<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Box Office Awesome: The Early &#8216;09 Sprint</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.goddos.net/2009/05/25/box-office-awesome-the-early-09-sprint/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.goddos.net/2009/05/25/box-office-awesome-the-early-09-sprint/</link>
	<description>Gail Simone is my hero</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 May 2009 19:10:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: damienroc</title>
		<link>http://www.goddos.net/2009/05/25/box-office-awesome-the-early-09-sprint/comment-page-1/#comment-4635</link>
		<dc:creator>damienroc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 May 2009 19:10:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.goddos.net/?p=63#comment-4635</guid>
		<description>Well, it&#039;s certainly not good for the theaters. But it&#039;s worth noting that all three of the really high profile front-loaded films (F13, Watchmen, and Wolverine) underperformed to expectations. F13 is still a profitable film, because it&#039;s dirt cheap to make slasher flicks, but considering the last film featuring Jason (Freddy vs. Jason) managed to finish up north of $80m, this isn&#039;t the franchise reboot that&#039;s to be desired.

Wolverine&#039;s also likely to be profitable, if only because of overseas grosses, but it&#039;s throwing well under the previous X-Men films, and that&#039;s with the headline character for the series. The prospects for Magneto or any other origins films don&#039;t look good for the franchise.

Watchmen, however, is a massive disappointment. Even before the release, WB sold off the foreign rights and then got into a legal battle just to get it released. It&#039;s not profitable and will probably have a long road to becoming so on DVD.

While there&#039;s varying degrees of studio profitability there, it can&#039;t be understated that these films are disappointments. I believe any heavily frontloaded film will have that stigma. Just look at Spider-Man 3, which managed to cross $300m and was the biggest film of 2007 and is still considered a business disappointment. So, yes, they&#039;re not good for theaters they&#039;re not especially good for anyone.

Box Office Awesome isn&#039;t always positive, after all. ^_^</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, it&#8217;s certainly not good for the theaters. But it&#8217;s worth noting that all three of the really high profile front-loaded films (F13, Watchmen, and Wolverine) underperformed to expectations. F13 is still a profitable film, because it&#8217;s dirt cheap to make slasher flicks, but considering the last film featuring Jason (Freddy vs. Jason) managed to finish up north of $80m, this isn&#8217;t the franchise reboot that&#8217;s to be desired.</p>
<p>Wolverine&#8217;s also likely to be profitable, if only because of overseas grosses, but it&#8217;s throwing well under the previous X-Men films, and that&#8217;s with the headline character for the series. The prospects for Magneto or any other origins films don&#8217;t look good for the franchise.</p>
<p>Watchmen, however, is a massive disappointment. Even before the release, WB sold off the foreign rights and then got into a legal battle just to get it released. It&#8217;s not profitable and will probably have a long road to becoming so on DVD.</p>
<p>While there&#8217;s varying degrees of studio profitability there, it can&#8217;t be understated that these films are disappointments. I believe any heavily frontloaded film will have that stigma. Just look at Spider-Man 3, which managed to cross $300m and was the biggest film of 2007 and is still considered a business disappointment. So, yes, they&#8217;re not good for theaters they&#8217;re not especially good for anyone.</p>
<p>Box Office Awesome isn&#8217;t always positive, after all. ^_^</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jacquilynne</title>
		<link>http://www.goddos.net/2009/05/25/box-office-awesome-the-early-09-sprint/comment-page-1/#comment-4632</link>
		<dc:creator>Jacquilynne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 May 2009 18:17:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.goddos.net/?p=63#comment-4632</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m curious what this ends up meaning for theaters. It&#039;s my understanding that distribution deals tend to pay the studious most for the initial week with the theater getting a higher percentage of the take in subsequent weeks. If more and more movies are one-and-done on the opening weekend, how do the theaters pay for all those big screen, big sound megaplexes? Presumably $6 popcorn will only go so far.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m curious what this ends up meaning for theaters. It&#8217;s my understanding that distribution deals tend to pay the studious most for the initial week with the theater getting a higher percentage of the take in subsequent weeks. If more and more movies are one-and-done on the opening weekend, how do the theaters pay for all those big screen, big sound megaplexes? Presumably $6 popcorn will only go so far.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
