View Poll Results: Which will be the top 5 movie at the boxoffice this winter?

Voters
39. You may not vote on this poll
  • Ender's Game

    20 51.28%
  • Thor: The Dark World

    36 92.31%
  • Hunger Games: Catching Fire

    38 97.44%
  • Frozen

    26 66.67%
  • Oldboy

    0 0%
  • The Hobbit 2

    38 97.44%
  • Saving Mr. Banks

    0 0%
  • Anchorman 2

    25 64.10%
  • Monuments Men

    0 0%
  • Walking With Dinosaurs

    1 2.56%
  • 47 Ronin

    2 5.13%
  • Jack Ryan

    5 12.82%
  • Secret Life of Walter Mitty

    1 2.56%
  • American Hustle

    1 2.56%
  • Other (list in post)

    2 5.13%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 138
  1. #61
    Only one person did not have Catching Fire in the Top 5. That dummy is me.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Frozen took the top spot this weekend and it along with Hunger Games and Thor are locks at this point.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    The new Coen film is in limited release on the 6th and somewhat wider on the 20th.

    Because I live in a mid-market area, and only two theaters (Frontenac, Tivoli) pick up the "art films" (whatever that means), I'm kind of pessimistic that I'll get to see it because I have to go see family in rural GA and exurban NC over Christmas. Quality doesn't matter, only box office take, in this system.

    Come back here and then I go to the LSA convention over the first weekend in January. By the time I get back here to see the new Coen film around the 9th of January, they're probably only showing something that people care about making a number on its box office. They have a clear pattern of yanking good stuff after two, three weeks here. And we're not St George UT. There are 3M people here.

    I guess I'll get the Coens thru DVD in June. By that time, people will be calculating the box office take of something with exploding monsters.

    So, basically, if you're a middle-class viewer, and you have any taste, you're done for outside of NYC and LA. This is clearly a failing industry, especially where artistic truth is involved. If I can't even be served as a consumer, what hope is there for art?

    I guess I should live in NYC, LA, or Chicago, and never visit my family.

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by throatybeard View Post
    So, basically, if you're a middle-class viewer, and you have any taste, you're done for outside of NYC and LA. This is clearly a failing industry, especially where artistic truth is involved. If I can't even be served as a consumer, what hope is there for art?

    I guess I should live in NYC, LA, or Chicago, and never visit my family.
    While you are correct that there are some films without wide release that will be difficult for you to find, why do you assume that every film that makes it to the theaters near you will be low-quality and devoid of art? I agree that Summer tends to be populated by "exploding monster" films but this is the time of year where there is often plenty of quality/artistic films found in theaters everywhere.

    You mentioned the Frontenac theater. I just checked and it is showing The Book Thief, Philomena, Dallas Buyers Club, 12 Years a Slave, and Nebraska. Dude, those are some pretty high-quality films! You won't find a single exploding monster in the mix!

    Perhaps you as so busy assuming the worst that you have not bothered to check to see if your assumptions are true. Try to be a little less of a curmudgeon. I bet your life will be happier as a result.

    -Jason "I bet Inside Llewyn Davis comes to theaters near you as soon as it goes wide on Dec 20. If you wait until it is out on DVD, that is on you, not on the release pattern for that film" Evans
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Bern, NC unless it's a home football game then I'm grilling on Devil's Alley
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    Try to be a little less of a curmudgeon. I bet your life will be happier as a result.
    Or at least have one...same result. More happiness...

    Founders-Old-Curmudgeon.jpg
    Q "Why do you like Duke, you didn't even go there." A "Because my art school didn't have a basketball team."

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    You're not hearing me, Jason.

    I have to leave town on the 20th, spend two weeks in places that are less likely to have the film than here, and then immediately go to a conference when I get back. So effectively, for three weeks I cannot see the film, until I get back here. And my experience of the two theaters here that are likely to have the film here is that, often, they will only show such a film for about two weeks.

    Since Before Midnight is my go-to example this year, it opened at the Tivoli on June 14 and aired through the end of the month, so, sixteen days. It mysteriously re-appeared in August for another six. Fortunately, I was in town, and I managed to see it thrice, first with a female friend, then with my wife, then alone. I hope the popcorn guy didn't fashion a narrative out of that in his head.

