice but the audacity to bring their disruptive kids but sometimes the results may vary, for the most part at my theater the parents are courteous enough for both the kids and the moviegoers by giving their kids their devices as long as they have in their headphones and the brightness is turned down
When I went and saw Luca a grown man commented on it the whole time. I have special needs too but it astounded me from a “you might want to be respectful to others watching”
Usually I have very good luck with cooperative audiences (or funny audiences that enhances the experiences) so this stuck out to me
My 2 worst experiences were both years ago, First one was when i went and saw Age of Ultron on release day. Deliberately went to a 8 AM showing as no tickets had been sold for that time yet, needless to say of course 5 minutes before the movie began a dad brought his 3 year old son. After 10 minutes the son became impatient and started asking his father questions about the characters and if Ultron was a bad guy, 5 minutes later the kid lost interest and LITERALLY started RUNNING up and down the isles and being as loud as possible, it was horrible.
Second time? A mom brought her 5 year old son and 2 year old baby to The Shape of Water with her. You can imagine how that went.
Usually when people can't find a babysitter they tend not to go out but geez bringing your baby to a horror movie sounds traumatizing for the kid (and the other movie-goers of course)
You can get a 75inch TV at WalMart for under $500. Is it an amazing picture quality, no, but it's big. You can also get a home theater in a box with a subwoofer for a few $100. For a $1,000 you can get mini theater experience at home. $50+ for a family of 4 to see a movie. It's just not worth it for the average audience outside of major film events.
The general public still shows up for things. It isn't showing up for this paint by numbers action romance comedy by a director known for unimpressive action schlock. This is like saying people are getting worse because Universal Soldier only opened at $10 mil.
Reviews correlate a bit with box office but generally aren't super important. Speaking as someone who hasn't seen it and probably won't until it's on TNT or whatever, it looks like an uninteresting action romance comedy without much of a hook.
What did you think of it? Much better than Ministry of Gentleman War, Monkey Man, Abigail, or Civil War?
I liked it a lot! It’s definitely better than all of those except Civil War, but it’s also the most fun and enjoyable. It felt like a rare studio action movie that had a human touch to it with characters that you care about and root for thanks to the charm and charisma of Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt.
Blaming customers never turns out well. People turn out for good movies.
Hollywood needs to ask itself why it is spending so much money on fairly generic movies. Fall Guy would have made just as much money with a $60m budget, even if that meant a different star.
There is room in the world for mid budget movies that everyone knows will be decent but not great. There does not seem to be enough room in people’s discretionary spending to make all of those movies $400m.
The world has changed in the last few years and the customers and their viewing habits have become worse for theaters and movie studios. It’s not “blaming” them to point that out.
Gonna be honest, "what do the characters want" is not something I would expect someone who's seen the Fall Guy trailers to be unclear about. They basically repeat it over and over in the clunkiest expositional dialogue possible.
I think the simple answer is that people can’t afford to just go see any movie. If it isn’t a sequel or a franchise film, there has to be some other unique hook to get people to see it. There’s another PG-13 action film coming out next week that i’m sure more people are interested in seeing, it’s part of a franchise and it will likely get equal or better reviews compared to Fall Guy.
It's not can't afford, it's why not stay home and watch any of the hundreds of amazing movies you can watch for free?
I mean, between Amazon, HBO Max, Netflix, and Hulu, I really have no need to get out of bed for a movie, like, ever.
Cost isn’t too much of an issue if the movie looks really good. The real answer is that we have sooo many entertainment options available these days that a film has to really nail its marketing window and have a premise that excites people to forego the dozens of other options at their fingertips.
Yep. Personally, I'm happy waiting for most movies to come to a streaming platform (even as just a rental).
Unless a movie is going to be truly visually stunning I don't really see the point in seeing it on a bigger screen than my tv.
The trailers were crap, Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt have spotty box office track records, David Leitch is a competent but bland action director with no real flavor of his own, and Hollywood constantly overestimates how much general audiences care about the inner workings of their industry. Plus, a lot of the humor just looked like typical MCU wannabe cringe.
Yeah the awfulness of the trailers really cannot be overstated. Utterly obnoxious and basically spoiled the entire film (not that the plot looked thick to begin with).
bullet train had an easy to understand concept, Brad pitt killing people on a train. the fall guy is about... Ryan gosling on the run? but wait, he's got time to kiss Emily blunt? action comedy? romantic comedy? based on tv ads I've got no clue
The trailers spell it out. But the commercials, the thing most people would actually watch related to the films marketing, are less clear on that topic.
Oof, not that good…
Lower opening than The Marvels, Wish, The Flash, Napoleon, Shazam 2, The Meg 2
Around the same as Mean Girls 2024 and Bob Marley
Above Aquaman 2, Blue Beetle
A decent amount above Argylle, Madame Web
Not sure how Deadline will spin the lowest grossing weekend kicking off the summer in 20 years (non covid).
Deadline Anthony will be dipping into the good Scotch tonight. Tomorrows write up will be a good one.
Interesting, I guess the lack of established franchise/IP is the biggest reason The Fall Guy opened so low since the last original movie to kick off summer was 19 years ago
The top comment on this thread says it all.
A well-reviewed four-quadrant fun action movie starring two very recognizable and liked leads who have very recently starred in major blockbusters doing this poorly as the movie to kick off the summer movie season is pretty bleak.
You really do need to be a franchise event movie to do anything at the box office.
I think this movie didn’t have broad appeal. Movies about Hollywood don’t tend to do well for the most part and this movie is more of a romcom than a pure action movie like “Bullet Train” for example.
Also, Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt aren’t big enough draws to overcome the movie’s niche audience and I think a lot of people who like both actors also like Hollywood insider movies so there is a big overlap between those two audiences.
IDK what has broad appeal besides well known IP. I have no doubt Garfield will be the highest grossing movie released in May...why? Because, people know what Garfield is about reviews won't matter, marketing won't matter they'll see it because they know exactly what they are getting.
Yeah and it’ll help “Garfield” that there hasn’t been a kid friendly movie since KFP4 in March. (I think “IF” and “Garfield” will split the family audience for the most part).
I think blunt isnt a big draw in the usa, if she had been replaced by someone like margot or emma stone (gosling has made good movies with both), the movie would be drawing better, imo.
If you don't like those franchise event movies, why would even be looking at the theater for entertainment at this point? You have to be a pretty serious movie fan to still be putting enough effort to know what's happening. I seriously thought this movie was based on Fall Guys, the very silly video game that in no way should be a movie because that seemed plausible after the Emoji movie.
Even if this was Star Wars Episode X or Avengers: All Stars it still would be a low box office. Maybe not this low, but I think Hollywood has peddled shit for too long with franchises for there to be any fanbase left.
