This won't even match solo domestically and that was rightfully considered a bomb. It won't match justice league worldwide and that was considered a flop.
Looks like there is marvel studios fatigue.
Most movies have a 60% drop in their second week. This movie is making more than the first one.
share"Most movies" don't have a 63% second weekend drop. Sorry.
shareThey do, actually. Also, this article further proves you wrong:
https://deadline.com/2018/07/ant-man-and-the-wasp-dying-to-survive-incredibles-2-china-global-international-box-office-1202422761/amp/
Skip to the end: "A worldwide finish of $600M is foreseeable for these big-hearted bugs." Which means Andre will be eating his own shit soon enough.
They don't. And if they do, they were flops to begin with. Just like this film.
Average drops for successful movies are 50-58%. This is well beyond that. Spiderman homecoming also turned out to be a massive disappointment as well not even clearing a billion (spiderman is A list).
This should be doing at the minimum winter soldier business. May not even outgross Logan.
Spider-Man Homecoming was the highest grossing superhero movie in 2017, beating Wonder Woman which was DCEU's most successful film. It did better than the Andrew Garfield movies. What are you even talking about?
Also, why should A&W beat Winter Soldier? The Cap movies are much bigger money makers than Ant-Man movies.
Because the antman comics are actually more popular than captain America. There is no reason why antman should make less and spiderman to make less than a billion when jurassic world 1 and 2 both did well over a billion without the benefits
shareAnt Man comics are NOT more popular than Cap comics. Ant-Man barely had his own series and is considered a b-list hero whereas Cap has been going strong since the 40's. Do you even read comics?
As for making 1 billion, that has nothing to do with anything. Most movies don't make 1 billion and that includes all the DCEU movies.
I can't wait for his next reply, I'm sure it will be substantive.
shareThey killed off captain america for a time in the 2000s just because sales were low.
Antman is going strong in comic sales. There is no reason why it should be well behind winter soldier.
Antmans 2 domestic gross might be impressive if the budget was only 1 million dollars. Not the 160 million in production costs alone.
Yep, he didn’t disappoint.
shareCap was not killed off in the 2000s because sales were low. In fact, his comic continued as it was all a set up for a different storyline. Meanwhile, Ant-Man has struggled with the VERY few titles under that name. You are reaching. Ant-Man has never been very popular.
shareI certainly remember more antman comics being sold in my comic book stores than captain america.
shareWhat Ant Man comics? For most of his 50+ years of existence, he has had few ongoing titles. Hank Pym hasn’t had a series since the 60’s and it was cancelled after a few years. Lang has only recently gotten a series and I am not sure it is still around. Meanwhile, the third Ant Man had a series that barely lasted a year. What comic are you referring to exactly?
shareIt's a hard drop from what was already a mediocre opening weekend. Production budget over 160 million as well.
shareDont know why you are being harrassed all the time. You do make great points.
shareThank you.
shareScott Mendelson from Forbes:
Speaking of which, yes, Ant-Man and the Wasp will probably break Spider-Man's record for a second-weekend MCU drop (-62%). It has earned $112m in eight days and should earn $28.1m (-63%) for the weekend to give it a still-solid $132m ten-day total. Nonetheless, it has been showing exceptionally tiny legs since its opening day, and at this point, it's essentially tied with Ant-Man (a $24 million second weekend back in 2015) in terms of day-to-day tickets-sold comparisons.share
The good news is that Mama Mia! Here We Go Again and The Equalizer 2 might not be as brutal of competition. The bad news is that Mission: Impossible Fallout looks like it's going to crush the competition in two weeks due to strong buzz and rave reviews. To be fair, Ant-Man and Mission: Impossible Rogue Nation closed out summer 2015 (alongside Straight Outta Compton). So the hope for Disney and Marvel is that A) history will repeat itself, or B) the movie will make enough overseas to still be a huge hit on its mere $160 million budget. I don't have the overseas updates, but tomorrow's post may be a tad more optimistic even if it continues to dive in North America and ends up under $200m domestic.
He concedes that domestic is not-so-hot.
Your point is?
1. It is not as "Gloom and Doom" for Disney as some paint it out to be.
2. The jury is still out as ticket sales for the following summer days roll in.
3. He continues to reserve judgement "His tomorrow post maybe a tad more optimistic" for the weekend numbers.
My point?
You tend to jump the gun on posting Disney's fortunes as being misfortunes all too often. You like to take the Half-Empty approach for Disney and "Thy cup runneth over" with effusive hyperbole for Universal, Warner, DC, etc.
SM seems to be a bit more cautious and even handed. You? Always a bit heavy handed.
***
[–] QueenFanUSA (959) 11 days ago
Any Marvel movie, at this point, that can't even open over 80 million is an underperformer. It's predicted to open just 10-18 million above the original and when you factor in ticket price inflation that's barely an improvement.
