MovieChat Forums > Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny (2023) Discussion > Currently tracking at a $70 million dome...

Currently tracking at a $70 million domestic OW.


Unremarkable pace this close to release. This is feeling like a Flash type scenario where projection continue to fall as the week continues.



It looks like $65M-$75M OW right now

https://forums.boxofficetheory.com/topic/30019-the-box-office-buzz-and-tracking-thread/page/1100/#comment-4529543


The Flash (2023), aka The Flop (2023), had a domestic OW of $55.7 million. It's budget is $210 million.

Indiana Jones is currently tracking at a $70 million domestic OW... it's budget is $295 million.



Mega bomb incoming?

reply

TROLL JOB.

reply

The Little Mermaid which flopped had a $95.6 million domestic OW which puts The Flash and probably Indiana Jones to shame. Whack! This summer is a disaster.

reply

save us axel foley!

reply

Why aren't people going to the cinema?

And what is it about the words 'INDIANA JONES' that is telling CINEMA-FANS, to go away?

Have these motherfuckers never seen or heard of Raiders of the Lost Ark, The Temple of Doom, or The Last Crusade?

FUCKING INGRATES.

reply

No one wants to see an old washed-up Indiana Jones who is made to look like a fool next to his brilliantly, better goddaughter.

It's that simple... No, it REALLY is that simple.

reply

I do. Time is not on anyone's side you moron. I want to see Indy in one last Adventure. I want to see an older and frailer Indy. ...just because his goddaughter is younger and has more energy doesn't mean she's better and more brilliant....idiot

reply

I know your schtick...

reply

Oh yeah....??? Tell me why that is.....because I see what so many of you are doing.

reply

Coward... 😂

reply

They could have made THAT work. EVerything I hear is that they choose to do the other.

reply

Have these motherfuckers never seen or heard of Raiders of the Lost Ark, The Temple of Doom, or The Last Crusade?

Maybe they've heard of all of them but they've also heard of Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull as well?

reply

That's what I was going to say, they brought Indy back for one more adventure in Crystal Skull and although it tricked many into the theaters it left them wanting no more.

Everyone knows what this one is likely to be and honestly the trailer just makes one want to watch the original trilogy, not go and see how woke they were able to make the 5th.

reply

The thing about the Crystal Skull is even that was released fifteen years ago now! And he already looked knackered enough / played out back then - and that's even before talking about the terrible cgi, Mutt's Tarzan swinging, etc...

They should have just left it with The Last Crusade. That ending was absolutely perfect for the series - I mean they literally had them riding off into the sunset.

reply

Blah blah blah.... last crusade was great but it was far from perfect. Lots.of bad effects shots as well as silly implausible scenes... 😂

reply

Raiders > Crusade > Doom > Skull

reply

I like them all. But Temple of Doom is probably the most embarrassing of the films. Kate Capshaw whining the whole film and Short rounds weak kicks taking out men three times his size was laughable. Not to mention some of the cheap looking model work during the railcar scene. Still love the film but it has the most issues. Especially in the way of coincidence .... 😂

reply

Raiders > Crusade >>Doom >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Skull

reply

Agreed, in fact I can pretty much just watch Raiders and Last Crusade back to back and have a great time and see it as a beginning and ending for the character.

Ford looks great for his age but this is just embarrassing that he’s reprising the role at his age. What next? Is Angelina Jolie going to play Lara Croft again in her 50s? It’s silly.

reply

There can't be 50 year old heroines??

reply

What's woke???? Tell me. What is woke about this movie. A movie that you have yet to see.....list the things that will make it woke..

reply

I said "likely to be" because all the elements are lining up for it to be a wokefest and I do hope I am wrong but come on man..

reply

I don't understand why so many people challenge the concept of "woke," as though it is something that doesn't exist. To some extent it will mean different things to different people, as with all concepts, but for those using it as a form of denigration it generally means to emphasize perceived social justice at the expense of other aspects of the thing in question.

Within the context of this movie, and based upon a combination of trailers and online reviews, the insertion of a female character (Helena Shaw) who upstages the titular hero is an example of female inclusivity and dominance at the expense of the main character. Since Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) are given so much focus these days, it isn't unreasonable for people to surmise that certain writing/casting decisions are made for DEI reasons over what would have been good for the movie. This isn't to say that female characters must be stereotypical damsels in distress, but Indiana Jones should never be upstaged in his own movie. Again, this is based on viewer reviews, but for one example, Helena Shaw punches out Indiana Jones, the guy who gets in fist fights with towering, buff, Nazis on the regular.