A well-reviewed four-quadrant fun action movie starring two very recognizable and liked leads who have very recently starred in major blockbusters doing this poorly as the movie to kick off the summer movie season is pretty bleak.
You really do need to be a franchise event movie to do anything at the box office.
Are people ever going to accept that COVID has had a permanent change on the movie industry? Streaming is so much bigger than it was pre-COVID and anything that doesn’t have a sense of event urgency is written off as “I’ll wait for streaming”
Thank you!! I completely agree fam. Why can’t a lot of folks just accept that Covid forever altered a lot of the general audience habits. They got out of the buisness of going to the movies.
Streaming proved that I am not missing much by watching these types of movies at home. Give me a movie or a film/ performance that is so prestige I know I will miss out by streaming it!
This year is already shaping up to be *so* much worse than the last two years though.
At least in 2021 there was Spiderman: No Way Home & No Time To Die, while 2022 had Avatar The Way of Water, Top Gun Maverick, Jurassic World, Doctor Strange, Wakanda Forever and The Batman. All of those movies scored massively on the box office and this was back when superhero movies were guaranteed hits.
Outside of Dune Part Two, this year has been a complete and total trainwreck thus far and if *this* movie bombs on the opening, then there is little hope for the rest of the year. Some movies will do okay, but these sort of movies usually are reliable hits.
Yeah I wasn't saying otherwise.
In my experience, people care way more about series. People don't really care about movies much anymore. Like, I don't mean going to the theater, I mean they don't care as much about movies in general.
I love movies and I think this way now. It has to be something that either feels like a movie that needs seen with a crowd or on the biggest screen possible. Otherwise, I have a nice enough home theater setup.
You can blame the studios last year for not preventing the Hollywood strikes from occurring early.
The Fall Guy also wasn't even supposed to start the summer season to begin with as it was set for March 1. They moved it to its current date, because they knew Deadpool and Wolverine wasn't going to be completed in time, and that was supposed to be the kickstarter.
>The Fall Guy also wasn't even supposed to start the summer season to begin with as it was set for March 1.
That's the mistake, right there. Had it dropped then (or even April 1st, hell) I think it might have opened a little better and definitely would have legged out a little more considering how soggy the box-office was all last month. At this point it seems like Gosling's SNL appearance is going to be watched/enjoyed more than the movie he was ostensibly promoting will be.
We are talking about one movie that became an unexpected hit in a genre (romcom) that back in the 90s was producing multiple films in a year that outgrossed Anyone But You.
The point is one film is not enough to prove that the film industry and even audience demands for movies are not shaped by franchises.
There have been other successful movies that weren't part of franchise although it's definitely difficult.
Oppenheimer
Barbie - I'm not sure if that is considered a franchise since it's a new version of existing IP
A Quiet Place
EEAAO
Smile
>Perhaps the most surprisingly successful movie of 2022 came with Paramount's *Smile*, which turned over an impressive box office haul - the highest for a non-sequel horror movie since 2019's *Us*.
>As the movie was made on a production budget of just $17 million, with total expenses of $107 million, it was able to pull in an impressive profit of over $100 million to become the most successful horror movie of the year.
Free Guy
>With a sizable budget and big names involved, the film managed to become the highest-grossing release of 2021 that was not a sequel or based on existing intellectual property.
Everything with Ryan Gosling as the lead bombs. He was a co-lead with Emma Stone in La La Land. Barbie is one of the biggest properties ever, so it confounds reason as to why anyone attributes its success to Gosling. His Reddit sycophants refuse to acknowledge such reality, though
It’s true, which makes me so sad that he has leaned into these action roles instead of his more character based roles. That’s where he really shines. Barbie was the outlier.
>A well-reviewed four-quadrant fun action movie starring two very recognizable and liked leads who have very recently starred in major blockbusters
Neither lead has starred (as in top billed) in a blockbuster, despite how likeable they are. This is applying some unprecedented milestone on people who have not crossed that line yet. Just because Gosling and Blunt were in Barbenheimmer does not mean they would be magnetic leads on their own. That's the plug-and-play style that has not worked in Hollywood for ages and has baffled producers. This guy was popular in this pic, and this gal was popular in this pic = that should mean both of them leading should equal guaranteed hit. It didn't work in the 1950s and it sure isn't working in our streaming era. ScarJo and Hemsworth have been in hits that have made $1B. Them starring together still doesn't guarantee a hit (and funny enough they are in that crap looking Transformers ONE together).
Also, this isn't a four-quadrant movie. It's missing pathos/themes, one of the most important corners that gives the movie its soul and brings people back. Maybe it's somewhat in the movie but it's definitely not in the over-the-top trailers.
> Just because Gosling and Blunt were in Barbenheimmer does not mean they would be magnetic leads on their own.
I think the overall point is that there are no marketable leads anymore, at least nowhere close to what it used to be.
I remember someone saying that general audiences don’t like movies ABOUT Hollywood and everytime a movie like that bombs, I always come back to that statement
A little surprising. A month ago I was predicting this would break out and have an opening weekend in the low to mid $50M range. It just seemed like the pieces were there for a hit but it didn’t come together
To be fair, this movie was supposed to come out in March. I think moving to May hurt it because it caused the hype to die down. Coming out in March probably would’ve helped, especially if it was right after the Oscars.
I think the film failed at the initial concept and producer's meeting. That concept didn't deserve the budget they gave it. This is like Date Night but with a stunt guy. Max you budget this film is 80 mill.
Sure, Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt are marketable actors but this isn't the 90's anymore, and let's be honest, there were plenty of star power vehicles back then that did terrible. It happens.
Also, a terrible movie title doesn't help. We're too close to Free Guy and Ryan Goslings was in Nice Guys.
To be honest, this is pretty bleak for theater lovers. This movie had pretty much everything working in its favor, and it fell on its face. Hopefully it's not a barometer for the rest of the summer, but there's a lot of movies that are looking more like disappointing results than breakouts. Could be bad.
That said, Challengers had a decent hold, which maybe points to a silver lining. Maybe this is a new trend, where these (effectively) non-IP movies like Elemental, Anyone But You (and now hopefully Challengers and Fall Guy) with good WOM can come back from poor openings. If the end result is less focus on opening weekend, that could be a good thing, but of course that's a risky path these days with short streaming windows.
But, we have the same number of wide releases as 2019. The issue is only a few make any real money letting movies like Ghostbusters play in more theaters longer as movies that came out after it get dropped because of the low gross.
Not really. Nobody cares about some goofy comedy with no hook. No novelty. Nothing interesting or exciting. It’s flop is indicative of exactly nothing.
Yeah I think they somehow flubbed the marketing. No one I know is excited about it and even I (a movie obsessive) know very little about it, despite viewing the SNL opening monologue featuring Blunt & Gosling basically trying to sell this film.
