X-Men Origins record earnings!
p2pnet news view | P2P | Movies:- In the continuing Wolverine saga (double exposure on the P2P networks well before its official release sparked shock-horror declarations from its owners, 20th century Fux) it, “grossed an estimated $87 million from 4,099 runs to mark the studio’s best-ever non-holiday bow at the domestic box office,” says Variety.
But how can that be? Hollywood misinformation machine the MPAA says when feature films show up online, the studios experience massive losses!
Wolverine, you’ll recall, initially appeared online on April 1 in the form of an unfinished workprint, later appearing for a second time as the finished product.
Nonetheless and notwithstanding, it still managed to gross $73 million, “from more than 9,100 runs in 101 markets for a worldwide opening of $160 million,” says the story, adding:
“In many individual markets, ‘Wolverine’ saw the best numbers of any film in the franchise.”
This isn’t really surprising considering it was already doing gangbusters on its opening day, according to EW.com.
Wonder why we haven’t seen any of the usual blathering from temporary MPAA boss Dan ‘The Joker’ Glockman about how the film’s online opening is yet another example of how ‘piracy’ is ‘devastating’ the hugely profitable studios and causing thousands of helpless workers to lose their jobs?
Meanwhile, 2oth century Fux, “immediately confirmed a sequel, with reports suggesting it may be set in Japan, in line with a samurai-based storyline from Marvel comics’ original tales,” says The Guardian.
No need to stay tuned.
May, 2009
Variety – ‘Wolverine’ claws to top of box office, May 3, 2009
unfinished workprint – X-Men: Origins – workprint online, April 2, 2009
finished product – Finished ‘X-Men: Origins’ now online, April 26, 2009
EW.com – ‘X-Men Origins: Wolverine’ grosses $35 million Friday night, May 2, 2009
The Guardian – Wolverine rakes in biggest opening total of 2009 in US, May 5, 2009
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy! Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
May 5th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
Hmmmm – just imagine the profits if all the million downloaders had gone to the cinema to see it… Wait – quite a lot of them probably did!!! Maybe the extra advertising that sites like TPB gave them actually helped towards this record breaking turnover?
May 5th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
I would put the P2P downloaders cinema viewing rate at around 90%.
Giving that 3% had swine flu, 2% are busy with RIAA Extortion Letters, 1% are scared of large crowds, 2% were too busy flaming on P2Pnet, and 2% didn’t want the MPAA to get their hard earned cash.
May 6th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
An excellent demonstration that the “downloading is costing the box-office money” argument is cow poop.
I think it can be a double-edged sword, though, if the substance of the downloaded material doesn’t do the job right. To be fair – I thought “Origins” was simply a damn good flick. That has to have a lot to do with it downloads or no, because the ultimate fate of any film is not decided by how many see it when and in what environment, but whether it can entertain no matter what environment it is shown in. The opening weekend figures are pretty insiginificant as to whether a film will perform well over time anyway. The fact that you produce DVD’s and home video of classic movies demonstrates that you already understand the concept that seeing the film once doesn’t preclude repeated viewings.
I believe many of the anti-pirate crowd were using “the Hulk” as leverage for thier argument that internet leakage was to blame for a poor box office showing, conveniently ignoring the fact that the movie itself was utter crap. I suppose pre-box office release might be damaging to a film that doesn’t offer much other than star power or big effects because the movie-goers ultimately want more than that; they want to be lost in another place for a few hours and a light show just isn’t going to do it. Films that are mostly eye-candy might even still do well early on if people think the BIG SCREEN will make it a better ride, but eventually word travels that the plot is thin or the acting weak (or both) and they fail sooner than the indie sleeper nobody heard of before. My all time-fave flick was “The Princess Bride” which I knew nothing AT ALL about when my buddy dragged me to see it (her 2nd time) with the simple assertion “Trust me – Its your kind of movie.” (Incidentally, “Bride” actually made most of is money after leaving the theaters initial release due to the fact that they had no clue how to advertise the thing- word of mouth did its work, but it just took a little longer.)
To anyone at Fux that legitimately concerned that it might be talked down because of the unfinished nature of the film, I say this: most of the pre-release critical commentary about “Wolverine” came from the purists who can’t tolerate any deviation from the comic, localized to comic specific websites and therefore only seen by the ubergeeks affiliated with them and akin to the criticisms of the people who always say “the book was better” when any popular novel visits the theatres in its appropriately abbreviated form. In the case of comic figures, who often have a very dedicated fan base, this is even more pronounced because of the often complicated and multifaceted histories of the characters that have years of publication and past which would be likely impossible to duplicate in an entire series of films, much less in one. (and the whole of the x-men line is even more convoluted than most, imho) If you take away the critical comments that center around it not being “Wolverine”-enough, there aren’t too many that remain that can make the case that your two hours would be better spent doing or seeing something else. Even if not entirely true to the comic book version, the story was engaging, believable and complete and the parts well acted; the movie magic and CGI stuff enhances the experience without having to BE the experience (See:Hulk) which is why I predict it will continue to do well, and I myself plan on seeing it more than once if possible. Much like with “Jurrassic Park”, the film may not contain the depth of the written version, but it was still one hell of a good ride!
Moral of the story: Make a good product = Make money. Hollywood and advertisers are always looking for a “paint-by-numbers” formula for profit, but fail to understand that just because you spend $100 million on making a movie doesn’t mean it will be a good one if the majority of it is spent solely to finance the licensing of a pop culture phenomenon, a big name, or an explosion-fest. Most studios have it backwards when the winning formula is actually well-written script over popular fad or licensed familiarity, actual talent over star power, and artistry over effects. Meaning that the studios will have to put a little bit of thought and effort into the project instead of expecting the fluff to carry the film. You know… do a little WORK!
May 11th, 2009 at 2:14 am
Reader’s Write Says:
May 5th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
“I would put the P2P down loaders cinema viewing rate at around 90%.
Giving that 3% had swine flu, 2% are busy with RIAA Extortion Letters, 1% are scared of large crowds, 2% were too busy flaming on P2Pnet, and 2% didn’t want the MPAA to get their hard earned cash.”
Thas teh best and truest thing I’ve seen in weeks. ha