The Hobbit: AUJ box office

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I'm not really a big box office person, but I suppose that we should have a thread about that. Early reports of the midnight screening appear to be positive:

http://www.boxoffice.com/news/2012-12-1 ... t-midnight

[Elentári]

From Box Office Mojo

Forecast: 'The Hobbit' Expected to Set December Opening Record

Midnight Update: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey opened to an incredible $13 million from 3,100 midnight locations. That may not seem like much when compared to record-holder Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 ($43.5 million) or this Summer's The Dark Knight Rises ($27 million), but for a December release that's a massive figure. In fact, it's three times as much as Avatar made at midnight ($3.537 million), and also way up on I Am Legend's $1.7 million. I Am Legend is the current December opening weekend record-holder with $77.2 million, which The Hobbit is now guaranteed to pass by the end of the weekend.

[Elentári]

Box Office Mojo Friday Report: 'The Hobbit' Steals $37.5 Million

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey drew large crowds on Friday and set a new December opening day record with an estimated 37.5 million from 4,045 locations.

The previous December record-holder was The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, which debuted to $34.5 million on a Wednesday in 2003. The Hobbit also opened noticeably higher than The Two Towers ($26.2 million), and grossed twice as much as The Fellowship of the Ring ($18.2 million). With 3D/IMAX premiums and a decade of inflation, though, The Hobbit's initial attendance was substantially lower than that of Return of the King and about on par with The Two Towers.

Because its $13 million midnight opening is over three times higher than any previous December release, it's likely that The Hobbit is more frontloaded than other December hits like I Am Legend and Avatar. The range now appears to be $85 million on the low end and $105 million on the high end, which means no matter what it will break the December opening weekend record (I Am Legend's $77.2 million).

While critics were lukewarm on The Hobbit (65 percent on Rotten Tomatoes), audiences awarded it a strong "A" CinemaScore. This suggests that The Hobbit is in for a long, very healthy run at the box office through the remainder of the Holiday season.

[Stranger Wings]

Box Office Mojo Friday Report: 'The Hobbit' Steals $37.5 Million

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey drew large crowds on Friday and set a new December opening day record with an estimated 37.5 million from 4,045 locations.

The previous December record-holder was The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, which debuted to $34.5 million on a Wednesday in 2003. The Hobbit also opened noticeably higher than The Two Towers ($26.2 million), and grossed twice as much as The Fellowship of the Ring ($18.2 million). With 3D/IMAX premiums and a decade of inflation, though, The Hobbit's initial attendance was substantially lower than that of Return of the King and about on par with The Two Towers.

Because its $13 million midnight opening is over three times higher than any previous December release, it's likely that The Hobbit is more frontloaded than other December hits like I Am Legend and Avatar. The range now appears to be $85 million on the low end and $105 million on the high end, which means no matter what it will break the December opening weekend record (I Am Legend's $77.2 million).

While critics were lukewarm on The Hobbit (65 percent on Rotten Tomatoes), audiences awarded it a strong "A" CinemaScore. This suggests that The Hobbit is in for a long, very healthy run at the box office through the remainder of the Holiday season.

IMO, that's a shame. I actually now want the films to do poorly at the box office, as I think that would increase the chances of there being a remake in the not-too-distant future. I just hate the fact that PJ has effectively monopolized film interpretations of Tolkien during my lifetime.

I don't like to say that, as I find him to be a wonderful man (and love the creativity and energy of his crew), but I so despise his form of storytelling that I want to see another director take a hack at TH and LOTR before I croak.

[Pearly Di]

SA - Why do you think that PJ's Hobbit films flopping at the box office would mean that any other film director would want to touch the project with a bargepole?

I give you The Golden Compass. Not a bad film, actually, although it softened the edginess of Pullman's story, but a flop. So there won't be any more attempts.

The point about Jane Eyre and Great Expectations and other beloved stories is that remakes are SUCCESSFUL.

[Stranger Wings]

SA - Why do you think that PJ's Hobbit films flopping at the box office would mean that any other film director would want to touch the project with a bargepole?

I give you The Golden Compass. Not a bad film, actually, although it softened the edginess of Pullman's story, but a flop. So there won't be any more attempts.

The point about Jane Eyre and Great Expectations and other beloved stories is that remakes are SUCCESSFUL.