    My wife has granted me shore leave to go to the bowl game, so what I think I'm going to have to do is figure out where the Coen movie is airing in Atlanta and see it right before the football game.

    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    You mentioned the Frontenac theater. I just checked and it is showing The Book Thief, Philomena, Dallas Buyers Club, 12 Years a Slave, and Nebraska. Dude, those are some pretty high-quality films! You won't find a single exploding monster in the mix!
    Here's the problem with that, and why I prefer the Tivoli. Allow me to speak briefly about local geography.

    Plaza Frontenac is a small mall that is anchored by the only Nieman Marcus and the only Saks in Missouri. It has some other upscale chain stores that are the only one of themselves in this metro area. It is located in Frontenac, which is adjacent to Ladue--these are the two wealthiest, whitest inner ring suburbs with a significant population. (There are some that are much smaller, like with a few hundred people in them--Saint Louis County is a hodgepodge of ninety-some odd municipalities--a bureaucratic grease fire). So there are some destination stores there, and a small movie theater.

    Frontenac is best known locally for having an abysmal reputation for treatment of Black and Latin customers. Arrests with no PC, frisking people for no reason, following people around in stores, asking people what their business is in the mall. And not just young people. Once, a Full Professor in the African American studies department at WashU. Chingy and Nelly, African American gentleman of some means and repute, both reference Frontenac, ironically, in their songs. Nationally, you're amused at Chingy's clever rhyme of "Frontenac" and the woman's "front and back;" locally, it's an eye-wink to hundreds of thousands of residents who know they aren't welcome at that mall. (Chingy's not exactly Talib Kweli when it comes to socially conscious rap, but he's capable of some signifyin here and there),

    I am not comfortable with--I cannot--spend money at Frontenac. I won't. I pay the earnings tax in the City, property tax in the City, the vehicles are titled in the City, and as much as I can, I spend my sales tax in the City, or in University City. If the choice is see it at Frontenac, or wait four months for a DVD, I choose patience.

    So we have the Tivoli. Which is on Delmar just into U City. The Durham analogy would be Ninth Street, insofar as that section of Delmar is a collegey strip. In the Central Corridor, in what passes for integration in Saint Louis. Plus, I can walk there from my house if it's not hot outside.

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  7. #67
    Our family saw Frozen today for the 2nd time (well, it was my first time seeing it. My wife and daughter went with my MiL the first time).

    If I'm reading them correctly, it looks like Frozen is predicted to finish this weekend at 166 million. I'm not surprised it's doing well, as I thought it was one of the best kids' movies I've seen in years. I liked it way better than "Brave". In fact, I would go so far as to put it maybe top 3 in modern Disney movies (depending on where you draw the line at "modern"). That's excluding pre-merger Pixar fare.

    I dunno, I'd have to think about that some more, but it was really, really good. Great graphics, great script, great plot, you name it.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Charlotte, North Carolina
    Quote Originally Posted by throatybeard View Post
    Quality doesn't matter, only box office take, in this system.

    So, basically, if you're a middle-class viewer, and you have any taste, you're done for outside of NYC and LA. This is clearly a failing industry, especially where artistic truth is involved. If I can't even be served as a consumer, what hope is there for art?.
    There are some simple realities in play here: theater owners have to occupy their limited screen time with the product that is going to sell tickets. Its how they stay in business. Bigger cities, with more screens, will have theaters that don't try to compete in a crowded "exploding monster" market, but instead will aim for the art crowd. There are enough people in the area to sell enough tickets on those screens to make it financially viable for the theater owner to target that audience. If you live in an area that doesn't have enough of a market to allow screen time to art fare, you're going to get the more generic crowd fare.

    But that doesn't make it a failing industry. It just makes it an industry that follows market forces. Which is a good thing for millions of high school kids looking to earn a little income working at those theaters.