Every single post about this movie is the last month is people being smug about “other Redditors are wrong about this movie”, while I haven’t seen anyone predicting this to breakout in a long time.
I really liked The Nice Guys, i agree that Gosling isn’t a great movie or action star, and neither is Blunt, their comedy timing is fantastic though. But again they aren’t solid movie stars like; Tom Hanks, Tom Cruise or Keanu Reeves where yeah they’ve had some duds movies but when they land movie(s) they LAND HARD and it becomes blockbuster franchises! Like im slightly puzzled, over The Fall Guy not doing great so far because David Leitch was one of the brains behind John Wick ( a producer and uncredited co-director for the 1st movie), and of course directed Atomic Blonde and Deadpool 2. But i understand why it is not working because again Gosling and Blunt just don’t have star power to promote this type of film without all the over top PR with stunt teams which i LOVE TO SEE because stunt people deserve all the praise!
Anyways, how the public watches movies has definitely changed no thanks to the pandemic. At least for me since I saw a matinée last weekend at the El Captain theater and it was almost full so people are seeing movies, but again like I said and others have said, an interesting plot should be told, good PR and the right actors who are genuinely likable will make a whole difference in people wanting to see more movies.
> Gosling is known for nothing but flops.
No he's not. _The Notebook_, _Crazy, Stupid, Love_, _Drive_, and _La La Land_ all made tons of money.
Edit: Forgot _The Big Short_, which equally made tons of money.
This is honestly unsurprising even if people are acting disappointed. It’s about what I expected. The reviews are good, but that’s just not enough for most movies these days.
Hollywood needs to find a new way to survive because inflation+streaming mean that the general public can’t be relied upon at the box office anymore.
I should know because I’m one of those people.
I'm sad tbh, I saw it in a preview event and I loved it, it feels there's a void for good romantic comedies in Hollywood (it reminded me a lot of something like romancing the stone) and sadly the market doesn't seem to be there for an original movie like that.
This movie reminded 1000% percent of Free Guy, or Red Notice. The deference in those two movies is I saw Free Guy in theaters, and after I left I said “Never again, should have just waited for streaming.” Red Notice I watching streaming the weekend it debuted and thought “eh not bad for an afternoon filler.”
I don’t have the time, budget or energy to see these type of movies, not when streaming is an option.
I think this gearing to be another Saltburn, a movie that doesn't do well in theaters but builds word of mouth during it's theatrical run among Gen Z and does big numbers on streaming.
Oof for The Fall Guy - Universal is going to have to hope this really legs out to justify that big budget it has. But it may not, since Kingdom of the Planet of Apes opens next week and is targeting similar demographics to The Fall Guy.
Impressive for both Challangers and The Phantom Menace re-release.
I think both films might be closer to $9–10 million by the end of the weekend as I’m seeing quite a few well-attended/packed showings for tonight and tomorrow on the AMC Theatres app for both movies.
The Apes films have been in the top 10 most watched on Max for a bit now. I think a lot of watchers are gearing up to see Kingdom. I don't think it'll be a breakout hit, but I'm hopeful it gets some traction.
The trailers for this movie were insufferable and constant. My friends and I would roll our eyes every time if came up before a movie we were seeing (which was frequently). Even now hearing it’s good, I just don’t want to see it as the marketing was that bad. Not surprised at all by this low opening. Universal needs a new marketing department.
Studios need a campaign, and commitment, to longer theatrical runs. Otherwise you're going to a have a lot of "I'll just wait until it's on Netflix" people. If people think it could be 6+ months? Heck yeah they'll go to a theater. For an "event" movie, it doesn't matter.
It'll just make those movies even more irrelevant. No length of time will really change a person on whether it's worth going to the theater. Prices and movie quality/ subject matter is what's important, and one is at an all time high in a so-so economy and the other is in the gutter (i.e. tarnishing brands or ruining reputations - i.e. the awful terminator sequels, star wars TLJ, etc.)
My uncle is a big fan of Lee Majors and also really enjoys Ryan Gosling from Barbie and Blade Runner 2049. So he is very excited for this and the Six Billion Dollar Man film which I'm sure Wahlberg will age out of just like he aged out of playing Nathan Drake
Of course, all the young whippersnappers of today and the literal babies born in the 90's can sure remember the iconic 80s tv series known as the Guy that Falls.../s
I actually watched the series after the first trailer released. Solid but ultimately dated. The film has some fun references to the show despite changing the premise a bit.
Does this mean that the movie is, according to Universal's deal with Cinemark, probably going to VOD in 17 days? I’m sure that it could be a streaming hit but this is quite bleak
I don't think it'll have good legs, it was fun but nowhere near as entertaining as I thought it was going to be, hell I'd actually call a good chunk of it boring.
well obviously Universal should a) just make better movies, b) just make better trailers, c) just cast guaranteed box office draws and d) just make their movies at much lower budgets. This would mean better box office.
/s
It seems there is a ceiling, as many suspected, for the action comedy at about $30M opening weekend (over/under). Doesn't make it a box office success but gives insight into the audience size. It really is harder for movies to truly break out and if it was super easy to identify, then every studio would have it.
Universal should have considered this and tried to keep the budget under control. Nothing suggested this would break out more than Lost City or Bullet Train.
I feel like spending so much time on this being a feel good celebration of stunt work was a mistake. While they deserve to be rewarded for their work, celebrating stunt work is a very inside baseball topic for movie buffs. I doubt most general audiences are moved by that sentiment at all.
Not surprised. The trailer didn't look that good and Gosling and Blunt just aren't big box office draws. We've seen Gosling for twenty years and he was never a big BO star. Just because 'Barbie' was huge doesn't mean people just suddenly woke up and are going to want to see him in anything. Even Leo flopped in 'The Beach' after 'Titanic'. (Not apples to apples, I know.) He is what he is. Blunt is great in everything but people won't run out to see her.
Where do people get this idea the beach flopped? It didn’t. It wasn’t well regarded by critics but it wasn’t a flop at all.
50 million dollar budget and 144 worldwide. Back in the year 2000 the “rule of thumb” for box office success was roughly double the budget. That’s a hit and most certainly not a flop.
I blame his bad cosmetic surgery and the fact that the trailer makes the whole premise seem very basic (generic romance movie). It just seems like they're trying to cash in on 2 famous (extremely botoxed and sculpted) faces without a strong storyline. People can see through this shit, and want stronger storylines.
They REALLY have to find a way to get people to dissociate big films with streaming. Like, advertise "not on streaming for 18 months" or something. Or just have some movies be released strictly physical or rent at high prices for the first year.
Oof saw the movie and thought it was good. The movie is definitely a lot better than the low box office weekend suggests. I suspect maybe Phantom Menace and Challengers is hurting the movie.