Perhaps I am wrong, but I think TH doing poorly might increase the desire, among audiences, to see it done right. Which might lead a studio to support a new director to do it right. But that is a huge and pretty baseless assumption, I admit...

Perhaps I just want it to be recognized, by a broad audience, that PJ is not a great film-maker, and that his version of Middle Earth, and Tolkien's stories, is neither definitive nor close to the beauty and magic of the source material.

If that meme could get out there, perhaps the film-making, film-going, and film-financing communities will want to try their hand at LOTR and TH in the future...

But you are probably more right than I am. If TH succeeds, it is probably more likely to be remade. But I certainly wouldn't want future remakes to imitate PJ's sensibility and style, and that's partly what I am afraid of. I want any future attempts to be fresh and original. But if PJ's versions are deemed highly successful, it is possible that future attempts will do a lot of imitation...

[Primula Baggins]

I think a well-made television serial that hewed closely to the book could be successful both artistically and in terms of ratings . . . in maybe about ten years. By then, too, the technology of movies and TV should have converged, so where spectacle was required, it could be provided. But it would not all have to be spectacle or all in constant motion, which would be a relief. More moments like the dwarves' song in Bag End, fewer long stretches of jittery kinetic action whose only story purpose is to get the characters from A to B.

Mainly I would like the closer-in, character-based focus of a serial to be applied to Tolkien someday. I think the net experience might be much more like reading the book.

I would be tempted to wish for PJ to consult on casting, though. That's one area where he's made few mistakes and many brilliant strokes, IMO.

[Inanna]

IAWP.

[Stranger Wings]

I think a well-made television serial that hewed closely to the book could be successful both artistically and in terms of ratings . . . in maybe about ten years. By then, too, the technology of movies and TV should have converged, so where spectacle was required, it could be provided. But it would not all have to be spectacle or all in constant motion, which would be a relief. More moments like the dwarves' song in Bag End, fewer long stretches of jittery kinetic action whose only story purpose is to get the characters from A to B.

Mainly I would like the closer-in, character-based focus of a serial to be applied to Tolkien someday. I think the net experience might be much more like reading the book.

I would be tempted to wish for PJ to consult on casting, though. That's one area where he's made few mistakes and many brilliant strokes, IMO.

Amen to this. A well-made TV series of the Hobbit and LOTR could be very nice. I also think that PJ has done a decent job with casting, though I disagree with his choices for some of the main roles. I feel that his supporting cast is almost flawless. Bean, Urban, Hill, Stott, McKellen, Persbrandt, etc. All perfect

[axordil]

Overseas and North American BO is around 300 million USD after the weekend.

[SirDennis]

According to someone over at Deltorofilms.com the take so far is $223 million worldwide. Not sure of their source.

[axordil]

223M outside NA, 85-87M NA. OR it could be 223M world wide. English is not the first language of most entertainment journalists.

[sauronsfinger]

[Note: I combined this with the existing box office thread - VtF]

So far, THE HOBBIT has taken in over $500 million worldwide. While that seems to be a large number, Box Office Mojo is predicting that both its domestic and international grosses will be less than the three LOTR films. They also predict that the latest Middle-earth film will fall short of the magic one billion dollar mark as well.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/news/?id=3591&p=.htm

Even though it did hold on to the top spot, though, The Hobbit's performance was underwhelming. The Peter Jackson-directed Lord of the Rings prequel plummeted 57 percent to an estimated $36.7 million for a new total of $149.9 million. That 10-day gross is noticeably lower than that of The Return of the King ($190.8 million) and The Two Towers ($168.1 million), which is disappointing when considering ticket price inflation and 3D/IMAX premiums.

That steep 57 percent drop also suggests The Hobbit is going to be more front-loaded than most movies at this time of year. I Am Legend had an identical decline on the same Dec. 21-23 weekend in 2007, and if The Hobbit continues to perform similarly it will wind up with just $280 million at the domestic box office (lower than any of the Lord of the Rings movies).

Do people here have any explanations for the lower numbers?

Keeping in mind that SMAUG is not due for another eleven months and the final installment even later than that, is there anything Jackson should do to look to helping get those revenue figures more in line with the LOTR films?