    So a guy like Throaty, who loves artistic movies but lives in an area with limited art fare, is kind of screwed. Fortunately, the free market (and the technological development the free market has driven) has developed options for him. Netflix and the like don't get you what you want on the big screen, but they at least allow you to see it. Remember back in the day before there were even VCRs? You had only two options - movie on the screen in the theater, or wait for the same movie to be broadcast a year or two later on network television…because cable didn't exist back then either. So how did one see art fare outside of New York or LA? There really was no option at all.

    And this is point: we can grumble about market forces (the modern movie industry in this case) and the evils of the profit driven system all we like, but the reality is that we are living in a world with more options than we've ever had, easier access to what we, as consumers want, and more choices than ever…and a big reason for that is that ugly, dirty word: profit. Sure, it means that what's shown on your local screen is going to be dictated by the financial incentive to keep the theater owner's business in the black. But it also means that options exist for getting the fare you want.

    Back slightly more on point, and Throaty and Jason are probably well equipped to answer this: are there more "art" films made today than there were before 1980s VHS/cable/internet boom, or less? What have those technology developments done for/to the art film industry?

    Even more on point: Nice to see that The Hobbit Part 2 is being punished, a little, for the bloat and cashing-in feel of The Hobbit Part 1, at the box office. I'm a huge Tolkien fan and a fan of PJ's LOTR movie trilogy, and was willing to accept (and even a little excited about) mining the appendices to flesh The Hobbit out to a 3 part series. But it still was a lot much to try to turn the events of that part of the Tolkien history to 9+ hours of movie. I have yet to see Desolation of Smaug, and, although the reviews indicate it's better than was Unexpected Journey, PJ deserves some punishment for making Unexpected Journey as self-indulgent as it was.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Fayetteville, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by davekay1971 View Post
    Nice to see that The Hobbit Part 2 is being punished, a little, for the bloat and cashing-in feel of The Hobbit Part 1, at the box office. I'm a huge Tolkien fan and a fan of PJ's LOTR movie trilogy, and was willing to accept (and even a little excited about) mining the appendices to flesh The Hobbit out to a 3 part series. But it still was a lot much to try to turn the events of that part of the Tolkien history to 9+ hours of movie. I have yet to see Desolation of Smaug, and, although the reviews indicate it's better than was Unexpected Journey, PJ deserves some punishment for making Unexpected Journey as self-indulgent as it was.
    LOL, not sure what you're seeing, but the theater where I took the family to see The Hobbit 2 were packed and those were prior to noon. I'm sure when the dust settles the folks who bankrolled this movie will be having the last laugh. This movie is better than the first. Nice to see Evangeline Lilly again, as well as the actor from the BBC version of Being Human.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Charlotte, North Carolina
    Quote Originally Posted by ncexnyc View Post
    LOL, not sure what you're seeing, but the theater where I took the family to see The Hobbit 2 were packed and those were prior to noon. I'm sure when the dust settles the folks who bankrolled this movie will be having the last laugh. This movie is better than the first. Nice to see Evangeline Lilly again, as well as the actor from the BBC version of Being Human.
    The movie will do quite well. According to the numbers it did a little north of $73M for the first weekend, which is good but off about 10 percent compared to part 1. Overseas, it's doing better than part 1. With the quality being higher (a general consensus among critics), it will have good enough legs to maybe match part 1 despite a softer opening, and part 3 will get some benefit from part 2 being better quality.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    Quote Originally Posted by davekay1971 View Post
    There are some simple realities in play here: theater owners have to occupy their limited screen time with the product that is going to sell tickets. Its how they stay in business. Bigger cities, with more screens, will have theaters that don't try to compete in a crowded "exploding monster" market, but instead will aim for the art crowd. There are enough people in the area to sell enough tickets on those screens to make it financially viable for the theater owner to target that audience. If you live in an area that doesn't have enough of a market to allow screen time to art fare, you're going to get the more generic crowd fare.

    But that doesn't make it a failing industry. It just makes it an industry that follows market forces. Which is a good thing for millions of high school kids looking to earn a little income working at those theaters.