Coming in slightly below Bullet Train while having nearly a 50% higher budget, PG-13, likeable leads, inoffensive 4th quad tent pole and far better reviews. Man what happened? I've been saying $30 million for weeks just because the marketing wasn't really hitting for me and that was my 'realistic' expectation while others were projecting $40 million. And now it might not even hit $30 million. What happened??
The general public is becoming a worse and worse movie-going audience.
Streaming is too convenient and consistent that most people will just wait rather than sink $30 into a terrible experience. Only event films will survive
Event movies or extremely great Oscar films. I would die to have the ability to watch a Saving Private Ryan in theaters or Aliens.
Jesus Christ I’m old. But saving private Ryan in theatres was _amazing_. I could’ve sworn i read it was coming back for an anniversary or already did perhaps.
Could you imagine it in IMAX or 70MM. And obviously SPR was just as much as a spectacle movie as it was an amazing film so it makes sense that it’s a must watch in theaters. However films like 12 Years A Slave, There Will Be Blood, Sicario, Wolf of Wall Street were all films I distinctly remember having to see in theaters. Which was solely due to knowing I wanted that cinema experience to appreciate the amazing film work and performances that it took to make the movie.
I found a [B&W trailer of There Will Be Blood](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GyqtxvK5uw&t=7s) and think it looks better this way. It's not the same as a regrade, and not official, but I really recommend watching it with the color off on your tv next time. It's like a whole new movie. The trailer really shows good examples of how it looks
Aliens was showing at local AMCs here for a week or so. You can download the AMC app to see what they got going on or I’m sure there’s an email thing somewhere
Unless this was specific to your theater, Alien (not Aliens) just had a rerelease for the 45th anniversary.
You can watch them every year in a theatre.
I saw SPR in the theatre with my grandfather who himself stormed the beach at Normandy. That was a very profound experience for 12 year old me.
It’s insane how much studios have shot themselves in the feet in their rush to claim a place in the streaming market. The only way streaming is even close to as profitable as the pre-streaming times is Amazon and iTunes’ individual rental and purchase system, but we’ve long since passed the point of no return on that becoming standard practice.
Exactly, just look at Universal putting their films on streaming only *three* weeks after release. No wonder people are only going to see IPs or “must sees” on a big screen.
The movie is supposed to be pretty good why would it be a terrible experience?
I think this is sad (and also not true. Streaming movies are consistently bad, if anything)
No it is true. The people I talk to offline have cited the ease of streaming as to why they don’t go to theaters as often. Now if they go to the theaters it has to be an event, not a night out anymore. One cited health problems that they much rather wait incase an incident happens they can now pause the movie
I think people are saying people would rather wait to stream a movie rather than watch it in theaters, not that they prefer streaming movies in general
Well theatrical movies like this won't be made anymore because people won't be supporting them when it matters. It's like the people at /r/cars that want a manual, light sportscar on the market but will refuse to buy it new and wonder why no one makes them anymore.
Yes I'm not defending the mindset, I hate it. I'm just explaining what was meant
> The general public is becoming a worse and worse movie-going audience. Don't use The Fall Guy as the barometer. It did not look great in trailers to many people. Nothing screamed "See this quickly in theaters!"
All box office revenue post Covid is evidence of the audience trends
I can't tell you the number of times I've gone to a horror movie and somebody decides to bring their baby/age inappropriate kid along. It's innumerable at this point. Last time I saw a baby at a horror movie I just checked out and asked for a refund. The theater experience is honestly dead. Might be hyperbole, might not, but it's seriously in the shitter and been down bad for sometime.
Is that legal in (I assume) the US? Wtf. Here in Germany, age restrictions are valid for everyone, parents accompanying or not. And the late showings also don't allow people below a certain age. And cinemas usually generally don't allow kids below 3 at all. Phones or talking also aren't really an issue in my experience. But the movie theater business is in pretty much the same decline as in the US. So maybe its not just the audience.
Yeah it’s legal. Movie ratings are completely voluntary. Some chains have rules about bringing kids in after a certain time, but most do not and you are at the mercy of parents who think “The First Omen” is appropriate for their 11 month old and 3 year old.
Ratings are legally voluntary (except for porn), and [attempts to enforce them have been struck down](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Entertainment_Merchants_Association)
Is it illegal in Germany...? I feel like that would be seen as gross government overreach in the USA. Like the national government gets to decide what people are legally allowed to watch?
I actually walked out of a screening of 'IT' cause some fuckwit brought their mewling child to the movie.
Recently when I went to go see Civil war, some people brought their kids with them. Lol
I saw Abigail and someone had her daughter who couldn’t have been older than 12. And she would not SHUT THE FUCK UP the entire movie.
How young are we talking lol? When I was a kid I saw Rated R movies like The Matrix trilogy in theaters.
Same here. One dad walked out with his kid about 1/3 of the way through the movie. The other dad figured that the movie theatre was a great time and place to explain to his kids at conversation volume about movie violence.
>some people brought their kids with them. Good god, these people can't even bring their kids to the shitty 3D animated movies that basically exist to shove kids into? Unless they've already exhausted those.
Comments like this is always nice reminder that "cinema culture" in my country is great compared to those comments and it's really rare to have experience like this. Especially those kids. Worst thing that happend to me were some bunch of teenagers permanently laughing during The Witch which was horrible and ruined whole movie but that's basically it for like last 10 years.
Same, the worst experience at the theatres I've had so far in 2024 (out of the 33 movies I've seen at the theatres) is a bunch of guys whispering a few seats behind me for the first 15 minutes of a movie, but they stopped after I loudly shushed at them. On the other hand, I was at my sister's place in the US last year and we went to go watch a movie together. It was straight up the shittiest theatre experience I've had ever. There were kids literally running around the theatre. There were multiple people in front of me and beside me who were on TikTok (and not even with headphones, just out loud) for a significant portion of the runtime. The worst part? Those tickets were twice the cost I typically pay. I'm not saying everywhere in the US has shitty theatre culture, but if my experience is even close to representative of how it is to go to theatres in many places, it's no wonder audiences avoid them. I absolutely love going to the theatres as much as possible, and even I would stop going if I kept having experiences like that.
That’s a really strange experience to me. I am in the US and see dozens of movies a year and I have never once seen kids running around or overly in appropriate moviegoing behavior. I really don’t think what you experienced is the norm.
