Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Grosses for Spider-Man 2??

This is topic Grosses for Spider-Man 2?? in forum Ground Level at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=001191

Posted by Ron Yost (Member # 1850) on 06-28-2004, 07:08 PM:

Any guesses? I'm guessing it'll be huge.

It has a 100% 'Tomatometer' score from the critics (for whatever that's worth).

If it doesn't have a Kirsten Dunst 'wet' scene (or better) I'm thinking it'll bomb .. with me, at least. [Big Grin]

Ron Yost

Posted by Mike Williams (Member # 1140) on 06-28-2004, 07:15 PM:

I am sure it will do great for the first week(end). The question is: What kind of legs will it have after the 4th of July weekend?

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 06-28-2004, 09:15 PM:

I don't normally get into the "predict the numbers" threads, but I expect that this will be huge. Probably the movie of the summer. It has a good trailer, a built-in audience, and "word on the street" is that it is a genuinely good film. Let's hope so. I'm running a one-off free show of it on Saturday which will, of course, be a full house. Should be fun.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-29-2004, 12:35 AM:

Our local priest asked me at church yesterday if we were getting it this week, and he NEVER comes to movies, so that tells me it's gonna be a big one.

Posted by Robert L. Fischer (Member # 2424) on 06-29-2004, 02:44 AM:

I think it will take the biggest opening weekend of the year, but fall short of Shrek 2 and land somewhere closer to the Passion of the Christ for the total gross.

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 06-29-2004, 10:22 AM:

Quick!! Theaters should raise box office prices to boost the gross!!! [evil]

Oops, too late! Already done. AMC's here went up to $9 [Roll Eyes]

=TMP=

Posted by Don Sneed (Member # 955) on 06-29-2004, 10:32 AM:

I just got finish installing a new 15-screen theatre in Alabama, they are opening with Spider-man on 12 of them.. [thumbsup]

First showing is at 12:01am tonight [Eek!]

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 06-29-2004, 10:56 AM:

I think it will be a disappointment if it doesnt gross eleventy billion dollars.

Posted by Michael Cunningham (Member # 210) on 06-29-2004, 11:27 AM:

After screening it last night, no Kirsten "wet" scene, but good ... uh ... ?nipplage? just the same, heh.

- Mike

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 06-29-2004, 02:16 PM:

Basing the movie numbers on wet nipple scenes? Come back to the table when you finish your spinach son.

This film is a blockbuster in every sense of the word. It will kill shleck 2. It is opening on a wed and will probably break the all time record for an opening five day weekend and single day opening and three day as well, and put it in the top three grossing films of all time.

The critics have already had thier screenings, as well as the geek crowd that will pan the film as well. It is bieng called the greatest super hero film of all time by all of them.

Hold on to your socks people, it is going to be huge.

Ciao

Dave

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 06-29-2004, 02:31 PM:

quote: Robert L. Fischer
but fall short of Shrek 2 and land somewhere closer to the Passion of the Christ for the total gross.

I am pretty confident this will be closer to Shrek 2 numbers than POTC(Pirates of the Carrib or Passion of Christ, take your pick) numbers. Roughly putting it, Shrek 2 may end up around 450M. I see Spiderman 2 closer to that mark than the 370M POTC put up. Spiderman2 could very well be the top grosser of the year.

Posted by Ron Yost (Member # 1850) on 06-29-2004, 05:18 PM:

No offense, Dave, but I'm not your son. [Smile]

My 'wet' comment was said at least partially in jest .. but, you don't think such scenes help sell tickets? Of course they do and they do affect the numbers.

Not being a real 'superhero' fan, I'm not real big on watching some guy flying around in a silly tight suit for a couple of hours -without- a little balancing female 'exposure' once in a while. Too bad he doesn't get laid in the film (or does he?) .. that's what he needs. Probably sell more tickets, too. [evil]

Ron Yost

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 06-29-2004, 09:55 PM:

quote: Ron Yost
No offense, Dave, but I'm not your son.

My 'wet' comment was said at least partially in jest .. but, you don't think such scenes help sell tickets? Of course they do and they do affect the numbers.

Not being a real 'superhero' fan, I'm not real big on watching some guy flying around in a silly tight suit for a couple of hours -without- a little balancing female 'exposure' once in a while. Too bad he doesn't get laid in the film (or does he?) .. that's what he needs. Probably sell more tickets, too.