    So a guy like Throaty, who loves artistic movies but lives in an area with limited art fare, is kind of screwed. Fortunately, the free market (and the technological development the free market has driven) has developed options for him. Netflix and the like don't get you what you want on the big screen, but they at least allow you to see it. Remember back in the day before there were even VCRs? You had only two options - movie on the screen in the theater, or wait for the same movie to be broadcast a year or two later on network television…because cable didn't exist back then either. So how did one see art fare outside of New York or LA? There really was no option at all.

    And this is point: we can grumble about market forces (the modern movie industry in this case) and the evils of the profit driven system all we like, but the reality is that we are living in a world with more options than we've ever had, easier access to what we, as consumers want, and more choices than ever…and a big reason for that is that ugly, dirty word: profit. Sure, it means that what's shown on your local screen is going to be dictated by the financial incentive to keep the theater owner's business in the black. But it also means that options exist for getting the fare you want.

    Back slightly more on point, and Throaty and Jason are probably well equipped to answer this: are there more "art" films made today than there were before 1980s VHS/cable/internet boom, or less? What have those technology developments done for/to the art film industry?
    Thoughtful post, DK71. Thank you.

    Netflix was a revelation. I was living in Starkville freaking Mississippi in 2006 when my wife signed up for it. This unchained us from Blockbuster and the other video store. There was no streaming at the time, though I think they added that a year or two after? It radically opened the catalog. When I was a child in rural GA, Blockbuster had a single shelf for foreign films, and those basically never changed. Now, I'm glad that Manon des Sources was one of the twenty foreign films I was ever allowed to see on VHS, but the availability was low.

    Further, everyone these days is trashing Netflix's DVD service. I know people who make four times as much money as I do who have loudly patted themselves on the back for getting rid of the DVD service and only keeping streaming, as if they were scoring some blow against Netflix. But the DVD service is great! You're right. Even in the 1990s, you saw it in the theater, or you waited a year or two for, maybe just maybe, a $90 VHS tape to come out. Now, if something is only at the Frontenac, I can act ethically (see earlier post), boycott the Frontenac, and still see the dang thing just four months later. That movie with Olivia Wilde, Drinking Buddies--it wasn't great or anything, but danged if I'm going to miss Olivia Wilde on a screen. It never came here AFAIK. I saw it the night it came out on DVD, because Netflix.

    That said, I lament the death of the local video stores. You had relationships with the people who worked there, and they could suggest things once they knew your taste...if they had any catalog.

    My point back upthread was this. I don't live in Cody, or Williston, or Shubuta MS. It's hard to see what I want to see. I live in about the 16th most populous metro in the country (approx 3M). If the good films can't make money here, what does that say about this country?

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Charlotte, North Carolina
    Quote Originally Posted by throatybeard View Post
    Thoughtful post, DK71. Thank you.

    My point back upthread was this. I don't live in Cody, or Williston, or Shubuta MS. It's hard to see what I want to see. I live in about the 16th most populous metro in the country (approx 3M). If the good films can't make money here, what does that say about this country?
    You're welcome, and thank you!

    It says that a huge percentage of the population that goes to movie theaters likes exploding monsters.

    One reason that box office draws are what they are is that kids and young adults (pre-kid types) are your most frequent movie-goers. I used to see movies in the theater all the time. Then kids happened and, well, now it's pretty rare...except when when we take our kids. So my box office dollars, since I had kids, are probably 75% kid-fare, 25% we-got-a-babysitter-woo-hoo fare. Every year a good half dozen movies come and go off the big screen that I'd like to see in theater, but time is limited and we decide to use our babysitting time for a romantic dinner and drinks instead of the theater. When I do get to theaters, the audience is always vast-majority teens and tweens. And they like exploding monsters. Oh, and bad horror.

    The box office dominance of that demographic crowds out more artistic fare (my point above about the limited commodity of screen space), creates demand for more exploding monsters and masked psychopaths (maximizing revenue per screen), and probably feeds on itself in that many adults simply don't feel like getting into a crowd of hormonally overcharged nitwits on their Friday night out.

    The other relevant factor, which does impact what gets on American screens, is the growing power of international taste. The international box office potential of movies is increasingly important in determining the wide releases in America, and the biggest international box office numbers go to...exploding monster sequels!