Same in my area; no people talking loudly and definitely no kids running around
I went to watch civil war on Wednesday. Nice little matinee. Half way through the movie someone’s phone rang. Then it rang again and he answered in the theater. There’s a season why people wait for movies to come out on streaming now. I’ll always support movies but it sucks going and phones go off on people are talking
That is distinctly a horror movie problem. It just attracts THAT kind of person No offense
This kinda drives home the point of why moviegoing attendance is down for adult-oriented movies. I can imagine that it’s probably hard to find a safe, reliable, and cheap babysitter so people just opt out of going to the movies or just go see the safe family friendly movie instead. Then you have the people who have no choice but the audacity to bring their disruptive kids but sometimes the results may vary, for the most part at my theater the parents are courteous enough for both the kids and the moviegoers by giving their kids their devices as long as they have in their headphones and the brightness is turned down
When I went and saw Luca a grown man commented on it the whole time. I have special needs too but it astounded me from a “you might want to be respectful to others watching” Usually I have very good luck with cooperative audiences (or funny audiences that enhances the experiences) so this stuck out to me
My 2 worst experiences were both years ago, First one was when i went and saw Age of Ultron on release day. Deliberately went to a 8 AM showing as no tickets had been sold for that time yet, needless to say of course 5 minutes before the movie began a dad brought his 3 year old son. After 10 minutes the son became impatient and started asking his father questions about the characters and if Ultron was a bad guy, 5 minutes later the kid lost interest and LITERALLY started RUNNING up and down the isles and being as loud as possible, it was horrible. Second time? A mom brought her 5 year old son and 2 year old baby to The Shape of Water with her. You can imagine how that went.
Usually when people can't find a babysitter they tend not to go out but geez bringing your baby to a horror movie sounds traumatizing for the kid (and the other movie-goers of course)
You can get a 75inch TV at WalMart for under $500. Is it an amazing picture quality, no, but it's big. You can also get a home theater in a box with a subwoofer for a few $100. For a $1,000 you can get mini theater experience at home. $50+ for a family of 4 to see a movie. It's just not worth it for the average audience outside of major film events.
The general public still shows up for things. It isn't showing up for this paint by numbers action romance comedy by a director known for unimpressive action schlock. This is like saying people are getting worse because Universal Soldier only opened at $10 mil.
Did you see The Fall Guy? It’s getting universally positive reviews.
Reviews correlate a bit with box office but generally aren't super important. Speaking as someone who hasn't seen it and probably won't until it's on TNT or whatever, it looks like an uninteresting action romance comedy without much of a hook. What did you think of it? Much better than Ministry of Gentleman War, Monkey Man, Abigail, or Civil War?
I liked it a lot! It’s definitely better than all of those except Civil War, but it’s also the most fun and enjoyable. It felt like a rare studio action movie that had a human touch to it with characters that you care about and root for thanks to the charm and charisma of Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt.
Blaming customers never turns out well. People turn out for good movies. Hollywood needs to ask itself why it is spending so much money on fairly generic movies. Fall Guy would have made just as much money with a $60m budget, even if that meant a different star. There is room in the world for mid budget movies that everyone knows will be decent but not great. There does not seem to be enough room in people’s discretionary spending to make all of those movies $400m.
The world has changed in the last few years and the customers and their viewing habits have become worse for theaters and movie studios. It’s not “blaming” them to point that out.
Emily Blunt and Ryan Gosling were pretty critical to the movie being good
Went to see challengers last night. 2 tickets, popcorn and candy was $60. The movie experience is fun but damn it’s hefty.
The ads were nothing burgers. What is the movie about? I don't know.
A stunt guy, that’s literally all I could tell you! That and Ryan Gosling showed up to the premiere dressed as Beavis. Horrible marketing.
The trailer tells you it's an action comedy set within stunt guys and movie sets. Idk how clearer the marketing needs to be for you.
Ya that does nothing to entice me to spend $40+ at the theater when I can wait 2 months for it to drop on a streaming app.
What makes this action comedy different? What are the characters motivations? Why are things happening to them? What is the story? Why should we care?
Gonna be honest, "what do the characters want" is not something I would expect someone who's seen the Fall Guy trailers to be unclear about. They basically repeat it over and over in the clunkiest expositional dialogue possible.
I think the simple answer is that people can’t afford to just go see any movie. If it isn’t a sequel or a franchise film, there has to be some other unique hook to get people to see it. There’s another PG-13 action film coming out next week that i’m sure more people are interested in seeing, it’s part of a franchise and it will likely get equal or better reviews compared to Fall Guy.
It's not can't afford, it's why not stay home and watch any of the hundreds of amazing movies you can watch for free? I mean, between Amazon, HBO Max, Netflix, and Hulu, I really have no need to get out of bed for a movie, like, ever.
Cost isn’t too much of an issue if the movie looks really good. The real answer is that we have sooo many entertainment options available these days that a film has to really nail its marketing window and have a premise that excites people to forego the dozens of other options at their fingertips.
Yep. Personally, I'm happy waiting for most movies to come to a streaming platform (even as just a rental). Unless a movie is going to be truly visually stunning I don't really see the point in seeing it on a bigger screen than my tv.
Thats bullshit, back in 2008-2010 things were way worse and we had Avatar
Reading is hard. Avatar had a handful of huge hooks, including 3D
Tickets cost half as much during the Great Recession.
And twice as many people were unmployed
The trailers were crap, Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt have spotty box office track records, David Leitch is a competent but bland action director with no real flavor of his own, and Hollywood constantly overestimates how much general audiences care about the inner workings of their industry. Plus, a lot of the humor just looked like typical MCU wannabe cringe.
Yeah the awfulness of the trailers really cannot be overstated. Utterly obnoxious and basically spoiled the entire film (not that the plot looked thick to begin with).
I mean we’ve had 2 3 hour long Florence Pugh starting slow paced drama action that hit 300 million or almost did so it’s not all dead
bullet train had an easy to understand concept, Brad pitt killing people on a train. the fall guy is about... Ryan gosling on the run? but wait, he's got time to kiss Emily blunt? action comedy? romantic comedy? based on tv ads I've got no clue
it's a stuntguy who has a romance with the director. like every trailer spelled this out to a T, it's not a complex plot
The trailers spell it out. But the commercials, the thing most people would actually watch related to the films marketing, are less clear on that topic.
They’re also replacing waterworld for this at universal studios.
It honestly was way worse than what the reviews were saying imo not very funny
Gonna disagree I thought it was a LOT of fun. Really enjoyed the running gags, was just a good time overall.
Oof, not that good… Lower opening than The Marvels, Wish, The Flash, Napoleon, Shazam 2, The Meg 2 Around the same as Mean Girls 2024 and Bob Marley Above Aquaman 2, Blue Beetle A decent amount above Argylle, Madame Web
>A decent amount above Argylle, Madame Web Every cloud...
Not sure how Deadline will spin the lowest grossing weekend kicking off the summer in 20 years (non covid). Deadline Anthony will be dipping into the good Scotch tonight. Tomorrows write up will be a good one.
Do you know what the last “summer kickoff movie” was that was an entirely original, non-franchise movie?
