Very few films have ever had an increase in their second week (Borat was one of them) but Watchmen has finished out its second weekend at 18million in second place just above Wes Craven’s Last House on the Left, though some reports are saying third (House finished at $14m).
Watchmen lost it’s #1 spot to Disney’s PG-rated family flick Race To Witch Mountain, but held it’s own against the incoming R-rated remake of Wes Craven’s Last House On The Left. Interestingly, while Last House beat Watchmen’s numbers Friday, it finished #3 for the weekend after Watchmen defied industry expectations with an impressive Saturday comeback.
After a staggering 78% dropoff from the previous Friday, Watchmen experienced an equally staggering 42% increase the following night. To put that in perspective, The Dark Knight had only a 22% bump on it’s second Saturday.
$18million is still pretty impressive considering the more family friendly Dwayne Johnson starring remake of Witch Mountain was destined to dominate the boxoffice. (Remember the Squash)
I honestly didn’t think that Watchmen would break $10million this weekend, so I guess it exceeded my humble expectations, but still not enough to really launch it into the hall of fame.
Watchmen was one of those films were you just loved it to death for what it was supposed to be, or you hated it. There doesn’t seem to be any middle ground.
I didn’t anticipate Hayter’s Open Letter to have that much of an impact, though I did agree with the principal behind it.
The first time I read Watchmen, its concept was pretty clear: what would costumed heroes look like in real life. Heroes weren’t all pretty, they aged, had flaws…
The first scene of the film showed precisely where Snyder went wrong: a fight so over the top it almost asked for the “Pow!” and “Kabang!” of the Batman TV show. Simply said, visually, the movie looked less like real life than a Spider-man movie, or most superhero movies in fact.
The only adult content was there because some of Alan Moore’s dialogue which was repeated literally (Good Decision). Other than that, Zach Snyder thought an adult film meant full-frontal nudity and gore; it doesn’t!
Snyder included those scenes because they were in the comic book. I thought you said you read the book??
And the movie was not about what costumed heroes would LOOK like in real life. It was a story about how they would deal with their lives, how the public would deal with them and how it all fits into reality.
This wasn’t anything like a Spiderman movie or the pow/kabang of a campy Batman tv show.
When I said what they would “look” like I meant more along the lines of what heroes would be like in reality, probably my poor choice of words.
Most of the fight scenes were very over the top. It was almost ridiculous sometimes. Nudity and gore serve to make it more for adults but that alone does not make it an adult film. I feel that Snyder failed to build up a raw, gritty, dark atmosphere to give the violence and nudity impact and meaning. Gore alone serves no point but with a proper context such as a gritty atmosphere it can.
I think that’s ultimately why it failed to meet expectations. Snyder didn’t really create a world we can care about. It all has a very glossy and clean feel to it and the film tries to undermine any the seriousness it seeks to establish with ludicrous and out of place cartoonishness.
didnt cost 200 million….missed the ‘nt
there is a reason the studios mainly focus on what a film does domestically. Unless a film does massive massive international box office the studios don’t see much from the international take.
By the time local distributers, theatres etc etc take their cut there aint that much fro the studio to get unless it is a gigantic 500 million blockbuster. and a lot of the time they have presold territories so it can make as much as it does and the studio won;t actually get a cent.
and again the punisher may have become a success on dvd but it all goes back to the budget. the punisher did cost over 200 million to make. watchmen has to make over 300 million at the BO to brek even and that is being conservative., plus the legal fees and payment they have to give fox.
anyway you spin it the film is looking likely to be a financial flop. for warners and it is a shame. its a good film that deserves better.
Id rather hear what its made internationally…sorry, but their is other countries beyound the US borders[and before nerd rage hits, l live in the States.].
Movies that often fail here[l wonder why], do exceptionally well elsewhere.
And to the “dont tell me about Dvd sales”…take a look at TJ’s Punisher…performed badly at the cinema, was a big money maker on Dvd[l maybe wrong but l recall it broke a record or two in dvd sales].
Witch Mountain was kinda creepy. At points it looked like The Rock wanted to make out with the little girl alien.