The budget for this one is higher than the first and we're talking about a franchise where it's last two films opened over 200 million.
***
Those are simply untrue statements but never the less your opinions, which paints AM&TW's $75.6 OW as a negative even though it is 30% higher than AM's. You try too hard.
Ah, one of these... Like this page needs another. Alright, let’s do this.
That last sentence in particular though...
... sure, after Black Panther and Infinity War shattered all kinds of records, became the most buzzed about movies, and the latter ended up becoming the highest grossing superhero/CBM of all time. (Extremely doubtful any upcoming movie this year shall come close to IW’s success.) Now Ant-Man, a character who even now can be considered obscure, is small in scale for Marvel and yet... it is performing pretty damn well all things considered. Moreover, this movie didn’t have ANYWHERE NEAR the large budget of Justice League, so it’ll likely to turn in a nice profit unlike, that’s right, Justice League. This was perhaps the MCU’s first movie to open below 100+ million in almost two years. So? Not reaching the same heights of the previous movies starring bigger and more impactful Marvel heroes, doesn’t prove this fatigue anti-Marvel/anti-Disney critics love to claim is already here.
Although Ant-Man is something of a household compared to when the first movie came out, hardly anyone expected the character to compete with the big dogs just yet. This sequel had a bigger opening weekend than the original and it has already made more than what it cost to make. If there is the slightest chance the sequel falls short of the original, I bet you it’ll nevertheless manage to make a profit unlike the “monster” that was supposed to be Justice League. I know someone like you isn’t going to look at the bigger picture and understand why this latest MCU film isn’t a sign of your wishes coming true, but Ant-Man and The Wasp is doing quite well. Yeah, analysts had higher expectations for its opening weekend, but guess what, it did better than Disney themselves anticipated. And any way you slice it, its opening and the way it’s been holding up is no sign of a failure. Far from it.
Marvel fatigue? Yeah, as if that hasn’t been said repeatedly for the last 7 years or so. My god, this new Marvel movie starring a relative newcomer to the MCU and big screen (who non-comic fans never even heard of) isn’t making close to a billion or more... automatical failure! Nice try. 10 years of this film franchise (the highest grossing in film history) and it broke record after record this year. Did I forget to mention the movies were worldwide phenomenons? Oh yeah, that fatigue is making its way. 🙄 If/when that day ever comes, I see the MCU remaining the most profitable film franchise for years to come. Their success was unprecedented and what they accomplished is going to be applauded for a long time. At the moment, Marvel only continues to exceed expectations. Nuff said.
The first Ant Man opened below 100 million as did Incredible Hulk, Thor, and I think Captain America First Avenger. It is doing better than the first AM movie, which is always a success for any sequel. The estimate is that it will end up at about 600 million, meaning DCEUfanticarmy loses his bet.
Also, it's hilarious that one of the smallest MCU films is apparently doing better commercially and critically than Justice League which was DC's big tentpole movie.
Yup. Almost every entry in the MCU did much better both critically and commercially (certainly critically) than Justice League and any of the DCEU movies that weren’t WW did. Even the MCU movies that technically grossed less money, didn’t actually LOSE money like Justice League. And other than WW, every single DCEU movies received mixed reviews at best; on the mighty Rotten Tomatoes, not one MCU movie is rotten.
You can’t really argue against this, but obviously those DCEU fanatics love to make outrageous claims. And, yeah, the fact that Ant-Man has already proven to be a successful property for Marvel, whereas a movie featuring DC’s biggest names failed, tells you everything you need to know.
The critical reception for the marvel films are dubious at best. Disney has been known to pay critics off to either praise its films or pan others. That's why these dc films have a bad reputation.
Jurassic world 2, thank god, is performing extremely well despite disney coordinating a pr attack with paid critics against universal.
The people I talked to preferred batman v superman over civil war. The people that saw the snyder cut of justice league says it blows infinity war out of the water
There is zero proof Disney ever paid critics for good reviews. This is why multiple Disney films/TV shows have had poor critical reception. If Disney did the things you accuse it of, that would be fraud and there would be major legal repercussions.
shareSo why is every marvel film at fresh? Even james bond and other popular franchises with this many films dips into rotten.
shareThe Marvel franchise has two rotten tv shows: Inhumans and Iron Fist. The Punisher TV show was barely fresh. Meanwhile, on the movie side, Incredible Hulk and Thor 2 only had about 70% on RT, which is not THAT fresh. I think Captain America First Avenger and Age of Ultron were only in the mid-late 70's. Being fresh and having all critics love the movies are two entirely different things. The RT algorithm is pretty crappy as well. A movie can get a 3 out of 5 stars and it's considered a fresh rating even if the review itself says it's an average film. So if a little over half the critics claim a movie is average, it will be fresh on the site.