At the end of the day you either see what they're doing or you don't. I can't change that.

reply

Did you see the movie yet??

reply

I explicitly stated, "and based upon a combination of trailers and online reviews," so there's your answer.

I understand that the next argument will be that people who haven't seen the movie can't possibly have a valid opinion, but I watch movie reviewers who tend to share my taste in movies and who provide specific details and spoilers. Obviously, a primary source (i.e. the movie itself) is the most authentic source, and I could very well watch it and conclude that it wasn't as bad as it was made out to be, but I can still make judgments about specific scenes that were relayed by reviewers.

In fact, the whole point of trailers and reviews is to convince people to watch the movie (or not), specifically because people will make judgments before investing time and money. Ultimately, the onus is on the filmmakers to convince us to watch the movie and they haven't done the best job here. Based upon what I know of the movie, there is a high likelihood that I'll be disappointed.

Returning to my example of Helena Shaw knocking out Indiana Jones (without further spoilers, I'm aware of the context), that is one example of "wokeness" for some people since there is a trend to depict women physically dominating larger men in media (which some people refer to as "girl boss" moments). I understand that Indiana Jones is an elderly man at this point, but he was always a larger-than-life, pulp era hero who could stand toe-to-toe with muscle-bound Nazis and prevail through a combination of resilience, wit, and his lucky hat. We don't want to see even an elderly Indiana Jones get knocked out by a thirty-something woman (or man for that matter) who doesn't have the grit and experience that Indiana Jones has. It's unearned.

I won't go into the other scenes that were discussed, but the central theme was that Indiana Jones was torn down rather than given a proper send off (which already ocurred in The Last Crusade).

reply

Well are you going to see it?

I get that some people don't want to see an old man at the end of his whip. But people are not seeing the upside to it....

reply

Lord Rake the thing is it's not even that woke (if at all), people shouldn't believe everything they hear. I saw the movie and I can confirm this. Is it a great movie? Not really but it's not the worst ever.

reply

Well casting the hardcore lefty was a curveball. It seems the movie just did not appeal to anyone. I heard we wont be seeing anymore Mutt which is one thing they did do right.

reply

They killed off Mutt off screen, in the Vietnam war, I think. Yeah, Indy 5 isn't for everyone it seems.

reply

With Covid still lurking around, its too dangerous to go to the theaters

reply

Oh please.

reply

I don't care at all about a film's box office take, I just want a good movie. The Flash is an excellent superhero film. Did it make a lot of money? I don't know and I don't really care. The first two Indiana Jones films are great. The third one was mediocre, the fourth one terrible. I hope this one is a return to form, though I don't have high expectations.

reply

Ha by every metric you are wrong in your claim. Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade crushes Temple of Doom in every conceivable objective measurement. Whether it be with critics or the mass majority. Also Flash is nothing other than nostalgia bait trash.

reply

Those are subjective measurements, as are any ways to rate films. I do know that the general consensus among those I know is that the first two films are great, and the third one is ho-hum, but even if I'm the only one on the planet who thinks so, it's still a subjective thing. Same with The Flash. I enjoyed it quite a bit, and was shocked by Miller's skill as an actor. I attribute its failure to sell tickets in large part to how bad the previous DC films have been, so by now any film in that franchise is doomed, coupled with the massive post-pandemic decline in movie-going in general.

reply

No that is not actually how film rankings work. The Godfather is considered one of the greatest films of all time. That is true regardless of what you or I think of that film. A film does not need your stamp of approval in order for other people to consider it great. Last Crusade edges out Temple in every way that is the general consensus. You simply like Temple of Doom more. I found Temple of Doom way worse than Last Crusade by miles actually. There are objective logical ways to measure films. You can't completely take out subjectivity but a film is not 100% subjective. There are film making techniques and writing which can be measured objectively.

reply

Now you're conflating two different things rather than admit that appreciation of art is subjective. Sure, you can say that a film is considered by many people to be a great film, but that only means that it appeals to a large audience. You can also find polarizing films that will never top a general list as they are loved by many and hated by an equal number. Or films that are generally disliked by most, but speak to a small number of people. When it comes down to it, opinions on art are 100% subjective.

