New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Max Braden: I want to go with previous multipliers but I have trouble believing that this last movie captured a significant new audience, which is what it would need to take in $500 million or even $400 million. Deathly Hallows II should be able to cross $350 million. I feel like I'm being conservative when I predict a total domestic gross of $390 million.

David Mumpower: I incidentally mentioned to BOP webmaster Tony Kollath that our BOP Trivia question (these are available off bottom of the front page and always highly challenging if you haven't been playing along) for last week needed to be Harry Potter related. He came up with a clever take on the first names of the directors of the Harry Potter series and that gave me the epiphany about what has been accomplished here. Child actors are notoriously difficult to work with and they frequently act out when a new face comes along. There have been four different Harry Potter directors yet all of the movies maintain the highest possible quality. That in and of itself is a feat that merits recognition and appreciation.

In terms of final take, I'm a lot more bullish on the product than the rest of you. I look at the global take of The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King and note that it is 21% higher than the better performer of the prior two titles. That's what happens when a concluding feature in a franchise delivers a satisfying denouement. The established rules do not apply for Harry Potter. The movie is going to earn $400 million barring something unforeseen and $450 million would not surprise me. This is the time when everyone who was standing on the sidelines gets involved. People who have been renting instead of going to the theater are demonstrably altering their behavior here. I also think it has a solid chance to supplant Titanic as the second biggest global performer of all time. Half a billion in three days is a performance that defies description.

And now for something completely different

Kim Hollis: Winnie the Pooh, the almost forgotten side note to the weekend box office, opened to $7.8 million. What do you think of this result?

Brett Beach: It had the "Love Letter"-esque cajones (see May 21, 1999) to open opposite what was going to be a mind-blowingly huge dominator and is playing primarily to those paying the least (or not at all) for tickets. Plus, it's not in 3D, is fairly quiet, runs barely over an hour, and is only playing matinee shows. For obvious reasons. It opened a little higher than the previous films in Mr the Pooh's filmography, and wasn't all that expensive so those are the pluses. I am not sure if I agree with some commentators that it will "hold up well" going forth. On DVD yes, in theaters, I don't see it reaching even $30 million. Still, I am sure I will be renting it for my son Finn in just a few months.

Side note: I saw The Love Letter in the theaters opening weekend with a friend, saw The Sixth Sense trailer and thought "that looks creepy" and also thought "this probably will interest no one but me."

Continued:       1       2       3       4