Monday Morning Quarterback Part I
By BOP Staff
May 9, 2011
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Kim Hollis: Thor, Marvel's latest superhero adaptation, opened to $65.7 million. What do you think of this result?
David Mumpower: In terms of opening weekend performance, the only Marvel properties that had a better debut for their first films were Spider-Man and Iron Man. Yes, if we adjust for inflation, the situation is less finite, but with box office down across the board, this still qualifies as a triumphant debut. If we judge this in a vacuum, it doesn't look like a mid-$60s opener on paper. Comic book licenses such as Fantastic Four and The Hulk are better established as well as easier concepts to market to mainstream consumers. Thor is on the arcane side since most moviegoers are not interested in the inner workings of Norse mythology. The fact that it has surpassed more marketable predecessors is a great sign for Marvel as they build toward The Avengers.
Josh Spiegel: This is definitely a very solid result. Unlike pretty much all of the other major superheroes in The Avengers, Thor doesn't have the advantage of starpower. Even though Robert Downey, Jr. wasn't a huge star before Iron Man, he was a very well-known figure from Hollywood. The Hulk may not be played by a box-office titan (sorry, Mark Ruffalo), but the character is recognizable enough. As David points out, Thor's not as familiar to audiences; even with 3D prices, the number should make the folks at Marvel very happy.
Joshua Pasch: I couldn't agree more with Josh and David. The key thing here is how vast the difference in "star power" there is between the character Thor and other major characters from Marvel like Spiderman, Iron Man, Hulk, and even the Fantastic 4. I consider myself a "fanboy" in the sense that I am a huge fan of comic book lore and movies without being an avid comic book reader. I rarely have to go "Wikipedia-ing" a whole lot to brush up when a comic book movie gets announced, but in the cases of Thor and Green Lantern I knew only a basic descriptions such as "Thor is a Norse G-d with a hammer" and "Green Lantern has powers granted from a ring." When I have to do research on a comic book character, then that's when I know that the public is probably as ill-informed (if not more so) than I am.
When I am left unsure of who Thor is - well that's when I know they studio has a major hurdle to overcome. To end opening weekend with a take of $66 million for America is fine indeed. It should have a run into the $160+ million area, and with an already stellar foreign take, Thor's profile will be well bolstered heading into next summer's Avengers.
Bruce Hall: Thor enjoyed a better opening weekend than The Incredible Hulk, which in my opinion was a better film. And the Hulk is much more well known to casual audiences than Thor. This result is also somewhat less than Wolverine's 80-whatever-it-was-million, but Wolverine was pretty awful. For Thor to land square in between is the best anyone could have hoped for. Good word-of-mouth and solid reviews helped bring in more cash this weekend than a lot of people would have guessed back when this film was first announced.
Matthew Huntley: I'm impressed by this result mainly because the trailers for Thor made it seem so sub-standard, or maybe standard at best. Clearly, the critical and audience reception has proven otherwise. Marvel will be happy for sure because the window for Thor, not only for future sequels but also the excitement for his participation in The Avengers, has been opened and people are generally pleased. I think word-of-mouth will be strong with this one, and although it has direct competition with Priest next weekend, I think it will be able to stay on top for one more weekend before Pirates 4 hits. I agree that $160 million + will be enough to consider this a hit, and I, for one, am glad, because it was actually a good movie! I guess that's why you can never judge a movie by its trailer.
Reagen Sulewski: I think there's a few different ways to look at this. As a film that's supposed to be opening up the summer movie season (be quiet, Vin Diesel), this is a poor result. As a film that's basically a lead-in for The Avengers, it's a not bad result. But as a film about a comic book hero named Thor, that 90% of the general public probably wasn't even aware had a long-running comic book about him, and whose catch phrase is "I say thee nay!", this is a really good result. Paramount has spun, if not gold, at least silver out of straw here.
Edwin Davies: As everyone else has said, this result means different things depending on what you want to take away from it. As a film that is meant to kick-start the summer, or in comparison to some of the other Marvel properties, it's not astonishing, but when you consider the relative obscurity of the character and how ridiculous he might seem to people new to the property - and we're talking in relation to a guy who flies around in a robot suit and another guy who changes color when someone cuts in front of him, so the level of ridiculousness if pretty high already - then it's a pretty stellar result. As much as I enjoyed the film, I can't see Thor having anywhere near the legs that it would need to get near the first Iron Man, but as part of the prelude to The Avengers, and as a start to a Thor franchise, this a very good result.