That's before we get into Disney having multiple live action flops over the years such as John Carter, Tomorrowland, Solo, the last Pirates of the Carribean movie, etc. If Disney pays its critics, why would they only do that for Marvel and not for their main films.
Meanwhile, some franchises are more popular than others. Pixar is another franchise with almost all fresh movies if I remember. And sure, James Bond doesn't have all fresh movies but that franchise is 50 years old and has about 30 movies under its belt with multiple actors for Bond. Of course it's going to have one or two rotten films.
So, outside of the Marvel movies being popular, what evidence do you have of Disney paying off critics? Keep in mind that a situation like this could destroy the company. It would be illegal for them to do this.
Marvel TV isn't marvel studios.
If we bring in other marvel stuff, why aren't you bringing in fantastic fail 2015 and x men origins wolverine.
Also, disney tends to leave their own live action films alone and pays for the animated films, star wars, and marvel films.
Marvel TV is Marvel Studios. Not only are they a part of the same universe and have had movie characters crossover onto SHIELD and Agent Carter, but the TV side is owned by ABC which is owned by Disney.
And why would Disney not pay for their live action movies if they are willing to pay for Marvel or Star Wars? And again, I need actual proof of Disney paying off critics. Simply saying "the movies are somewhat popular" does not cut it, especially when there are still several critics out there who give Marvel bad reviews.
Marvel TV is part of marvel entertainment. Marvel studios is now part of disney.
And the tv shows may as well be not canonical. The latest season of agents of shield contradicted events of season 6.
It would be too easy if disney paid every single critic all the time. That's why they exclude certain critics and exclude their own live action films.
Tell me one time a star wars, animated, or marvel film that got mostly negative reviews since 2010.
Margel Entertainment is owned entirely by Disney. The TV shows are included which is why they are attatched to the movies. They are owned by Disney. Daredevil, Agents if SHIELD, all of it.
And again, why would Disney protect subsidiaries and not themselves. Also, how is it that MCU movies still get some bad reviews? And again, if Disney paied off critics theb it would have been exposed a long time ago as it would involve way too many people. Particularly people who would benefit from exposing them.
Antman 2 didnt even open as well as thor 2 and doctor strange despite the marvel studios brand being a lot bigger since then. This is starting to indeed show the marvel fatigue.
shareA&W is already doing better than the previous Ant-Man movie. Also, the last two Marvel movies broke BO records. I'm not sure there is much fatigue there.
shareActually it's starting to look doubtful it will even finish ahead of the first antman.
shareIt's estimated to make 600 million at the BO. That's more than the first movie. All estimates say it's doing better than the first considering it opened better and isn't in every country yet.
shareActually it's starting to look doubtful it will even finish ahead of the first antman.
I am still chuckling a little that you compared it to JL as if those films would have comparable expectations lol
It will earn a profit and likely finish ahead of the prior film..so profit for the least popular character of the current crop of Marvel films.
Justice league and antman both had similar budgets. Warner bros includes its marketing budget while disney excludes them from the budget. Both are over 300 million. Only solo might have had a slightly higher budget.
shareJL had a massive budget lol It already cost more than Ant-Man before Snyder was replaced and millions were spent on reshoots..and this is before the huge cost of marketing.
shareA huge chunk of Justice League's budget went to reshoots and a few million were spent simply removing a mustache. It had a famously bloated budget.
shareI'm not talking about what money was spent on which. I'm talking about antman being just as expensive as justice league
shareIt wasn't. Ant Man did not spend millions of dollars on reshoots and a mustache, so Justice League had a bigger budget.
Justice League's budget ended up at 300 million. http://ca.ign.com/articles/2017/11/07/justice-leagues-budget-reportedly-revealed
Ant-Man and Wasp is estimated at about 170 million.
https://screenrant.com/ant-man-wasp-budget-movie-cost/
You jest surely?
Justice League cost $300million.
Ant-Man and its sequel COMBINED come in at $10million LESS.
Go back to school
The 300 million included marketing. The 160 million for antman did not. It's at least the production budget.
shareFeel free to provide a link for that claim, everywhere has $300million as the production budget with no mention of marketing.
Whatever way you try to spin it, Marvel got better value from two movies for Warners one.
hahahahaa rip marveltards mcu empire is going to fall from here and new empire aka dceu will born
marveltards should ashamed at this collection
Not sure what kinda legs this thing had. It was always going to have a good opening weekend but the fact it has very little to do with everything else going on in the MCU and that it is just light entertainment is why it's probably not getting repeat viewing. It almost seemed like a family film when I saw it and families have moved on to HT3 now.
Have a short review of this movie if anyone is interested. If you feel there is something I could be doing better, I would definitely love to hear it. Review here - https://youtu.be/hjGwk7t7bU8
It's hilarious that you would hold Ant-Man 2 to the same standard as Justice League, which was supposed to be a billion dollar juggernaut.
Why are you DC trolls so hilarious and desperate? Is that the intent?