We all knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that Spider-Man 3 was going to dominate the box office again this past weekend. Only in its second week, and with nothing of note opening against it. The question was how much of a drop would it take from week #1?
We’ve always said that EVERYONE is going to see this movie at least once. A lot of people avoided Spider-Man 3 the first week to miss the huge crowds, so we were expecting another big weekend. And with $60 million on its second weekend, that has to be considered nothing short of a huge success.
HOWEVER….
We’ve also noted that this film (being a horrible bag of crap that even X-Men 3 was better than) will have limited “repeat viewings”. Dropping 60% shows that. Sony right now is trying to spin the drop as “normal” for a film that opened as big as Spider-Man 3 did. And he’s not totally wrong. HOWEVER, you know Sony were hoping for better with large amounts of people rushing back to the theaters to see it a second or third time. That didn’t happen.
By comparison, Pirates of the Caribbean 2 only dropped 53% from its opening weekend to the second… and it actually made MORE than Spider-Man 3 in its second weekend of release. Some people were trying to tell me that Spider-Man 3 was going to beat Titanic’s domestic Box Office total.. I laughed. I honestly don’t know if this film will even cross $400 million (although it probably will) with Shrek 3 opening on Friday.
Hey Flynn
Opening weekend BO doesn’t tell you anything except how well the film was marketed and measure public interest in the film. It says nothing about how good the film is, or if it got people to go back to see it a second or thrid or fourth time, or it’s longevity and staying power.
There is no one “metric” that tells you everything about everything. Opening weekend numbers don’t tell us squat about if the movie was good enough to get big numbers of people to go back to see it again.
You say it’s “intellectually dishonest” to change the measure depending on the topic. I say it’s Intellectual stupidity to not.
Guys, decide on a metric. I once was told here by an author that the only metric that counts is the opening weekend. Not how it drops in the second week or how it does overseas. It’s intellectually dishonest to choose the benchmark metric to match your article.
The Spiderman movies and the X-men movies are kinda like the same movie quality-wise. The first one is great, and the second one tops it, and the third one is disappointed throughout. This can be said about both comic book fanchises
Is Spiderman 3 a failure? No! But the movie did cost 500 million to produce and market(most of which was poured into the overseas market).
The fact that it might not get to 400 million domestically is a little alarming
You haven’t seen Grant Curtis’ book on the making of Spider-Man 3, Gio. Vulture might not have turned out too bad. In fact, I myself wished they had him (despite Angel in X3) -because then Venom could be held off until #4. For all the hype and mystery arround Venom, that’s where the film takes the real lumps…aside from emo Parker and life lessons.
Another problem is that 3 is not better, or on a par with,than Spider-Man 2. That’s the candle I hold it up to. As to which is more “enjoyable”- compared to the new Spidey film? X Men Last Stand. Pirates 2.
Back to Spidey, The time spend on FX for Sandman was great. Long process, interesting stuff…and then Sandman is almost a side character. FX wise thus far, it is the best I have seen. I didn’t care much for Spidey 3. BUT the bigger a film opens, it is not unusual to have a noticeable dropoff. Next week will be the true test of staying power.
Oh come on Stuart,
SM3 was one persons fault… raimi. he wrote the script, he was behind the chair. If it wasn’t Venom then Raimi was going to put in the bloody Vulture. Good god… THE VULTURE!
If Bryan Singer can make a great movie with 15 characters… then raimi has no excuse.
I LOVE Sam Raimi. But lets call it like it is… Raimi dropped the ball big time here. That’s ok… it happens to everyone. SM3 was his. No biggie… but please no more excuse making for him.
And yes… X-Men 3… with all it’s faults… was a more entertaining movie than SM3… or as it should have been called “Mary Jane Wresltles with Her Career: The Movie”
X-Men 3 better than Spider-Man 3?
SM3 is a “bag of crap” next to X-Men 3??
WTF???
I know it’s the in-thing for the cool-kids to bash Spider-Man 3 right now but let’s not get carried away.
X-Men 3 was a dumb movie with a dumb script for a dumb director.
Spider-Man 3 was the best movie a great director/writer could possibly hope to make while having to cater to a meddeling fuckwit producer. I respect Sam Raimi for pulling the movie off to the degree that he did.