Nerd season begins!
Kim Hollis: What do you think the opening weekend of Thor means for Green Lantern, Captain America: The First Avenger and the 2012 film The Avengers?
David Mumpower: I am a strong believer in the idea that positive reinforcement is a huge factor in box office behavior. When audiences go see a movie they enjoy, they will be encouraged to watch other similar titles. This is good news for Green Lantern, a movie whose trailers make me cringe. As much as I like Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively as actors, that title needs all the help it can get. Whether consumers distinguish between DC and Marvel comics properties remains to be seen, but I could see Green Lantern getting a slight boost from this. Meanwhile, Captain America is the next major comic book release from Marvel. With Iron Man, Iron Man 2, The Incredible Hulk and Thor all being (generally) well received, Captain America appears poised to match if not exceed Thor. It's the most approachable story after all due to the World War II setting as opposed to...Asgard.
The real prize here, however, is The Avengers. That's been the long term goal for Marvel for a while now and Thor's opening weekend popularity goes a long way in securing it as one of the major tentpole titles of 2012. With Iron Man, Thor, Captain America, Black Widow and Nick Fury already introduced plus a third actor taking a turn at The Hulk (and one other Avenger debuting in Thor that I don't want to spoil), this is a potent combination of comic book licenses being thrown together. It's a shame that DC couldn't get their act together in time to do a Justice League movie first, but since they could not, The Avengers will be the first film of its kind in what I expect will be the future of comic book movies. Joint projects such as this one have a lot of upside in terms of marketability. As of this moment, I believe that there are three films on the schedule that can break the opening weekend box office record. The final Harry Potter film is one, the sequel to the current record holder, The Dark Knight, is another. I honestly believe The Avengers also has a chance at that type of historic debut if it's marketed well. Thus far, Marvel's slow build has been masterfully done.
Josh Spiegel: I agree that this kind of box office performance should bode well for future superhero adaptations, though I'm even more put off by the Green Lantern trailers than David is. I keep hearing other people rave about the trailers, and I must be missing all of the cool action behind the cartoon characters interacting with Ryan Reynolds. I think that Captain America has a better shot at big numbers later on in the summer, but I'm also curious to see if the reviews for that film continue the complaint that began with the reception for Iron Man 2: too much about creating The Avengers, too little about the actual superhero whose name is the movie's title. I still think that it's going to be a challenge for any film that isn't The Dark Knight Returns to top that opening weekend number, but if all goes well, I could see The Avengers getting there.
Joshua Pasch: I feel like a broken record here for Josh and David, but Thor's solid opening definitely gives a nice bolster to Avengers. It's like adding another A-lister to your cast. I feel like the excitement for its release is already amped up. By the time next summer roles around (and after Captain America opens - if it is a success), then Avengers buzz could reach a serious fever pitch.
Also, I couldn't agree more that the Green Lantern trailers are atrocious. I am a big Reynolds fan, and yet I am not buying him one bit. The special effects look hokey at best, and the comedy/epic scale balance seems more off kilter than in most Michael Bay films.
Bruce Hall: I think David crystallized the reality of the situation right off the top. I think that if lesser known characters like Iron Man, Hulk and Thor can be made into crowd pleasing - and successful - films, Marvel ends up with a window of opportunity where they have a built in friendly audience for for their brand, and across a wider demographic than many would have thought possible. If they can pull off their obvious strategy behind The Avengers, I'll bet Marvel easily extends the shelf life of the comic book film for another decade.
Reagen Sulewski: I think it's less about the opening weekend and more about the reception of the film. Thor could have opened to $90 million, but if it was as good as Spider-Man 3, that would be disastrous for The Avengers. That it opened to $66 million, but apparently was well liked, is a lot better overall for the followup. There is some added buzz in the sense that people can now plausibly say "oh yea, Thor, I've heard of that character," but it's much better that they like him.
Edwin Davies: I think it's better news for Captain America and The Avengers because there's a familial connection there; each runs into the other, so the success of Thor could feed into the success of Captain America through brand association. (Obviously, that's not 100% certain, since the success of Iron Man didn't really help Hulk 2.0, but that film had a lot of negative associations to shake off from Ang Lee's version so it's not quite analogous.)
I have a harder time believing that Thor's success will aid The Green Lantern, which just looks like such a bizarre and crazy mess from the trailers that I can't see it breaking out. The only thing I think it has going for it is that the acceptance of Thor means that people might be more willing to take a chance on Green Lantern, but even then that's a stretch.