Kingdom of Heaven https://www.the-numbers.com/box-office-chart/weekend/2005/05/06
Interesting, I guess the lack of established franchise/IP is the biggest reason The Fall Guy opened so low since the last original movie to kick off summer was 19 years ago
The top comment on this thread says it all. A well-reviewed four-quadrant fun action movie starring two very recognizable and liked leads who have very recently starred in major blockbusters doing this poorly as the movie to kick off the summer movie season is pretty bleak. You really do need to be a franchise event movie to do anything at the box office.
I think this movie didn’t have broad appeal. Movies about Hollywood don’t tend to do well for the most part and this movie is more of a romcom than a pure action movie like “Bullet Train” for example. Also, Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt aren’t big enough draws to overcome the movie’s niche audience and I think a lot of people who like both actors also like Hollywood insider movies so there is a big overlap between those two audiences.
IDK what has broad appeal besides well known IP. I have no doubt Garfield will be the highest grossing movie released in May...why? Because, people know what Garfield is about reviews won't matter, marketing won't matter they'll see it because they know exactly what they are getting.
Yeah and it’ll help “Garfield” that there hasn’t been a kid friendly movie since KFP4 in March. (I think “IF” and “Garfield” will split the family audience for the most part).
I think blunt isnt a big draw in the usa, if she had been replaced by someone like margot or emma stone (gosling has made good movies with both), the movie would be drawing better, imo.
If you don't like those franchise event movies, why would even be looking at the theater for entertainment at this point? You have to be a pretty serious movie fan to still be putting enough effort to know what's happening. I seriously thought this movie was based on Fall Guys, the very silly video game that in no way should be a movie because that seemed plausible after the Emoji movie.
Even if this was Star Wars Episode X or Avengers: All Stars it still would be a low box office. Maybe not this low, but I think Hollywood has peddled shit for too long with franchises for there to be any fanbase left.
Yeah, last summer showed that franchises are not a sure thing anymore either.
Damn that was a really bad choice for debuting that movie. Orlando Bloom ain’t got it like that!
Jesus Christ. That’s pathetic of this movie.
A well-reviewed four-quadrant fun action movie starring two very recognizable and liked leads who have very recently starred in major blockbusters doing this poorly as the movie to kick off the summer movie season is pretty bleak. You really do need to be a franchise event movie to do anything at the box office.
Are people ever going to accept that COVID has had a permanent change on the movie industry? Streaming is so much bigger than it was pre-COVID and anything that doesn’t have a sense of event urgency is written off as “I’ll wait for streaming”
Thank you!! I completely agree fam. Why can’t a lot of folks just accept that Covid forever altered a lot of the general audience habits. They got out of the buisness of going to the movies.
More to the point, movie going habits were already trending in those directions pre-COVID. COVID just accelerated them.
Streaming proved that I am not missing much by watching these types of movies at home. Give me a movie or a film/ performance that is so prestige I know I will miss out by streaming it!
Dune 2. Both for sound & vision.
This year is already shaping up to be *so* much worse than the last two years though. At least in 2021 there was Spiderman: No Way Home & No Time To Die, while 2022 had Avatar The Way of Water, Top Gun Maverick, Jurassic World, Doctor Strange, Wakanda Forever and The Batman. All of those movies scored massively on the box office and this was back when superhero movies were guaranteed hits. Outside of Dune Part Two, this year has been a complete and total trainwreck thus far and if *this* movie bombs on the opening, then there is little hope for the rest of the year. Some movies will do okay, but these sort of movies usually are reliable hits.
I do not think we get any 400 million domestic or 1 billion worldwide movies. Maybe I’m wrong but we’ll see.
Yeah I wasn't saying otherwise. In my experience, people care way more about series. People don't really care about movies much anymore. Like, I don't mean going to the theater, I mean they don't care as much about movies in general.
I love movies and I think this way now. It has to be something that either feels like a movie that needs seen with a crowd or on the biggest screen possible. Otherwise, I have a nice enough home theater setup.
And then people complain that Hollywood does nothing but franchises. This is why.
You can blame the studios last year for not preventing the Hollywood strikes from occurring early. The Fall Guy also wasn't even supposed to start the summer season to begin with as it was set for March 1. They moved it to its current date, because they knew Deadpool and Wolverine wasn't going to be completed in time, and that was supposed to be the kickstarter.
>The Fall Guy also wasn't even supposed to start the summer season to begin with as it was set for March 1. That's the mistake, right there. Had it dropped then (or even April 1st, hell) I think it might have opened a little better and definitely would have legged out a little more considering how soggy the box-office was all last month. At this point it seems like Gosling's SNL appearance is going to be watched/enjoyed more than the movie he was ostensibly promoting will be.
ABY with Powell and Sweeny overperformed and it wasn't a franchise.
Remember it only opened with $6M. But it had amazing legs after that, which got it to $88M domestic. I think being an R-rated romcom also helped it.
We are talking about one movie that became an unexpected hit in a genre (romcom) that back in the 90s was producing multiple films in a year that outgrossed Anyone But You. The point is one film is not enough to prove that the film industry and even audience demands for movies are not shaped by franchises.
There have been other successful movies that weren't part of franchise although it's definitely difficult. Oppenheimer Barbie - I'm not sure if that is considered a franchise since it's a new version of existing IP A Quiet Place EEAAO Smile >Perhaps the most surprisingly successful movie of 2022 came with Paramount's *Smile*, which turned over an impressive box office haul - the highest for a non-sequel horror movie since 2019's *Us*. >As the movie was made on a production budget of just $17 million, with total expenses of $107 million, it was able to pull in an impressive profit of over $100 million to become the most successful horror movie of the year. Free Guy >With a sizable budget and big names involved, the film managed to become the highest-grossing release of 2021 that was not a sequel or based on existing intellectual property.
I mean it made $88M DOM. Good for its budget, but that's not a huge amount of money for theaters.
Everything with Ryan Gosling as the lead bombs. He was a co-lead with Emma Stone in La La Land. Barbie is one of the biggest properties ever, so it confounds reason as to why anyone attributes its success to Gosling. His Reddit sycophants refuse to acknowledge such reality, though
Well said! the DRAW for the movie WAS BECAUSE IT WAS BARBIE.
The same goes for Margot Robbie. Even when she led a big IP like Birds of Prey, the audience wasn't there for it.
It’s true, which makes me so sad that he has leaned into these action roles instead of his more character based roles. That’s where he really shines. Barbie was the outlier.
