I realize that $8 one day and $6 the next isn't a bomb, but I think everyone expected this movie to be a huge massive blockbuster. What gives? I don't think that effects the quality but if a movie like this isn't going to be a big hit, what will? Maybe the Christians who are seeing "Narnia" refuse to see this because it might mention evolution (take a look at the dionsaurs).

I guess it's not "nerdy" enough for LOTR fans or Harry Potter fans to turn out for it. Those numbers are a letdown for a "blockbuster" movie.

Vinny, the figures were $9.8 Wed and $6.2 Thurs

The first Pokemon movie made more on its Wednesday opening than this clunker did

Internationally:

$8M opening day from 36 territories

vs.

$23M opening day from 19 territories (the first LOTR)
[Edited 12/16/05 13:23pm]

it will likely develop momentum on word of mouth. If that word is good. The idea of blockbusters being defined by opening figures is a marketing concept/scam meant to artificially inflate a movie hype. There have been hugely entertaining movies that build their business after opening days.

I still haven't seen it. But the '76 one was the first movie I asked to see as a kid...
[Edited 12/16/05 13:22pm]

You have to keep in mind that it's a three hour movie, which means that theaters can't have as many screenings per day as they can with other flicks. I remember when the first Lord of the Rings flick hit, a lot of people were declaring it a flop in its first couple of days. How wrong that turned out to be!!!

JediMaster said:

I don't remember that. At least in terms of pundits and analysts. You have to remember that Universal was publicly using LOTR as a benchmark for King Kong, and that made over $18M on its opening Wednesday. So it's clearly not meeting expectations no matter how you cut it. Yes, I think it will recover somewhat over the weekend but it's a disappointment.
[Edited 12/16/05 13:30pm]

Could be that the general movie-going public are sick to death of remakes.

Could it be that the movie sucks, and everyone is telling everyone that it sucks?

jerseykrs said:

That could be, too.

Yeah, cause I thought it sucked. Maybe I just expect alot more, but it was unimpressive in my view.....

TMPletz said:

could be...at least i hope so, because the remakes are getting tiresome, as well as they suck for the most part.

Handclapsfingasnapz said:

...and don't get me started on television shows converted to movies.

Yeah, these first few days aren't promising. We'll see what the weekend brings.

ufoclub said:

Yah man, wait until the weekend's over.

From Yahoo:

"That Kong's opening was neither flashy--it ranks 21st on the list of all-time Wednesday openers, according to BoxOfficeMojo.com--nor a fiasco arguably can be chalked up to the calendar. Of the top 20 Wednesday openers, only five bowed in December, including all three parts of Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy, and of those, none bowed as early as Kong, with schools still in session and office vacations still days off.

"We'll have a much better picture on Sunday morning," Dergarabedian said.

While Gray wouldn't offer a prediction as to Kong's Friday-Sunday gross, he did guess that it wouldn't top the stunning $65.6 million posted last weekend by The Chronicles of Narnia. Compared to Jackson's ape epic, Narnia is shorter (two hours compared to three) and more kid-friendly (PG compared to PG-13), factors that generate more screenings, more potential audience members and, just maybe, more money."

ufoclub said:

Funny. I had a projection Viewmaster as a kid and had the 1976 King Kong slides. It scared the crap out of me seeing him projected onto my wall.

It has also only had 6000 votes on IMDB.com and has managed to slip into the top 250 movies there.
Give it time who goes to the cinema on a Wednesday anyway?

jerseykrs said:

THe reviews have all been good...it looks pretty good and this is not the kind of movie I would see at a theather (come to think of it, I usually only go to the theather to see comedies...the last big budget adventure I was was "Die Another Day").

muirdo said:

Every event picture has that happen.

TMPletz said:

Exactly.

I say give it a bit of time. But I do have to mention that I also think moviegoers are just sick of remakes. Also, I think people -- except children -- are growing tired of big CGI epics. Perhaps we want more character, more plot depth and less flash.

UPDATE: Early reports have it pegged at $14.3 on Friday with Narnia following at $9.7. If Narnia outgrosses it for the weekend, heads will roll at Uni.

jerseykrs said:

Not every movie can be Brokeback mountain.

VoicesCarry said:

Narnia won't be it overall this weekend....are you saying last weekend compared to this? At this rate, it's highly possible that Narnia's numbers from last week will be better. Guess they should have sold this to churches....It has no gay cowboys!

VinnyM27 said:

Kiddie films always have very high internal multipliers. I think Kong will get about $43M and Narnia will manage about $37M this weekend, although who the fuck knows with Kong ?

VoicesCarry said:

I think this is a backlash with all that fucking hype. It pisses people off when it's overkill, maybe. I was thinking it was a good movie.

BTW, the budgets for Kong and Narnia are $207 (all figures in millions) and $180, respectively. They have to make double and more to make a profit...I don't know if Kong will be able to do that just with box office numbers at this rate. I think the studio was expecting over $200 in America and even more than that overseas....I don't think it's going to happen.

Just got back from Kong. 10/10.

Marrk said:

10/10=1

VinnyM27 said:

FOURTEEN DOLLARS?
What a fiasco!

The Production Companines Fail to see the trend we have been undergoing for the past several years.

Movie Box Offices have been undergoing a change.

The Production Companines still want to do business the same old way.

I don't mind.

I have a good chuckle to myself when the biggest movies go belly up.