I’ll respect Brett Ratner when he grows some balls and stops dealing out journeyman’s sloppy seconds to other people’s better original work.
Hey Sujay,
Rail? Where did I rail? I just pointed it out. I never said it isn’t making big money… as a matter of fact, if you read my post i specificALLY SAID:
“And with $60 million on its second weekend, that has to be considered nothing short of a huge success.”
Is that your definition of “railing”?
The point of the post is that with a drop of 60%, very few people are going back for repeat viewings.
http://www.slashfilm.com/2007/05/13/box-office-spider-man-3-earns-622-million-in-first-10-days/
I like that you rail on Spidey for dropping 60%, but mention that Pirates ONLY dropped 53%. Only.
I think all of the negative press that I read about it actually helped me enjoy the movie when I saw it this weekend. Maybe my expectations were lowered by the critics, so I went in expecting less, and felt like I got more. In any case, I liked it and felt it was worth my $7.50.
Regarding this other debate – I’m not much into X-Men, and haven’t seen any of those movies, but I’m sure they’re decent films in their own right too. I’ll tell you one thing, Spidey 3 was no “Godfather”. :-D Now pass the damned popcorn.
PS: The best thing this weekend was The Sopranos. Finally, things are happening.
Who on earth ever suggested SM3 was a “failure”??? It’s a failure as a movie for sure… but it’s certainly NOT a failure financially.
The point of this post wasn’t SP3 was a failure financailly… but rather that it’s bad enough that it’s not getting people back for repeat viewings.
How many films gross 60 Million on it’s 2nd weekend? No matter how hard you try, this film is not a failure.
I gotta agree with some people. SM3 much better then X3. I loved Spider-Man 3. Even with it’s flaws I think loved it. Venon did suck dirt balls though. But yeah SM3 is done earning $$$$$$$$$$$$$ from next week onwards.
X3 better than Spidey 3? Let’s not be too harsh, guys.
Hey Don,
I don’t follow your logic at all. Just because Pirates 2 beat Spider-Man 2… automatically means that Pirates 3 should beat Spider-Man 3? That makes no senes at all.
If Spider-Man 3 were “good” (which it’s not) then more rabid fans would be floking back to the theaters to see it 2, 3 or 4 times. They’re not. It had a high profile to get everyone out at least once… but profile only gets you 1 screening. Quality determines if people will go back to see it again and again.
Spider-Man 3 is trash, and people aren’t going back in numbers to see it a second or thrid time.
Also, Pirates 2 was superior to Spider-Man 3. I think Pirates 2 was an “ok” movie. But like I said with Spider-Man 3… Pirates 2 was major high profile enough to get everyone out to see it at least once. But it was better than Spider-Man 3 so more people went back to see it a second and third time. Same can’t be said for Spider-Man 3.
Just one more thing:
Shrek 2 and Pirates 2 both outperformed Spidey 2, so please don’t make it some significant point when/if Shrek 3 and Pirates 3 beat Spidey 3. It’s no big deal–it’s no “point” about how “horrible” Spidey 3 was, John–it’s just the marketplace and there’s already a precedent for it. There’s no reason why Spidey 3 WOULD have beat those movies.
On the other hand, you liked Spidey 2 more than Pirates 2, didn’t you? Well Pirates 2 beat it at the box-office! That doesn’t prove that Spidey 2 was a horrible movie! Certainly Spidey 3 is reviewed much worse than Spidey 2, but I think that will not be much of a factor in its eventual boxoffice or how it stacks up to the othe blockbusters this summer.
The only shocking “news” would be if Spidey 3 actually beat Pirates 3 and Shrek 3. Instead it’s business as usual.
John,
The “Sony execs” may be trying to spin things, but if that’s the case than the whole industry is as well. The articles I read about this yesterday on Yahoo and (I think?) imdb as well all had independent non-studio sources saying that this wasn’t a BAD or a GOOD drop. If it was a 65% drop, then yeah, that’s pretty noteworthy. If it only had a 55% drop, then people would be screaming to the heavens about its success. Instead it’s right in the middle. I don’t think that deserves a post like yours. You don’t like the movie, WOW, we get it; it seems like you’re hoping it does poorly just to make yourself feel better. Well, good luck with that; you can take consolation that this might only be (gasp) the third-highest grossing movie in the biggest summer in movie history *rolls eyes*.