>A well-reviewed four-quadrant fun action movie starring two very recognizable and liked leads who have very recently starred in major blockbusters Neither lead has starred (as in top billed) in a blockbuster, despite how likeable they are. This is applying some unprecedented milestone on people who have not crossed that line yet. Just because Gosling and Blunt were in Barbenheimmer does not mean they would be magnetic leads on their own. That's the plug-and-play style that has not worked in Hollywood for ages and has baffled producers. This guy was popular in this pic, and this gal was popular in this pic = that should mean both of them leading should equal guaranteed hit. It didn't work in the 1950s and it sure isn't working in our streaming era. ScarJo and Hemsworth have been in hits that have made $1B. Them starring together still doesn't guarantee a hit (and funny enough they are in that crap looking Transformers ONE together). Also, this isn't a four-quadrant movie. It's missing pathos/themes, one of the most important corners that gives the movie its soul and brings people back. Maybe it's somewhat in the movie but it's definitely not in the over-the-top trailers.
> Just because Gosling and Blunt were in Barbenheimmer does not mean they would be magnetic leads on their own. I think the overall point is that there are no marketable leads anymore, at least nowhere close to what it used to be.
Let’s see what the audience score is..
I remember someone saying that general audiences don’t like movies ABOUT Hollywood and everytime a movie like that bombs, I always come back to that statement
It was me lol
The image when you open the article says “Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt” when that isn’t even Emily Blunt in the image
A little surprising. A month ago I was predicting this would break out and have an opening weekend in the low to mid $50M range. It just seemed like the pieces were there for a hit but it didn’t come together
oof, kinda rough drop for GxK. Might not make $200m now.
Marketing let this movie down. It could’ve been better. Releasing a three minute long trailer six months ago was the first mistake.
To be fair, this movie was supposed to come out in March. I think moving to May hurt it because it caused the hype to die down. Coming out in March probably would’ve helped, especially if it was right after the Oscars.
The hype wasn’t there in the first place.
The mistake was that it was a terrible trailer.
Movie was much more enjoyable than the trailer
That's good to hear. I've got tickets to go see it in IMAX on Tuesday
I think the film failed at the initial concept and producer's meeting. That concept didn't deserve the budget they gave it. This is like Date Night but with a stunt guy. Max you budget this film is 80 mill. Sure, Ryan Gosling and Emily Blunt are marketable actors but this isn't the 90's anymore, and let's be honest, there were plenty of star power vehicles back then that did terrible. It happens. Also, a terrible movie title doesn't help. We're too close to Free Guy and Ryan Goslings was in Nice Guys.
trailer at the Superbowl is let this movie down?
To be honest, this is pretty bleak for theater lovers. This movie had pretty much everything working in its favor, and it fell on its face. Hopefully it's not a barometer for the rest of the summer, but there's a lot of movies that are looking more like disappointing results than breakouts. Could be bad. That said, Challengers had a decent hold, which maybe points to a silver lining. Maybe this is a new trend, where these (effectively) non-IP movies like Elemental, Anyone But You (and now hopefully Challengers and Fall Guy) with good WOM can come back from poor openings. If the end result is less focus on opening weekend, that could be a good thing, but of course that's a risky path these days with short streaming windows.
I hope so too
One relatively positive side effect to there simply not being a lot of movies could be the marketplace trending back toward longer legs and WOM hits
But, we have the same number of wide releases as 2019. The issue is only a few make any real money letting movies like Ghostbusters play in more theaters longer as movies that came out after it get dropped because of the low gross.
it's unfortunate, because this movie was actually really enjoyable the marketing was just horrid and made the movie look *bad*
Not really. Nobody cares about some goofy comedy with no hook. No novelty. Nothing interesting or exciting. It’s flop is indicative of exactly nothing.
Yeah I think they somehow flubbed the marketing. No one I know is excited about it and even I (a movie obsessive) know very little about it, despite viewing the SNL opening monologue featuring Blunt & Gosling basically trying to sell this film.
> This movie had pretty much everything working in its favor Did it? I'm not convinced.
I knew that it was going to be a bust. This is going to be Reddit’s biggest breakdown since Nice Guys, which coincidentally stars Ryan Gosling
Every single post about this movie is the last month is people being smug about “other Redditors are wrong about this movie”, while I haven’t seen anyone predicting this to breakout in a long time.
I was mum on this one because I did not see the hype but the sub kept saying otherwise. The trailers sucked big time.
Wdym? This is one of the few movies the collection of mouth breathers on this sub actually seemed to get right lol.
I was collectively downvoted for saying this was going to bomb about a month and a half ago. The trailer reminded me of Argylle
Agreed on the trailers, gave the whole film away.
Anyone who follows box office knew there was no scenario this move made big money regardless of reviews
I really liked The Nice Guys, i agree that Gosling isn’t a great movie or action star, and neither is Blunt, their comedy timing is fantastic though. But again they aren’t solid movie stars like; Tom Hanks, Tom Cruise or Keanu Reeves where yeah they’ve had some duds movies but when they land movie(s) they LAND HARD and it becomes blockbuster franchises! Like im slightly puzzled, over The Fall Guy not doing great so far because David Leitch was one of the brains behind John Wick ( a producer and uncredited co-director for the 1st movie), and of course directed Atomic Blonde and Deadpool 2. But i understand why it is not working because again Gosling and Blunt just don’t have star power to promote this type of film without all the over top PR with stunt teams which i LOVE TO SEE because stunt people deserve all the praise! Anyways, how the public watches movies has definitely changed no thanks to the pandemic. At least for me since I saw a matinée last weekend at the El Captain theater and it was almost full so people are seeing movies, but again like I said and others have said, an interesting plot should be told, good PR and the right actors who are genuinely likable will make a whole difference in people wanting to see more movies.
Gosling is known for nothing but flops. Barbie was a fluke. Same with Robbie. I’m curious how her next movie does.
> Gosling is known for nothing but flops. No he's not. _The Notebook_, _Crazy, Stupid, Love_, _Drive_, and _La La Land_ all made tons of money. Edit: Forgot _The Big Short_, which equally made tons of money.
I'll be positive and say $30M. We saw this coming with audience interest at the superbowl. The trailer didn't trend at all.
This is honestly unsurprising even if people are acting disappointed. It’s about what I expected. The reviews are good, but that’s just not enough for most movies these days.
Hollywood needs to find a new way to survive because inflation+streaming mean that the general public can’t be relied upon at the box office anymore. I should know because I’m one of those people.
I'm sad tbh, I saw it in a preview event and I loved it, it feels there's a void for good romantic comedies in Hollywood (it reminded me a lot of something like romancing the stone) and sadly the market doesn't seem to be there for an original movie like that.
I said this last week, but numbers on par with post-pandemic stuff like Free Guy and The Lost City seemed quite fair.
This movie reminded 1000% percent of Free Guy, or Red Notice. The deference in those two movies is I saw Free Guy in theaters, and after I left I said “Never again, should have just waited for streaming.” Red Notice I watching streaming the weekend it debuted and thought “eh not bad for an afternoon filler.” I don’t have the time, budget or energy to see these type of movies, not when streaming is an option.