I gotta say that I’m reading the book now and love it just as much, if not equally as I did the movie (since the movie was what I saw first) and I’m kinda disappointed that the film isn’t dominating the box office the way I feel it really should be. It was an impressive movie and feel it has the ability to resonate in you for quite a while after viewing it. It definitely had an impact on me and made me look at Zach Snyder in a whole new light. I didn’t like Dawn of the Dead at all, but I thought 300 was good, and Watchmen was just a huge impressive and ambitious movie for him in my opinion. He’s definitely shown growth and skill in this film.
I don’t mind much it’s box office results. It’s not a “sequel material” movie. So I’ll happily get it once it’s released on Blu-ray and enjoy reviewing it then.
R movies don’t bring the entire familly, it’s not surprising they can’t pull the masses.
i thought it was going to be a lot bigger considering all the anticipation and hype.
at least a couple of weeks strong on top.
Watchmen is a huge disappointment in the box office.
I can’t believe how badly it’s doing.
At the end its going to make more money though. after 2 weeks itll make more then with mountain made in 2 weeks.
race to with mountain sucked
watchmen ruled
Watchmen was made for the fanboys, thats why it will struggle to make its money back. Iron Man and TDK crossed over from fan boys to main steam. Hell, my GF loved Iron Man and she;s not a comic book movie fan but Watchmen was not appealing to her at all.
Rodney, where do you get your facts from? First you mis spell The Rocks reals name then you tell us Hulk’s real name is Terry Hogan?? WTF? Its Terry Bollea.
TVo, Hulk may have been born by that name but his stage name as gone from Hulk Hogan to Terry Hogan to Terry “Hulk” Hogan in many different appearances.
All of which he still uses, so it makes sense to still call him by those names.
Johnson does not.
Box office mojo:
Watchmen disintegrated 67 percent to an estimated $18.1 million for $86 million in ten days, trailing all previous superhero movies that debuted in the $50 million range through the same point. For perspective, 300, which Watchmen was oft compared to, fell 54 percent to $32.9 million in its second weekend (for a $129.2 million total), and, among major comic book movies, only Hellboy II: The Golden Army and Hulk had steeper drop-offs. The weekend further cemented Watchmen’s status as a movie with much more limited appeal than other superhero pictures, rooted in its non-mainstream source material and its diffuse storyline and marketing. Watchmen’s 124 IMAX theaters held a bit better than the rest. They were down 58 percent, accounting for an estimated $2.3 million of the weekend and $9.5 million of the total.
Boy that is a drop! If this movie does not gross more domestically than it’s $150 million price tag it’s going to be a failure for sure. I also can’t see a movie this complex doing well overseas.
Guess I won’t have to worry about finding a seat when I go and see it again.
I think the marketing for this movie was horrible, I had read the comic, so I knew what to expect, but if you went by the ads that were on tv, the movie wouldn’t have been anything close to the experience you were expecting, so I think it got a lot of negative word of mouth because of it.
I agree. There was only one trailer which explained the film’s premise, otherwise most of the advertising was aimed at the graphic novel readers.
Some people went in expecting an action movie from the trailers but it was never made clear that Watchmen is a highly dialogue-driven story.
i think what went wrong w/ watchmen was that people were expecting it to be on par w/ TDK, and it turned out to be something different, dont misunderstand me i saw it this weekend and loved it
sorry but for a film this size and with the amount of marketing it had to have had such a massive drop his weekend after a mediocre opening spells disaster for this film. It shows that word of mouth is not great and that the fans are not flocking for repeat views…
if anyone thinks that the executive who shepherded this project is getting a promotion and high fives from the head of warners right now is sorely mistaken.
this thing had a bigger percentage drop then the happening….
and if this had opened in summer it would have fared even worse. At the rate it is going it is going to top out around 120-130…..for a film this size that is disastrous. and spare me the “dvd sales will save it” line. studios don’t make films this size to hope maybe dvd sales will make them a profit. they make these to bust blocks. to sell millions of tickets.
120-130 if its lucky i might add
“…. and spare me the “dvd sales will save it” line. studios don’t make films this size to hope maybe dvd sales will make them a profit. they make these to bust blocks. to sell millions of tickets.”
Um… Not quite true.
Currently, approximately only 12% of Hollywood coffers are filled by movie ticket sales. In many ways, cinema distribution can be seen as ‘pre-selling’. The overwhelming receipts enter the ledgers in ways not associated with putting bums in cinema theater seats. This surely ain’t the 1940s anymore…
all i know is that studios don’t spend well over 200 million on a film hoping that they can scrape in 100 mill domestic and then let dvds do the rest.
they just don’t. anytime a films success comes down to hoping that dvd sales will save it then that film is pretty much a failure.
I am not being a hater…loved the film myself but this thing might be lucky to hi 100 million. the industry standard for films this size is it needs to make 2- 2 1/2 its total budget back for the studio to see a profit. that varies from film to film and deal to deal but that is the indsutry standard. This film is way off doing that
“all i know is that studios don’t spend well over 200 million on a film hoping that they can scrape in 100 mill domestic and then let dvds do the rest.
they just don’t. anytime a films success comes down to hoping that dvd sales will save it then that film is pretty much a failure.”
Do some research, alfie.
The problem with the way you’re looking at things is making BO receipts paramount. And they’re NOT. It’s a lovely game many like to play, pretending we’re back in the days before DVDs and cable and on-demand viewing…but the truth is that the film biz just doesn’t work that way anymore. It’s not ‘all or nothing’ regarding how a film does at the box office. That might not be something you can ‘believe’, but it’s still true.
I didn’t really expect it to do incredibly well at the box office. I thought the film was good, but thoroughly disappointing. It’s the whole loyalty thing, if you have too much loyalty to the fans you might alienate everyone else, if there’s not enough you alienate your core viewing base. It created a bit of buzz in it’s first week but audiences didn’t really care for it. It really is a love it or hate it film.
I also thought that some people were misled by the advertisement. It was being billed as more of an action movie when it is far from it.
Oh well, family movies are critic-proof, no matter how many negative reviews they get, people will still go see them.
“Oh well, family movies are critic-proof, no matter how many negative reviews they get, people will still go see them.”
Nonsense. People say this all the time and it is simply not true. Family films bomb as well. Not every family film opens at number one and continues to clean up. its a myth.
Of course not every family film opens at number one, I never said they did, look at Inkheart for instance. Brendan Frasier, a fairly well-known book and a so-called “magical adventure” and it still did poorly. I did write in absolute terms which was my fault, but in general, family movies are a force to be reckoned with.
@ Slushie Man:
No, it wasn’t. Because if it had, given all the opportunities afforded it, the film would have earned a pile more money by now, and would be continuing to do so. Which it won’t. Why? Not because of any sort of universal unfairness. (Though this does happen; I’m sure we can all come up with a few ‘injustices’, favourite movies that dies premature deaths) Because…
…it just isn’t a good enough film for the greater portion of the public to get excited over.
So they’re not.
And they won’t.
I repeat: the film does not excite, does not move, does not entertain, no matter how many fanboys are screaming to the contrary at the top of their lungs…or John, or Roger Ebert for that matter.
Probitionate… the film does not excite YOU, that doesn’t mean everyone must now fall in line and lack appreciation or entertainment out of it.
Slushie is right. Despite its lackluster Boxoffice (which is still modestly respectable – its not a failure, just not a massive success) the reviews are pretty solid for this film.
And I wouldn’t say Roger Ebert is a fanboy. He is a critic and one who is highly respected in the field for decades. Its his job to be overly critical and yet he still managed to give the movie a positive review.
Not sure I’d say the box office has been respectable. Going into last weekend everyone thought Watchmen had no competition (Race to Witch Mountain? please.), and the fact that it cost $150 million just to MAKE this movie, it’s looking like Watchmen might just go into the red. Next weekend will tell us more: if they make 10 million or more, then it’s got hope. If not, then not.
@ Rodney: Actually, I wasn’t inferring that Ebert was a fanboy; if you go back and re-read my comment, you see this.
As for your comment about ‘falling in line’… Why do forceful opinions one way or the other make people react this way? I’m not expecting anyone to see things my way. (Actually, couldn’t care less if they do.) And this isn’t about subjective opinions, this is about looking at the BO receipts dropping off precipitously…and me answering the question ‘Why?’.
Love the movie! Embrace it! See it a dozen times, if that’s what makes you happy. But that doesn’t change the fact that the reason it’s not going to gross a huge pile of dinare (namely $500 million or so), is because it didn’t garner widespread appeal…because in the end, it doesn’t have what is required of a film to accomplish this. The only other option to explain its ‘lack of success’ would be ‘it never found its audience’. The problem with this notion is what I referred to with ‘…given all the opportunities afforded it…’
From here, they didn’t make a great film. Disagree all you want, but in the end, it’s the BO receipts what will matter.
And he is The Rock, it’s Dwayne Johnson
He isnt the Rock. He WAS the Rock.
If you were married once before but not anymore would you still call her your wife?
You might remember when he was the Rock, but he isn’t anymore no matter how many times you call him that.
I really don’t see what the problem is with calling him that. That’s how everyone knows him, that’s what everyone calls him. I really don’t see the need to go off on someone for calling him that.
Guess we better stop calling Terry Bollea by his ring name “hulk hogan” then.
That isn’t how “everyone” knows him. It is how wrestling fans KNEW him.
Not everyone who watches his movies is a wrestling fan.
I know lots of people who couldnt tell you who the Rock is, but recognize Dwayne Johnson’s name. Everything the Rock was, is attached to his stage persona in the ring, not the actor.
He was only briefly called The Rock in his acting career because at the time he was still wrestling.
Terry Hogan is his legal public name, Hulk is a nick name.
And he still makes appearances under that name so its appropriate that he be referred to as such.
Dwayne hasn’t used “The Rock” since he left wrestling.
The Rock starred on several highly rated TV programs over a number of years, watched by millions worldwide, so don’t downplay it as if only a small amount of “wrestling fans” knew him as that. He rose to fame using that name. He was credited under that name in several of his first films, after he had stopped wrestling, some of which he was the lead actor. “The Rock” was not just a character he played, it was the name he attached to his real life persona as well, including well after he left wrestling.
While he may no longer be credited in films under the name, “The Rock” is still a name he used outside of wrestling for a number of years, and by which a large percentage of the public still identify him. It’s not incorrect to refer to the man Dwayne Johnston by that name, just a bit outdated now.
I guarantee you more people saw him perform as ‘The Rock’ than have watched any one of his movies.
Its no surpise to me Witch Mountain took first place, with Watchmen, Last House on the Left, that was pretty much the only movie you could take the kids to see. Kids movies will always do well. Look at the fucking Beverly Hills Rat Dog movie.
I am very dissapointed, it was a freaking great movie, I think the biggest mistake they made was opening it in March instead of like June or July, course I would go crazy if i had to wait that long, but it’ll barely break 100 M hear and maybe 140 M worldwide, if it sky rockets overseas, they could earn their budget back, such a shame though, it’s a great movie.
@Jeff
LOL!!
“Watchmen was one of those films were you just loved it to death for what it was supposed to be, or you hated it. There doesn’t seem to be any middle ground.”
Oh, stop it. Please. Life isn’t black-and-white. I didn’t ‘hate’ it, but I only gave it 6/10; go back into John’s review and see. As a decided non-fanboy, I saw it for what it was, on a purely ‘entertainment value for the buck’ basis, a failed attempt at a rousing piece of filmmaking.
In order to REALLY succeed at the box office, you need to hit all four quadrants of the demographic box…and there is no way anyone with a reasonable level of intelligence can objectively say that this film did that.
Let’s put it this way: if this film had not been adapted from the much-lauded graphic novel, if it had come out of nowhere, you’d all be gooing over the BO results.
Not to flog a dead horse, but this points up the dangers of adaptation, and getting the end goal straight: faithful transfer of the source material…or putting a damned good story (and by extension, a damned good film) on the screen. The first can result in a beautiful failure…as in the case of ‘Watchmen’.
Maybe Terry Gilliam was right; the novel is impossible to adapt to film with an entertainingly coherent movie as the result.
“the novel is impossible to adapt to film with an entertainingly coherent movie as the result.”
Except that it was just done…
Not sure I’d call the end product a coherent movie.
I wonder if the subject matter just doesn’t have that wide of a commercial appeal? I haven’t seen the movie but I did read the comic and the material is rather depressing, which could turn the general audience off especially at a time when things are bad economically…there already is such a doom and gloom atmosphere, mentality.
But really though $18 Million isn’t so bad for a 2nd week. I hope it has enough staying power until I have a chance to see it though.
i am disappointed the way it failed at boxoffice.
I’d hardly call Watchmen a fail at the box office, my friend.
With a 200 million dollar production and marketing budget, Watchman has a long way to go before it can not be considered a boxoffice failure, at least for Warner Bros.
Yeah, but it should at least finish with at least 100 million or more by the end of it’s theater run and then it will make a killing on DVD. Warner Bros. should make a small profit on the film.