Monday Morning Quarterback Part I
By BOP Staff
November 26, 2013
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Bruce Hall: I totally called it. And since this is the only thing that's gone right for me this week, I'm going to savor it.
I think you could feel the anticipation leading up to this release. There is a LOT of goodwill toward this franchise thanks to the books, and then to the hugely successful first movie. The film didn't do much for me, but I am clearly in the minority. The Hunger Games is officially the new Harry Potter.
Matthew Huntley: This figure is more or less in line with my expectations, or maybe just slightly below. I thought the success of the original would have boosted the sequel's first weekend to over $170 million and closer to Iron Man 3's numbers from earlier this year, but then again, IM3 had the advantage of opening the summer movie season and attracting young males, who make up the majority of the movie-going audience (whereas Hunger Games seems more female-targeted). In any event, this is a fantastic start and just adds to the pile of surplus money the first Hunger Games already gave to Lionsgate. I'm not convinced Catching Fire will show the same legs as its predecessor, but $300 million is pretty much a guarantee, and with international figures, the movie is already, after just three days, a certifiable blockbuster. Even though we all knew this was going to happen, it's still nice to see the movie living up to its promise of being huge.
Edwin Davies: This is about what I was expecting, perhaps even a touch higher since, as I said last week, I didn't think that the sequel would have expanded the audience much compared to the first film, and that the decision not to add 3D for Catching Fire meant that the film did not have an easy way of gouging audiences for more money. Compare that to Iron Man 3, which had both the boost of being a sequel to The Avengers and the 3D surcharge, and you can see why there might not have been a huge bump up from the first Hunger Games to the second.
Jason Barney: I'm shocked that anyone would consider labeling this disappointing. My fellow box office contributors have hit the nail on the head. The film did well, and that is it. I have seen a couple of headlines that stated it disappointed or underwhelmed...and I can't believe any editor would run with that headline for a story about Catching Fire's performance. Can we step back a bit please? This is the sixth largest opening weekend of all time. The numbers are huge. It is mind boggling that a $158 million opening would be labeled as disappointing. This is almost double Thor's opening weekend take of a few weeks ago. This opening is enormous, better than the original. Catching Fire's performance is very strong.
Tim Briody: In no universe is something in the top ten opening weekends of all-time disappointing, but I admit to being surprised at how it just barely topped The Hunger Games. We're so used to sequels growing tremendously from the original film, but after this, I think we've reached a new paradigm when it comes to top of the marquee Triple A releases. After The Hunger Games opened, I expected Catching Fire and Mockingjay (both parts, now I suppose) to challenge for the top opening weekend of all time. Of course, this was pre-Avengers, Iron Man 3 and The Dark Knight Rises when at the time it was the third largest opening weekend ever. Without somehow increasing its fan base to include an entire demographic, we've reached the point where franchises have created such awareness and a "gotta see it now" mentality that there's no longer any room for considerable expansion. At this point, two years out, I would expect Avengers 2, for instance, to maybe only increase 5% or so, most of which would be attributed to inflation.
Reagen Sulewski: I'd say we all fell a little victim to the idea that every film has to expand on its previous audience. Of course, when you get up this high, that becomes quite a bit harder, as we've seen for things like The Dark Knight Rises. Everybody loves watching records fall, so I can see where the enthusiasm might have ratcheted things up a bit too high in our expectations. This is still a ridiculous amount of money any way you care to look at it. I do think it's coming up against some of the same issues as the Harry Potter series, where a significant portion of its audience isn't paying full price for tickets, and that's naturally going to hamstring it.
David Mumpower: When we conversed about the shocking debut of The Hunger Games, a point we stressed is that audiences gave the movie credit as if it were a sequel. The Hunger Games opened higher than any non-sequel ever had, and it still holds that claim, depending upon how one views The Avengers. I was one of the people last week who stated an expectation that there would be an increased audience at the front end of the release of Catching Fire. The caveat I almost mentioned at the time that I regret not stating was my concern that the impending five-day Thanksgiving period could cause some consumers to wait a week. John Hamann performed some research that posted in the Weekend Wrap-Up about the benefits of pre-holiday release patterns for tentpole titles. Even the heavily frontloaded films in the Twilight franchise grossed 60% of their opening weekend total during Thanksgiving week. The climactic Harry Potter movie returned 75% of its opening weekend take. What we should see this week is another dominant frame for Catching Fire, a movie that should reach $300 million domestically by the end of its third weekend.
Let's all take a moment to consider that achievement. For all its glory, only one title in the Twilight franchise grossed $300 million in North America. Only three Harry Potter films reached that plateau. The Hunger Games will be two for two, and I am not even factoring international grosses into the equation. That is the area of expansion for the franchise, as the first title grossed "only" $285 million overseas. Catching Fire managed half of that in seven days. Sometimes we get so wrapped up in our desire to cover records and other huge stories that meeting lofty expectations gets undersold. Catching Fire will likely earn less than its predecessor domestically, but it looks headed for global revenue in excess of a billion. That is a stunning performance for ANY second film in a franchise. Any time a brand has been grown that quickly, we are talking about mythic popularity.
Kim Hollis: I was pretty convinced this would expand on its original audience, but by no means is this debut disappointing. Think about how full theaters are just for a movie to reach almost $160 million in a weekend. I know my screening on Thursday night was jam-packed and enthusiastic. I actually applaud the studio for not making this a needless 3D release. It's a film that has a gritty, realistic feel (even though it's set in a fantasy world) that just doesn't really lend itself properly to 3D. Sure, they could have artificially inflated their numbers, but I like to think they stayed true to the tone of the film.