Comparing it to Pirates 2 isn’t really a fair comparison. More people saw Spidey 3 in its first week so of course there will be a smaller pool of people to see it in its second week. Pirates had a larger target audience anyway because it had the Disney machine behind it, with all their sorcery, brainwashing ability, and black arts.
And honestly, I think all this talk of repeat business must account for less than 1% of sales. I don’t know anyone who sees movies multiple times in theaters.
What can I say, though. I enjoyed X-Men 3 and Spidey 3–for all its weird humor, I was thoroughly amused. I didn’t take either one as a personal insult.
Blaze87…SORRY DUDE…I agree with John..X3 is MUCH better than S3! I saw S3 last Friday…what a fricken mess! I actially enjoyed X3.
S3, no doubt will make more money than X3, BUT I.M.O. S3 had a mish-mash strucuture and idotic and jerky characterization/plot lines.
You all amy disagree with me but I think a good portion of Spidey 3’s opening box office had NOTHING to do with the film’s content.
Spidey 3 was the first summer blockbuster, first comic book blockbuster(screw you Ghost Rider), and the first family friendly action movie of the year(no you shouldn’t have taken your kids to see 300!)
This guaranteed a huge opening weekend no matter how much the movie sucked!
The 2nd weekend drop is not a big surprise or a big test since there wasn’t anything opening that could compete with it.
the true test for Spidey 3 will be exactly how much it drops in Shrek 3’s opening weekend next week. There is an expected standard for how much it should generally drop in its 3rd week during the summer.
If Spidey 3 drops really low or completely disapears after next weekend then that will show its true colors!
BTW, Spidey 3 may have beat Pirates 2’s opening weekend but it will NEVER reach Pirates’ total take!
Kevin I echo your sentiments exactly. Enjoyable movies but so much wasted potential.
Thjis is such a weird discussion because I really dont think it was a “bad” film but at the same time I agree with most of the complaints about it.
To me this film should have been cut in two, with Sandman being the main villain for the first part, Venom being the main villain in the second part and Peter in the Black suit bridging the gap between the two films.
As it came out Spiderman 3 was overstuffed and undercooked, but there was still enough there to enjoy yourself, even though it was easily the lesser of the 3 movies.
I feel the same way about this movie as X-men 3. I didnt hate it, I thought theyu could have done more with it. I dont regret seeing it, but if I never see it again it wouldnt bother me.
“I honestly don’t know if this film will even cross $400 million (although it probably will)”
I wouldn’t bet on it. SM3’s weekday numbers have been relatively bad and it has earned $16 million less than Pirates 2 had at the same point in its release. Taking into account the sharper falls and stronger competition I would say that $350 million is not a sure thing right now.
I think this has to be attributed at least in part to bad word of mouth. Remember, Spider-Man 1 earned $114 on it’s opening weekend and went on to a domestic final of $403. This series is used to having great legs. Not so with the third film.
Neither film lived up to their potential. I think most would agree with that.
But if we are talking Box Office #s, 40% of $151 million is still a crapload of dough — 60 million to be exact. X3s drop was bigger, and the original take smaller. You can talk about Sony execs spin all you want (sure they probably wanted to make an unrealistic $500 million+), but this movie is already a huge success. If it had come out last year, it would be already be closing in on the #2 spot for the whole year. AND it has already out grossed X3 as well.
I am not accusing you of this Giovanni, but I am getting sick of hearing people call Spider-Man 3 a flop. That is just insane. Superman Returns wishes it could have flopped like this.
Yeah, I doubt it will even get above $350 million domestically.
You’ve got Shrek this Friday, and Pirates3 next Friday. Although $60 million is nothing to sneeze at (it’s still more than what 99% of films make in their first week), it’s the final hurrah!
…and yes John, I agree with you that Spidey3 sucked. It was ‘almost’ as bad as Batman & Robin!
Say it all you want Blaze. Yell it from the Mountain tops. Tattoo it on your ass. Put up a sign on your mom’s lawn.
X-Men 3… for all it’s flaws… was better than Spider-Man 3. That’s not saying much for X-Men 3… that’s just how bad Spider-Man 3 was.
Campea, you condemn the movie as much as you what, but I can say that X3 is a piece of shit compared to Spider-Man 3, it’s far more entertaining that montrousity you and Doug call an X-Men movie.