Ron Yost

WOW!!! Such stress and anger! [Mad]

And for such a wee tot like yourself! [Roll Eyes]

I know more about movies then most people can dream to know. The only movie I have never seen is Ladybugs, but Brad says it is my kind of film.

Wet nipple scenes sell tickets but not in the type of movie you see before you. What sells here is that it is freakin spiderman! Wet nipples or not, people go to see spiderman, not mary janes wet nipples. They are a nice add on and people like that stuff, but it is not what is bringing in the bucks.

And historically, wet nipple scenes have not truly added to the overall box office take of the top movies of all time. I saw spiderman three times, and each time loved the wet nipple scene, and sure it was discussed by all that are wet nipple deficient, but it was not what pulled people into the theaters. If it were, the previews would be nothing but wet nipples and the spiderman logo. It would sell tickets, but not that many considering most people that go are young children attached to thier parents, and if this is what they were to expect they would not go.

Anyway I am off the point. I just wanted to see how many times I could use the term wet nipple scene in a single post. That and to say not to get too upset over me using the term...

son...

Yeah, I know Im not your father. with that attitude I am glad I am not, cause I would have to do a through the computer virtual slap across the face, the same I would do to my son for that kind of off the cuff flippant remark, if you were my son, which you arent of course, wet nipple scene.

It is a term used by old farts like myself, wet nipple scene, to denigrate people who we think are immature, wet nipple scene, compared to us, so we put them down by calling them, wet nipple scene, son, wet nipple scene, sport, wet nipple scene, scooter, etc., wet nipple scene.

And ask anyone here, I am one of THE MOST cynical and sarcastic people around, wet nipple scene. Post a picture and join the family, we aren't that bad to hang around, wet nipple scene.

Ciao

Cave [evil]

Posted by Richard Greco (Member # 2032) on 06-29-2004, 11:57 PM:

so HOW old are you Dave?

BTW, we had over 100 people for our 12:01 am show tonight which is the most ever to a midnight show. I think this one will easily break some major records set by the original.

Posted by Richard Greco (Member # 2032) on 06-29-2004, 11:58 PM:

oopsie, sorry for the double post...refresh problem

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 06-30-2004, 01:21 AM:

I am as old as the wind.

I am as old as the sands of time.

I am as old as the oldest of water dropplets.

I am as old as that dried up hot dog at the quickie mart.

However I am young enough to have fun when it is warranted. [evil]

Ciao

Dave

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 06-30-2004, 03:26 AM:

$500 million domestic, $800 million international.

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 06-30-2004, 06:44 AM:

WET NIPPLE SCENE

Posted by Bob Brown (Member # 1205) on 07-01-2004, 01:13 PM:

-------------------------
BOX OFFICE MOJO
BREAKING NEWS
-------------------------

HOLLYWOOD (Box Office Mojo) – Spider-Man 2 faced its blockbuster destiny
on Wednesday and snared an estimated $38.6 million, according to early Box
Office Mojo estimates.

The $200 million plus Marvel Comics adaptation captured the record for
biggest Wednesday ever, soaring past The Lord of the Rings: The Return of
the King's $34.5 million.

Actual numbers will be posted by around noon Pacific time today...

FULL STORY:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/articles/news/?id=040630bo.htm

Posted by Kyle McEachern (Member # 2250) on 07-01-2004, 02:20 PM:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=529&e=1&u=/ap/20040701/ap_en_mo/film_spider_man2

quote:
LOS ANGELES - "Spider-Man 2" took in $40.5 million in its first day, a record debut that positions the film to beat more box-office highs through the Fourth of July weekend.

Paul Dergarabedian, president of box-office tracker Exhibitor Relations, said Thursday that "Spider-Man 2" could go on to shatter other debut records, including the best three-day weekend of $114.8 million for "Spider-Man."

Ticket sales Wednesday surpassed the previous debut record of $39.4 million that the original "Spider-Man" grossed in its first day two years ago.

The opening-day figure for "Spider-Man 2" was even more remarkable since it came on a Wednesday, when business is slower than on weekends. The first "Spider-Man" debuted on a Friday.

"We're in uncharted territory looking at midweek numbers this big," Dergarabedian said. "I remember when $40 million was a big opening weekend for a movie not that long ago, and now that's a single day in the middle of the week."