Films after all are a business. The purpose of them is to make a profit for the studio which puts out the investment to make the film. While it is too late to do anything to change the fortunes of the first film, perhaps things can be done for a better bottom line on parts 2 and 3.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I think there are a lot of reasons for the lower numbers. The inherent nature of the source material. The long stream of bad publicity. A poor marketing effort. The controversy over the HFR. The lesser reviews. But in my opinion the biggest reason can be summed in four words:

"Been there, done that."

Edited to add: and the films are still going to make a lot of money, even if they don't reach the $3 billion threshold that some had been predicting.

[axordil]

Could be worse. Terry Gilliam could be directing. There would have been a volcanic eruption on the North Island.

[sauronsfinger]

I think there are a lot of reasons for the lower numbers. The inherent nature of the source material. The long stream of bad publicity. A poor marketing effort. The controversy over the HFR. The lesser reviews. But in my opinion the biggest reason can be summed in four words:

"Been there, done that."

Edited to add: and the films are still going to make a lot of money, even if they don't reach the $3 billion threshold that some had been predicting.

What bad publicity are you referring to? The animal deaths? Something else?

The marketing on this film seems better and wider than the FOTR. there seems to be excellent promo ads on TV and there are probably more tie-ins with other products than there was at this time with FOTR. We forget that it was not until TTT that lots of other companies got on board with LOTR.

While the reviews have not been as good as LOTR, that demands we look at the reviews and find out what went wrong with the film itself rather than blame it on a review which is simply reporting on the film.

For me, the film never made up its mind if it wanted to be a kids films or an adult film. And that has hurt it in terms of reviews, in terms of word of mouth, in terms of repeat viewings, and even in terms of acceptance within the industry. It is neither fish nor fowl and please few who want it to be.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

What bad publicity are you referring to? The animal deaths? Something else?

The animal deaths and the labor dispute are probably the biggest ones. But the whole on again/off again nature of the production, the lawsuits that preceded it (Jackson v. New Line, Tolkien Estate v. New Line, even the new one between the Estate and WB/Saul Zaentz), the change in directors, all contributed to bad publicity.

The marketing on this film seems better and wider than the FOTR. there seems to be excellent promo ads on TV and there are probably more tie-ins with other products than there was at this time with FOTR. We forget that it was not until TTT that lots of other companies got on board with LOTR.

The TV ads were ok, but there was only one trailer, other than the original teaser (which was very good), and it was horrible. I was embarrassed when I saw it in the theater. Overall, I thought WB marketing was very poor.

While the reviews have not been as good as LOTR, that demands we look at the reviews and find out what went wrong with the film itself rather than blame it on a review which is simply reporting on the film.

For me, the film never made up its mind if it wanted to be a kids films or an adult film. And that has hurt it in terms of reviews, in terms of word of mouth, in terms of repeat viewings, and even in terms of acceptance within the industry. It is neither fish nor fowl and please few who want it to be.

While I largely agree with this, I personally am okay with the film straddling the line between more whimsical and more epic. It was just in the execution of that that I had problems with it. However, that's a different issue. In terms of your question about why the box office is somewhat underperforming, I agree that is a significant factor.

[yovargas]

I think if reviews and word of mouth had been as strong for AUJ as they were for LOTR, it would've easily matched LOTR's numbers.

[sauronsfinger]

Pre film publicity is a funny thing. I remember some rather scathing articles about the filming problems associated with TITANIC when James Cameron was filming it. ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY ran a few stories about production problems and emphasized the runaway budget and compared it to HEAVENS GATE.

When released, the film did pretty well and nobody cared about all that negative pre-release publicity.

I realize that we in the JRRT community cared a bit about the whole lawsuit controversy but I have to wonder if it every really took hold with the general public who probably saw it as just a bunch of people who already had a bunch of money fighting for even more money.

But again, I think all is forgiven when the film comes out and it captures the heart and imagination of the public. For lots of reasons already discussed, this film just has not done that.

One side note: and perhaps Alatar can chime in on this as well.... the fever pitch of collectors in acquiring items associated with the film has just not been there with this film. Not to mention there simply is a whole lot less of it - as if producers expected this.

I wonder if that was a canary in the mine?

[JewelSong]

I was only dimly aware of any controversy about the film...basically I ignored it as infighting and bickering amongst people whose motives I couldn't even begin to understand. Nor did I care...I figured the movie would get made eventually and when it came out, I would go see it.