I also suggest you talk to more people about these particular films. The opinion that Temple of Doom is better than The Last Crusade is not the outlier, fringe opinion you seem to think it is.

reply

No appealing to a large audience would mean the film makes tons of money. Films like Transformers the Fast and the Furious or Jurassic world films make quite a bit of money. Now lets compare for a moment. Are films such as the Transformers movies or the Jurassic world films seen as good as films like Star Wars a New Hope or Schindler's List? A new hope is popular and it is voted on by the mass majority of critics and fans as being a great film. Same goes for Godfather, Schindler's List etc. See with a New Hope it makes way more money than Godfather or Schindler's List. However it does not just stop at well it made loads of money. It is as I stated earlier voted on as being a great film with massive cultural influence. Transformers or the Jurassic World films are seen as disposable entertainment which makes tons of cash.

No you can state things on films which are objective. For instance if you look at something a film pioneered you can quantify it. Take for example Batman 1989. What did that pioneer? That was the first dark superhero and comic book film. You had Donner's Superman which was great but it was not dark. Notice the influence Batman 1989 had on lots of other dark comic book films going forward? That is not my opinion that is an objective fact. I am not stating there is no subjectivity but to state all of it is 100% subjective is not true.

I have and yes it is. When you crunch the numbers it showcases Crusade comes out the winner every time. Not just by critics but by mass majority. It is okay to be in the minority. I am in the minority on certain things as well but I do not deny when I am in the minority like you are trying to do.

reply

Worth noting that in the "rank the Indy films" thread, if you take everyone's rankings and tally 'em up you get

Raiders
Temple
Crusade
Dial
Skull

Not scientific by any means, but interesting in that it mirrors what I wrote above.

reply

The thread does not indicate the majority. The tally of imdb, letterbox, metacritic, and Rottentomatoes user score is a much higher tally of people and votes. Last Crusade comes out on top of Temple of Doom when all tallied up. That is just user score also. When you tally up the critical score Last Crusade completely demolishes Temple of Doom. The majority ranks it as follows. Raiders>Crusade>Temple>Skull. You simply like Temple of Doom more which you are entitled to but the majority does not share that view. Do not try and paint it as if they do.

Lastly you consider Dial of Destiny better than Crusade. Again you are the minority with that sentiment as well.

reply

Not trying to paint anything in any way. My opinion is that Last Crusade is the most dumbed down of the five, hence the most audience-friendly. I would expect it to be very popular, but that doesn't make it better. You seem to equate most popular with best.

reply

My opinion is that it's the best of the entire series. So no I don't see it as most popular being the best. Raiders is considered more popular and better than crusade by the majority. How is Doom better when the love interest is not interesting at all? She's a screaming idiot who is annoying.

In crusade you get a femme fatale who is shady and has a gray area. She's Indy's historical equal. Marion from Raiders is his adventure equal, Elsa is his historical rival and equal. Willie is the exact opposite of Indy in every way. How is Dial better when most of the stunts and set pieces are not done practically. Crusade has brilliant use of practical stunts and Connery is a fun dynamic.

Also you are wrong as well. Fast and the furious is a more popular franchise than Blade Runner is. It by no means is seen as better critically or by the mass majority of users/people. crusade isn't just popular it checked out with great critical scores and scores by users. So no try again with it's only poplar comment buddy

reply

I disagree with your ranking system. A film certainly needs my stamp of approval before I can consider it great

reply

I said nothing about you considering it great or bad. Others don't need your stamp of approval to consider it great. You yourself can consider it whatever you want.

reply

Thats not true. The Motion Picture Association (MPA), consults with me on all new releases for my stamp of approval

reply

Sure.

reply

I saw the trailer during the Raiders re-release. It looked really bad.

reply

This brings up something interesting. If Indy in a multiverse, leapfrogged to our year 1981, he could have watched Raiders of the Lost Ark in a theater

reply

I think this one could have really good legs, though. It'll have really strong word of mouth among women when they hear this isn't just another Indy adventure. Phoebe Waller-Bridge will be his strongest female costar yet.

I can see American audiences really start embracing her as an action/adventure movie hero. Especially the women.

reply

I legit cannot tell if this post is satire.

reply

As we get closer and closer to release the estimates are being refined and it keeps getting worse, current forecast is in the region of just north of $50 million dom OW, with some doubt it'll even make $50 million! Seriously. This is gonna be a major disaster if the forecast is correct

reply

Looks like we will see $300M by next weekend WW. $500M+++ break even is unrealistic at this point.
https://www.boxofficemojo.com/release/rl2776598017/?ref_=bo_hm_rd

reply