    The quality films are being made, as you know, so they must have some form of revenue, and I think the rapidly developing technology to improve the home video experience will probably increase revenue streams for artistic choices. When everyone can put on a wireless headset which feeds quality stereo directly into the ears and gives a full visual-field viewing experience, what you'll see die out is not artistic fare...it'll be the movie theaters themselves. I wouldn't be surprised if, within 30 years, you see fewer movie theaters, and those will be patronized by people who want the novelty of the in-theater experience (kind of like the rare drive-in you find these days).

  13. #73
    So, anyone seen American Hustle? Seems to be getting great feedback.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by cato View Post
    So, anyone seen American Hustle? Seems to be getting great feedback.
    I saw a screening last night. Very funny but also quite captivating. It was a bit too long and seemed to meander at times, but is a really good time at the movies.

    I've been swamped at work lately or I would post a longer review. I am not sure it is quite Best Picture material, but then again I thought Silver Linings Playbook was just good (not great) when I saw that a year ago. This is certainly better than SLP.

    Last note-- this may be the best collective acting job I have seen on screen this year. Everyone is fabulous in this flick... fabulous! Christian Bale utterly transforms himself for this role. The notion that the combover, tub-o-goo con man in this pic is the same guy who played Batman seems almost impossible. Also Amy Adams just exudes sexy throughout this movie. I mean, WOW! She wears 70s-style revealing blouses that make me long to have been a part of the disco era. She looks fabulous and probably deserves a Best Actress nomination for playing the character with a ton of sex appeal but also a ton of brains. Jennifer Lawrence's character has a small role and I didn't really care too much for her. Bradley Cooper is great too. David O Russell certainly gets the most out of his actors!!

    -Jason "seeing Wolf of Wall Street tomorrow night... i have high hopes" Evans
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    Quote Originally Posted by davekay1971 View Post
    It says that a huge percentage of the population that goes to movie theaters likes exploding monsters.
    True. Alas.

    At least I've established a catch-phrase.

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC area
    Quote Originally Posted by throatybeard View Post
    True. Alas.

    At least I've established a catch-phrase.
    The linguist in you must relish that! Let's hope it sticks. Jason Evans, you must use it in your reviews!

    -jk

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Skinker-DeBaliviere, Saint Louis
    Quote Originally Posted by -jk View Post
    The linguist in you must relish that! Let's hope it sticks. Jason Evans, you must use it in your reviews!

    -jk
    Well the problem with that is that exploding monsters don't box office as well as exploding zombies and exploding vampires do.

    I am desperately trying to temper my expectations for Anchorman II. I'll settle for even 82% as funny as the original.

    A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
    ---Roger Ebert


    Some questions cannot be answered
    Who’s gonna bury who
    We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
    ---Over the Rhine

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Charlotte, North Carolina
    So…now that Anchorman 2 is opening to a $30 million weekend and a B cinemascore, what's going to be our number 5 movie of the winter???

    This was always a contest to correctly pick number 5. Hobbit 2, Catching Fire 2, Frozen, and Thor 2 were always pretty much locks. But a fifth movie sure hasn't come up to join them yet.

    Current numbers (per boxofficemojo.com), rounding to nearest million

    Hunger Games: Catching Fire: $365M
    Thor: The Dark World: $200M
    Frozen: $177M
    Hobbit: Desolation of Smaug: $105M
    The Best Man Holiday: $69M

    So, right now Anchorman 2's mark to beat is $69M. Is that a lock? Is there anything else out there likely to beat that? My speculation is that American Hustle will have the legs to do it.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by davekay1971 View Post
    My speculation is that American Hustle will have the legs to do it.
    From your fingertips to God's eyeballs.

  20. #80
    Well, we now know 47 Ronin won't make the cut.

Similar Threads

  1. The Best and Worst films of 2012
    By Olympic Fan in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-30-2012, 06:44 PM
  2. Top Films
    By Udaman in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-09-2012, 08:17 PM
  3. PG-13 horror films
    By Lord Ash in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 08-31-2010, 01:28 PM
  4. A snowy winter
    By billybreen in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 70
    Last Post: 02-02-2009, 10:50 AM
  5. Classic Films
    By Deslok in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 05-31-2008, 03:50 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •