If people actually want to talk precedent, there have been plenty of oscar season sports drama films with big stars that have cleared $100M domestic or close to that landmark over the years. There has been a market for that type of films before.
R-rated action films with solo female leads, are the real barely tested rare-breed here. You got Lucy which became a global movie event but only earning $120M domestically and that's pretty much it. Birds is the one taking big risks in uncharted territories.
Just stop. You're nitpicking elements of both films and sound ridiculous. You might as well say "a live action film with a hyena has never made much money before so we shouldn't have had expected more than FvF". BoP is a comic book movie. They make billions of dollars now. Sports movies not so much.
I'll agree that the R rating is a factor but not a factor we should consider as to why this movie is a success (which it isn't) but rather why this movie failed in the first place. A character whose primary demographic are teens and tweens getting an R? That's a bad business idea. If Joker's success proves that cb movies can be rated R, this movie proves that not all of them should.
BoP might be charting new ground here, that's why it's so confusing, from a commercial perspective.
-comic book adaptation
-mid-range budget
-critical and audience success
***
-erratic tarantinoy narrative
-all female cast
-all female production team (writer, director, producer)
-'break even' b.o.
So what's the formula here? Hell if I know, but it's a curious case for sure.
What I'm glad to say, as an audience member who got more than I wanted from this, it's way better than what we got from Ayer... And that made tons more on b.o.
Historically R-rated action films have been male centered, because Hollywood has long held the notion that women are not into violent action films and therefor they never attempted to develop a market for that type of films.
The rare exception being Alien franchise, and even that one started as horror and an ensemble, and then Cameron came in and turned into full on action.
Historically R-rated action films have been male centered, because Hollywood has long held the notion that women are not into violent action films and therefor they never attempted to develop a market for that type of films.
The rare exception being Alien franchise, and even that one started as horror and an ensemble, and then Cameron came in and turned into full on action.
Yes, for the longest time Jim was the sole champion of heroines as blockbuster leads; Margot also talks about it and how it was her goal to re-introduce women as action leads. She cited Charlie's Angels, McG one, as the inspiration that she grew up with.
It's fantastic that Ford v Ferrari made that kind of money anyway. It's definitely not your next superhero ensemble pic. Also, it's a fantastic film. I haven't seen this one yet but is it really along those lines of great, good stuff?
It's fantastic that Ford v Ferrari made that kind of money anyway. It's definitely not your next superhero ensemble pic. Also, it's a fantastic film. I haven't seen this one yet but is it really along those lines of great, good stuff?
True, and to clarify, my point wasn't about BoP being or not being a good enough film to warrant that money btw. I meant that it's fantastic a film like FvF has made that kind of money.
I understand why they say BoPs opening is considered underperforming but I still think it's a whole lot of money. But it's not a grand slam hit right away, if it has serious legs it could do more than break even and that's just theatrical run.
Wom seems pretty good and 2nd weekend drop was only 45%. But good 70% of money actually comes internationally, it's similar to BR2049 situation for the US.