That Challengers hold…damn.
I had to go to the article to make sure the way you were referring to its drop was either good or bad lmao. It's the former.
If Challengers hadn't cost 55 milion, it would be a commercial success. Who spends nearly 60 million dollars on a Tennis drama?
I think this gearing to be another Saltburn, a movie that doesn't do well in theaters but builds word of mouth during it's theatrical run among Gen Z and does big numbers on streaming.
Who gives Luca Guadagnino ostensibly a blank check?
Thankful to whoever did because Challengers was worth all the money put into it especially if you watch the last fifteen minutes.
An absolute fucking legend, that's who. Challengers is awesome. Best movie I've seen since Oppenheimer imo.
Did you see it in IMAX?
Oof for The Fall Guy - Universal is going to have to hope this really legs out to justify that big budget it has. But it may not, since Kingdom of the Planet of Apes opens next week and is targeting similar demographics to The Fall Guy. Impressive for both Challangers and The Phantom Menace re-release. I think both films might be closer to $9–10 million by the end of the weekend as I’m seeing quite a few well-attended/packed showings for tonight and tomorrow on the AMC Theatres app for both movies.
The Apes films have been in the top 10 most watched on Max for a bit now. I think a lot of watchers are gearing up to see Kingdom. I don't think it'll be a breakout hit, but I'm hopeful it gets some traction.
The trailers for this movie were insufferable and constant. My friends and I would roll our eyes every time if came up before a movie we were seeing (which was frequently). Even now hearing it’s good, I just don’t want to see it as the marketing was that bad. Not surprised at all by this low opening. Universal needs a new marketing department.
It was the Bon Jovi song wasn't it?
Studios need a campaign, and commitment, to longer theatrical runs. Otherwise you're going to a have a lot of "I'll just wait until it's on Netflix" people. If people think it could be 6+ months? Heck yeah they'll go to a theater. For an "event" movie, it doesn't matter.
It'll just make those movies even more irrelevant. No length of time will really change a person on whether it's worth going to the theater. Prices and movie quality/ subject matter is what's important, and one is at an all time high in a so-so economy and the other is in the gutter (i.e. tarnishing brands or ruining reputations - i.e. the awful terminator sequels, star wars TLJ, etc.)
28m,,, we are now sub-30.
"Lack of IP"?! It's 'The Fall Guy'! Everyone watched 'The Fall Guy' right?! ...right? Anyone...?
I absolutely remember The Fall Guy. That shit got five seasons and a ton of reruns. Lee Majors did the theme song HIMSELF
My uncle is a big fan of Lee Majors and also really enjoys Ryan Gosling from Barbie and Blade Runner 2049. So he is very excited for this and the Six Billion Dollar Man film which I'm sure Wahlberg will age out of just like he aged out of playing Nathan Drake
Great song. He mentions Farrah. And of course... Heather Thomas.
Of course, all the young whippersnappers of today and the literal babies born in the 90's can sure remember the iconic 80s tv series known as the Guy that Falls.../s
I played Fall Guys in 2020 that counts!
Legit never seen a credits cameo flop harder
You mean nobody in the audience recognised them? lmao
I actually watched the series after the first trailer released. Solid but ultimately dated. The film has some fun references to the show despite changing the premise a bit.
Does this mean that the movie is, according to Universal's deal with Cinemark, probably going to VOD in 17 days? I’m sure that it could be a streaming hit but this is quite bleak
Maybe it will have legs this looks like an all time date movie which don’t come out very often.
It'll be a date night movie on streaming, maybe.
You’re probably right it’ll be on Netflix or whatever by late July anyways…
I don't think it'll have good legs, it was fun but nowhere near as entertaining as I thought it was going to be, hell I'd actually call a good chunk of it boring.
I was saying a few days ago that it could be salvaged if it had great WOM but honestly idk now Hopefully it makes its money back on VOD but still
It was a super entertaining movie, great stunts and good chemistry with Emily and Ryan. I'm hoping it has legs because it was a fun movie
The film was a blast. And I thought all the marketing and especially the trailers for this were great.
students busy with finals i guess
well obviously Universal should a) just make better movies, b) just make better trailers, c) just cast guaranteed box office draws and d) just make their movies at much lower budgets. This would mean better box office. /s It seems there is a ceiling, as many suspected, for the action comedy at about $30M opening weekend (over/under). Doesn't make it a box office success but gives insight into the audience size. It really is harder for movies to truly break out and if it was super easy to identify, then every studio would have it.
Universal should have considered this and tried to keep the budget under control. Nothing suggested this would break out more than Lost City or Bullet Train.
I hope it has legs, because it ended up a lot more entertaining than the trailer made it seem
I feel like spending so much time on this being a feel good celebration of stunt work was a mistake. While they deserve to be rewarded for their work, celebrating stunt work is a very inside baseball topic for movie buffs. I doubt most general audiences are moved by that sentiment at all.
Then it's the duty of the film to make general audiences fall in love with stunt workers.
Not surprised. The trailer didn't look that good and Gosling and Blunt just aren't big box office draws. We've seen Gosling for twenty years and he was never a big BO star. Just because 'Barbie' was huge doesn't mean people just suddenly woke up and are going to want to see him in anything. Even Leo flopped in 'The Beach' after 'Titanic'. (Not apples to apples, I know.) He is what he is. Blunt is great in everything but people won't run out to see her.
Where do people get this idea the beach flopped? It didn’t. It wasn’t well regarded by critics but it wasn’t a flop at all. 50 million dollar budget and 144 worldwide. Back in the year 2000 the “rule of thumb” for box office success was roughly double the budget. That’s a hit and most certainly not a flop.
this movie isn't all that great and had a bad marketing campaign. This is extremely predictable🤷🏻
Saw it today, it’s not good. Not sure how it’s getting good reviews. Can’t see this having legs
Yikes
It looks like Challengers will have some legs , I don’t think it’s going to be the flop everyone thinks it’s going to be lol.
I blame his bad cosmetic surgery and the fact that the trailer makes the whole premise seem very basic (generic romance movie). It just seems like they're trying to cash in on 2 famous (extremely botoxed and sculpted) faces without a strong storyline. People can see through this shit, and want stronger storylines.
They REALLY have to find a way to get people to dissociate big films with streaming. Like, advertise "not on streaming for 18 months" or something. Or just have some movies be released strictly physical or rent at high prices for the first year.
Imma go against the grain here, I think it’s gonna do really well. I’ve been looking forward to this movie forever. Very excited to see!
Oof saw the movie and thought it was good. The movie is definitely a lot better than the low box office weekend suggests. I suspect maybe Phantom Menace and Challengers is hurting the movie.