The best previous debut for a movie opening on Wednesday was $34.5 million last December for "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King."

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 07-02-2004, 02:56 PM:

quote: Kyle McEachern's Posted Article
"I remember when $40 million was a big opening weekend for a movie not that long ago, and now that's a single day in the middle of the week."

That's because ticket prices went up. When will the hype end?

=TMP=

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 07-02-2004, 06:22 PM:

The hype will NEVER end because this is SHOW BUSINESS. It's called showmanship!

Brings to mind a book I have about the promo campaign for "The Wizard of Oz." They went on and on about the "thousands and thousands of extras" when there were really only a few hundred. So this is nothing new.

Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 07-02-2004, 09:34 PM:

The $40,000,000 comment has very little to do with ticket prices, and much more to do with the oversaturation of screens in this country.

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 07-02-2004, 09:57 PM:

Mike..

Thank you for taking the words right out of my mouth.

Five years ago, 8000 prints was UNHEARD of, for the most part. These days, it's common practice. [Roll Eyes]

How can we, the exhibitors, continue to profit and grow when the majority of all tickets are sold in the first 7 days of a film's opening? Very few films have 'legs' these days. This is a result of the oversaturation of ALL markets. Right now, there are 16 prints of Spiderman within a 30 mile stretch.. 9 of which are less than 4 miles apart at two mega's...

I'm glad to see the business, but I'd rather see it spread across three or four weeks rather than 3 or 4 days...

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 07-03-2004, 01:53 AM:

You would think that theaters would learn how to make more money for themselves by now. If they have less prints, than the movie would be at their theater longer and still be doing well. The longer a theater has a print, the less percentage they pay, right?

Posted by John Scott (Member # 520) on 07-03-2004, 09:45 AM:

It depends Jeremy. A lot of theatres are going from booking in the traditional 80/20 to 50/50 sliding scale to an agrigate amount that doesn't adjust (I've heard quoted around 55%).

I guess that there are pros and cons to each, but the latter option encourages theatres to book more prints for opening weekend.

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 07-03-2004, 12:05 PM:

quote: Jeremy Fuentes
If they have less prints, than the movie would be at their theater longer and still be doing well.

Not if other theaters in the city are showing the same movie in many of their screens. This would only work if the theater is one of the very few showing the movie in a small town.

Posted by Ray Kaufman (Member # 2351) on 07-03-2004, 12:35 PM:

I’d have to agree with Pravin’s comment on showing on fewer screens to stretch the run. This is USER driven, and you have to be able to meet the demand, when the demand is there. The public has become so extremely intent on seeing the current rage on opening weekend, it’s impossible for the little guy to compete in larger markets. We’ve evolved, rather rapidly, into a society of “I want what I want when I want it and that’s now dammit!!” If I can’t meet that demand, I lose.

It’s all intertwined. Driven by the major corps. Three screens to six screens to multiplexes to megaplexes. In the summer months, that 20 screener may be playing only six or eight films. And the studios/distribs love it. Automatic income, Instant return.

I don’t think any other industry in the last 75 years, has so drastically morphed and evolved as the movie business, and just when someone thinks it’s settled – Whamo, think again.

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 07-03-2004, 12:53 PM:

Yeah, but I bet those 16 prints of Spiderman have all but 30 people in each show on the weekdays. But they still have to run them all. I think someone once said in this vast forum that megaplexes only do about 15% capacity on a typical weekday, and MAY reach 35% on a typical summer weekday (non-holiday).

The REAL way to run a megaplex is to run all 15 copies of the latest rage on the weekend, and on Monday, cut it down to 5 screens, and show arthouse or independent fare on the other 10 screens, which usually gross better on the weekdays, anyway.

But no, instead I can look forward to getting a private show of Spiderman in the largest auditorium on a Tuesday afternoon. [Smile]

It also irritates me when there are so many prints that showtimes are less than 10 minutes apart. Midnight shows, for example: 12:01, 12:05, 12:10, 12:15, etc... If they built an auditorium that can hold 1,000 people, they could get away with one show, and everyone goes home early. But then you get those people who don't want to be seen with the 12:05 crowd, and the 12:15 crowd talks too much... [Roll Eyes]

=TMP=

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 07-04-2004, 10:14 AM:

The real point that is bieng missed here is that the number of screens is less to do with anything but the complete lack of attention by our viewing public.

They line up around the block to see it opening day, and if you don't have enough prints, and there is not enough prints anywhere to see it, they eventually give up and wait for it to come on HBO or DVD or whatever.

It isn't about hype, it is completely about the simple fact that people are now conditioned to live in the moment, tommorrow be damned! The majority of people will not go to a theater if it has been out more than two weeks. They want what's fresh, new, and exciting. And in the summer, there is something new every week.

Are the too many prints? Should we cut them down for legs? No way. Cut the number of prints and you cut your customers off. They wont come in two weeks, they want it now. What we all need is not fewer prints and more movie legs, we need more quality product like Spiderman 2, and we need it every single week, in order to keep the attention of our public.

So there it is, speculation over. No matter how few prints you have, the average movie goer and the average movie will never see the light of each other after two weeks. So much more quality product is needed, and much few pieces of crap.

Ciao

Dave

Posted by Robert L. Fischer (Member # 2424) on 07-05-2004, 01:28 AM:

After 5 days, I still stand by my prediction of Shrek 2 being the highest grossing film of the year.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-05-2004, 02:11 AM:

Thomas, I couldn't agree more. But you know what the really funny part (read: sad) is? 8000 prints later and yet your dollar house will end up getting a beaten to crap print while all of the mint condition prints end up getting junked!

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 07-05-2004, 11:41 AM:

Brad, don't even get me started. Two replacement prints of HELLBOY later, and the best one out of the three has green platter scratches. We gave up. [Frown]

And what's worse is I have people who live near film depots telling me they junk shrinkwrapped prints all the time. And keep shit like the stuff I have to painstakingly repair every week.

We only got one -- ONE -- virgin print the whole time we've been open, and that was "Beyond Borders" and what happened with this brand-spanking-new print? The sound was out of sync for the last 15 minutes of a reel!! [Mad]

Tomorrow, I will have to order a replacement print for Kill Bill Volume 2, because a customer ran out complaining that the picture is jumping. I ran into the theater to witness what looked like the start of a brainwrap: picture jumping up and down, framelines visible, etc. I ran to the booth -- NOTHING is wrong!! IT'S THE PRINT!!! Reel 8 has such a bad vertical jump, that they probably printed it during an earthquake. Unbelievable. Oh, and the print number is 8508. Eight Thousand!!!

Lower print runs = higher quality.

Dave -- it would really suck if that line wrapped around the building got inside the theater and were treated to a print with out-of-sync sound or some other lab anomaly because the theater didn't have the manpower to pre-screen all 8 prints before the mindnight show.

=TMP=

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 07-05-2004, 02:46 PM:

When I saw Dodgeball, it had a hairline scratch down the middle ON THE SECOND DAY! I think I was the only customer to complain.

Posted by Bevan Wright (Member # 1884) on 07-05-2004, 04:21 PM:

'Spider-Man 2' Scores $180M in Six Days

2 hours, 30 minutes ago

By DAVID GERMAIN, AP Movie Writer

LOS ANGELES - "Spider-Man 2" pulled in a record $180.1 million in its first six days and obliterated other box-office highs over the long Fourth of July weekend, according to studio estimates Sunday. The previous best six-day opening had been $146.7 million for "The Matrix Reloaded" last year.

AP Photo

AP Photo
Slideshow: Movies: 'Fahrenheit 9/11'

"I think our hope was to go into the heart of the summer and grab the biggest six days possible. That's pretty much what happened," said Jeff Blake, vice chairman for "Spider-Man 2" distributor Sony.

Last weekend's top film, Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11," fell to second place with $21 million over the four-day weekend, raising its total to $60.1 million. The film, Moore's assault on President Bush (news - web sites)'s actions regarding the Sept. 11 attacks, could become the first documentary ever to top $100 million.

Hollywood had a record Fourth of July weekend, with the top 12 movies taking in $158.5 million from Friday to Sunday, beating 2002's previous high of $139 million.

"Spider-Man 2" took in $115.8 million from Friday to Monday, far ahead of the previous best four-day holiday gross of $95.6 million set by "Shrek 2" over Memorial Day weekend this year.

With $152.6 million in its first five days, "Spider-Man 2" also shattered the $129 million record of "Shrek 2" for biggest Wednesday-Sunday debut.

"Shrek 2" did strike back, though. Its $7.9 million weekend gross lifted its domestic total to $410.2 million, pushing "Shrek 2" above the original "Spider-Man" ($403.7 million) for the No. 5 spot all-time.

Director Sam Raimi, star Tobey Maguire and other key cast members returned for "Spider-Man 2," which continues the saga of Marvel Comics superhero Peter, now a broke college kid juggling two jobs, a hectic class schedule and nighttime crime-fighting.

The movie received rave reviews, with many critics saying the sequel outdid the original. Lavish visual effects and explosive action sequences, blended with Peter's human struggle between sacrifice and self-indulgence, made for an irresistible combination, said Avi Arad, head of Marvel Studios and a producer on "Spider-Man 2."

"I really believe there is a Peter Parker in all of us. We all live in this crazy world, and Peter stands for something good and likable and heroic," Arad said. "It's the ultimate wish fulfillment to get to soar into the sky and do good things. I believe people want to do that. But in his heart, Peter Parker is just a human being."

From Friday to Sunday, "Spider-Man 2" took in $88.3 million, missing out on the best three-day weekend record of $114.8 million held by the first "Spider-Man."

The first movie opened on Friday, so its initial business all came on the weekend, while the sequel already had rung up about $64 million in ticket sales Wednesday and Thursday. "Spider-Man 2" also had a comparatively quiet Sunday on the Fourth of July, when many people focused on outdoor activities such as parades, picnics and fireworks.

"Spider-Man 2" originally was scheduled to open the Friday before the Fourth of July, but the studio moved it up two days to get a jump on the holiday weekend.

"If they didn't have a good movie, I think they would have waited," said Paul Dergarabedian, president of box-office tracker Exhibitor Relations. "But they were confident enough to put it out on Wednesday and let the buzz build, and it really paid off."

Estimated ticket sales for Friday through Monday at North American theaters, according to Exhibitor Relations Co. Inc. Final figures will be released Tuesday.

1. "Spider-Man 2," $115.8 million.

2. "Fahrenheit 9/11," $21 million.

3. "White Chicks," $12 million.

4. "Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story," $10.45 million.

5. "The Notebook," $10.3 million.

6. "The Terminal," $10.2 million.

7. "Harry Potter (news - web sites) and the Prisoner of Azkaban," $8.1 million.

8. "Shrek 2," $7.9 million.

9 (tie). "Garfield: The Movie," $3.6 million.

9 (tie). "Two Brothers," $3.6 million.

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 07-05-2004, 06:45 PM:

quote: Robert L. Fischer
After 5 days, I still stand by my prediction of Shrek 2 being the highest grossing film of the year.

Your original prediction was that spiderman 2 would gross closer to POTC gross(370M+) than Shrek's. I personally think Spidey 2 will be the highest grosser of the movies released so far, and probably the rest of the year(i doubt anything huge is coming up later). But even if it doesn't, it will be so close to shrek 2's grosses, the difference will be hardly significant.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 07-06-2004, 01:42 AM:

quote: Pravin Ratnam
(i doubt anything huge is coming up later).

You're kidding, right? What about "The Incredibles?" It's going to get even more talk than the usual Pixar film does, because of the strife between Pixar and Disney. If it doesn't suck, it'll be gigantic.

Then there's "The Polar Express," based on a popular book, while it isn't going to be a Harry Potter, it already has people asking questions about it -- good sign.

Posted by Robert L. Fischer (Member # 2424) on 07-16-2004, 02:50 AM:

I'm very good at predicting grosses, and I'm still very confident about this prediction. On that note, it looks like Spider-Man 2 will fall behind Shrek 2's pace after either today's grosses or tomorrow's. Boxofficemojo.com reports that after 15 days, Spider-Man 2 sits at $272,674,954, while after 15 days, Shrek 2 had grossed $271,515,827. This is, of course, after the Memorial Day weekend for Shrek 2, but keep in mind that its 2nd weekend was nearly as successful as its 1st and that it is beating Spider-Man 2 signicantly in the weekday grosses now. It's hard to beat the legs that a good kids' movie has.

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 07-16-2004, 01:52 PM:

Well Robert, I agree to the extent that Spidey 2's total was never a sure bet to be the highest this year(even if I guessed it would), but it's overall grosses being huge were always a sure bet. You are probably right on Shrek 2 remaining the highest grosser this year. However this is a thread about Spidey's grosses, and I still stand by my original response to Robert's prediction where Spide 2 is going to be much closer to Shrek2's grosses - near the mid 400s at best - (whether Spidey is the biggest grosser or not) than POTC's grosses(370+). When you get to such high numbers, a few million doesn't matter as long as it reaches a certain range.

It will be fun to see what happens whatever the end result. So far, I have had good luck predicting movie grosses within decent ranges. However, I am concerned with my streak coming to an end with F911. I was on target for the opening week more than so called experts in the media about the averages and the grosses. But I also said it would not make even a third of 360M which was KD's prediction. Right now, I don't know what to think. I was thinking more like 80-90M total grosses before F911 came out, but the movie is already at that point.

On the other hand, Harry Potter 3 does not seem to be doing as great as many expected compared to HP2. It's a good thing I did not make a prediction on that because I would have been wrong. I thought 300+ easy. Hell, I probably would have not predicted Shrek 2's overall grosses. Because quite frankly, while many of us knew it would be huge, I had no idea before it released Shrek2 would be marching on this strong , months later to such a high gross.

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 07-18-2004, 09:35 PM:

Spiderman 2 will match Shrek 2 in 17 weeks.

The countdown begins...

DUN DUN DUN!!!

Besides, there is something about someone that is so brazenly proud of bieng right that I must absolutely be more right than them.

DUN DUN DUN!!!

Ciao

Dave

Posted by Robert L. Fischer (Member # 2424) on 07-31-2004, 02:55 AM:

Spider-Man 2's grosses are falling in line with Passion of the Christ's as POTC's superior legs will start to show this week and beyond. [Big Grin]

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 07-31-2004, 01:02 PM:

I gotta admit man, it looks unlikely Spidey 2 is going to come close to Shrek2's grosses(meaning within 10M) let alone exceed it. My only hope for a little redemption is if it grosses more than midpoint between POTC and Shrek2.
box office comparisons
Heh heh. it would be funny if Spiderman 2 grossed right between Shrek2 and POTC when all said and done.

Posted by Robert L. Fischer (Member # 2424) on 07-31-2004, 02:25 PM:

It's all in good fun. [Smile]

I'm not trying to be a jerk -- just keeping the friendly competition alive.

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 07-31-2004, 06:52 PM:

Same here. That's why I have to beat you. Because it's friendly to beat you. DUN DUN DUN [evil]

I finally broke down and sat through Shrek 2. I couldn't take shrek 1, hated that damned thing sooooo much. There is only so much Mike Meyers and Eddie Murphy I can stand. In this one they pretty much sucked too.

However it was very cute. I love cats. Good kitty action.

So I have to admit that shrek 2 has what it takes to beat the hell out of its competition. However, shrek 2 has what spiderman didn't have.... NO COMPETITION. When shrek 2 came out, that is all there was to really go and see. Spiderman 2 made the mistake of coming too close to so many action flicks, that it is getting diluted.

However, Shrek is near dead, and spiderman is still gaining at about 15 million a week. Granted that will not hold for long, but it will beat Passion and will come very close to shrek.

I on the other hand keep paying to see spiderman, because I believe that my measly little money will somehow overthrow the green giant.

here i go again.>

C
I
A
O

Dave

Posted by Robert L. Fischer (Member # 2424) on 07-31-2004, 09:07 PM:

I highly doubt Spider-Man 2 will reach $400 million. It's feasible, but unlikely. Even if it did reach $400 million, it would still have to gain a little more to fall more than halfway between POTC and Shrek 2. Spider-Man 2 will end up right around $385 million.

Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 07-31-2004, 11:11 PM:

Don't forget about the now-infamous .....

Labor-Day-weekend reissue.

Spiderman is still in theatres, but look for Shrek to be back. While not announced, this has become somewhat common, ever since BV did the Dinosaur/Gone in 60 Seconds combo reissue. The their was MIB2/Spiderman, the original Shrek and on and on ...

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 08-26-2004, 09:55 AM:

Robert, you are correct sir!
Spidey 2 at 365M and dying. Yep, it seems like it will be closer to POTC's grosses.