Gatsby77

The shot's I'm talking about are films with mega-budgets. Vast difference between giving a relatively new director with 1-2 solid indy hits -- like Sema ($20 million) or even Creed ($35 million) -- to giving them a film with a $100-$200 million budget. Coogler's shot at this level was Black Panther -- and he knocked it out of the park. Du Vernay's equivalent shot was A Wrinkle in Time ($103 million budget) and she whiffed. Mark Webb's still around because when he was given his first $100+ million budget (Amazing Spider-Man, $230 million budget) it still made more than $700 million. Carl Rinsch isn't because after being given $175 million for 47 million, it only grossed $152 million worldwide. Du Vernay belongs to that latter category.

I've said this before but everyone I know who was collecting comics at the time bought multiples of New Mutants 93-100. And for that first year or two, 98 was an $8 key because it was the first Domino -- not because of Deadpool. 98 wasn't nearly as hoarded as New Mutants 100 or X-Force 1, but...it was hoarded.

2,888 slabbed copies of The Walking Dead # 1, vs. its supposed 7,266 print run: 39.7% of the total print run now in plastic.

Interesting. And Jim Lee taking over. I'll say this -- Jim Lee's done a _great_ job with the Justice League title over the past few years. Also - worth reading: http://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/snyder-cut-justice-league-geoff-johns/ Notes that, per Vulture editor Kyle Buchanan, Geoff Johns basically ignored Chris Terrio's -script during the filming of Justice League -- and the resulting dailies so freaked out the Warner Bros. execs that they held a "summit" of writers and directors to view the scenes and suggest fixes. They were: Allan Heinberg (Wonder Woman) Seth Grahame-Smith (Pride and Prejudice and Zombies) Andrea Berloff (Straight Outta Compton) Joss Whedon (Avengers) Which led to Whedon getting the gig. Tweets here: https://twitter.com/kylebuchanan

Well done, sir!

Dude - that's "front-loaded first weekends," as in "greatest fall from Friday to Sunday of its first weekend." Try again, but comparing "first weekend gross" to "final gross." (i.e., compare column 2 to column 3. Column 1 doesn't matter). In other words, look at films that grossed >$100 million (i.e., "hit films") where column 2 (first weekend gross) was >50% of column 3 (total domestic gross). Harry Potter 8 doesn't fit -- $169/$381 = 44%. Neither does Fault in Our Stars -- $48/$124 = 38% Paranormal Activity 3 (# 20 above) does fit, as $52.5/$104 = 50.5%. The film made more than 1/2 its domestic gross its opening weekend. But it's beaten by the four other films I listed.

Huh? Discussion is of "Hit movies" that were so front-loaded. Literally none of the 100 movies on that list came close to grossing anywhere near $100 million domestic. Show me a list exclusively of films that grossed $100 million or more, and made more than 50% or their domestic total opening weekend. Here's a hint. It's: # 1. 50 Shades of Grey # 2. Valentine's Day # 3. Batman v. Superman # 4. Watchmen # 5. Paranormal Activity 3

Def. in the wild. I still have my OO copy of NM # 98 -- a few times a year I pull it out, marvel that I paid $1 for it, consider sending it to CGC for grading (9.6/9.8), and put it back in the box. But my best find in the wild? A small Craigslist score (~60 books) of Bronze Age Marvels about 10 years ago. I met the guy at a Panera, had coffee with him, appraised and bought the lot -- which included an ASM 129 -- paid him about $60 for a $200 copy -- and I was honest about it -- told him the value of the top 10 books (also ASM 121 & some others), the percentage I'd pay for different groupings & bought them all for a few hundred total. Here's the dumb luck part: He said that based on the ad, I was one of 7 people who called him to inquire about the collection -- and specifically ask if a Hulk 181 or ASM 129 were in the lot -- he said no. Turns out, he'd misread the issue number and listed the ASM 129 as ASM 219. So all the other buyers passed, and I was still willing to show up anyway.

Yeah - but I thought Watchmen was a good movie. Risky as hell, given the no-name characters, its nearly 3-hour run-time and subject matter (like the graphic rape scene and graphic violence). I remember sitting there after the lights went up, thinking: I'm impressed - it was a decent adaptation Huh - it actually improved on the comic in several ways (like, no freakin' squid!) Who the hell did the studio think this movie was for? It's like they made it for the die-hard comic fans, _knowing_ it would be impenetrable and/or boring to literally everyone else. Seriously - good movie, but _hard_ to watch if you haven't read the book.

Agreed - but RJRJR specifically questioned whether Infinity War will "double its first week" by the end of its domestic run. I mis-read that as "weekend" and checked the usual suspects -- including those you mentioned. I legit thought it would be Harry Potter 8 -- which was legendary at the time for how fast it fell. It lost 72% in its second weekend -- from $169 million to just $47 million -- that's $120 million worse in second frame. _Still_ was the # 1 film of the year. Nope -- turns out I was wrong -- BvS had worse overall legs.

Dang. You got me. Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Suckness: $166 million its opening weekend -- 50.3% of its total domestic take of $330 million. So there's a case of "didn't even double its first weekend money." I didn't find any others -- the last Harry Potter, last Twilight film, Last Jedi, Civil War, even Green Lantern all made more than double their opening weekends.

You may be right in terms of super-front-loaded. I think the last Harry Potter film (Deathly Hallows Part 2) is the gold standard for that right now: $381 million domestic (good for # 1 film of the year in 2011) but made $169 million of that its opening weekend -- 44% of its total. Internationally it finished at $1.3 billion -- again, a lot for 7 years.

Aren't we still expecting the Joaquin Phoenix solo Joker movie first? You know - the one directed by Todd Phillips and produced by Scorsese?

This. And so now we've got two different Joker stand-alone films coming out? Is DC just annoucing 2-3 projects at a time and then opting to pick whichever one fans seem to like more? I mean -- done right, they both could work. But I'm more excited for a Joaquin Phoenix take than a redux of Jared Leto -- Granted - he was one of the better parts of the turd that was Suicide Squad, but his voice seemed off for the character.

Here's why those analogies don't hold: Immediately before being offered New Gods, Ana Du Vernay had already had her shot -- and missed (big-time), with A Wrinkle in Time. So the better analogy would be seeing Josh Trank's failure with FF, and immediately having a studio turn around and give him $200 million to make a Teen Titans movie. This isn't an indie-auteur being offered a big-budget franchise -- this is someone who had already helmed a big-budget movie that tanked -- losing the studio tens of millions in the process and killing any sequel/franchise hopes. And FYI -- the Russo Brothers' biggest pre-Winter Soldier hit was TV's Arrested Development, not You, Me and Dupree.

I saw this last weekend and agree -- it was solid. Better than I expected, and for analogs I'd say it was better than Atomic Blonde but not as good as Salt. Joel Edgerton continues to be one of my favorite -- and most versatile -- actors.

If those projections hold, Solo could be looking at a total of $210M domestic and $350M worldwide.

Wonder if we'll see it before Gambit?

Eh...It might still hit $200 MM...but $225MM looks impossible at this point.

Yeah - I remember that. DHP # 34 had an Aliens cover; # 35 had a Predator cover; they met/fought in # 36 -- and then all three were reprinted in AVP # 0, right? I also recall that _everyone_ bought AVP # 1 -- it was the # 1 highest printed book the month of release, which was crazy at the time for a non-Marvel/DC book.

Also, while we're (sort of) on the topic, anyone know why DHP # 36 was released with two covers? Just seemed sort of random.

I think part of the Boba Fett disconnect is that Star Wars # 42 is his first cover appearance as well. But yeah -- I'm a Star Wars fan and it never occurred to me that say...# 2 is the first appearance of Han Solo, or that the first Yoda (and Boba Fett) is the ESB paperback (which was one of the few Star Wars comic-related items I actually owned back in the day).

I always loved that the Key & Peele Lando sketch featured Lobot at the end -- "don't leave me here with your mandroid!" http://www.cc.com/video-clips/wkrswn/key-and-peele-lando-s-fan

This is spot on. Re. point 3 (Expectations) - Forbes' Scott Mendelson has pointed out the unfortunate possibility that Rogue One over-performed. Had it made only $650-$800 million worldwide, or even less -- the expectation wouldn't be baked in that even a one-off "Star Wars Story" _had_ to do $1 billion+ At some point, these films should be done truly small scale (a la $160 million) and be allowed to make just $400 million worldwide. As it stands, Solo may finish at just $250 million domestic -- which is respectable if you're a normal film but not (yet) if your a Star Wars one.