Box Office Analysis Why X-Men Days of Future Past will Break the 300 Million Dollar Barrier

 Every superhero film franchise, and other franchises in general have a saturation point. There is a reason why even though the films are separated by 500 million dollars, Superman(1978) and Marvel’s The Avengers(2012) are actually very close in terms of actual attendance. Others in this group are Batman(1989), Spider-Man(2002) and The Dark Knight(2008). Considering both inflation and The Avengers’ 3D boosted tickets*, all of these films are within 25% of each others’ ticket sales. They all reached their respective series’ saturation points. Star Wars(1977) and Raiders of the Lost Ark(1981) are other examples of this, as their arguably superior sequels, The Empire Strikes Back(1980) and Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade(1989) started out with more, but ended with less.

*Even though The Avengers outgrossed The Dark Knight, their ticket sales are very close due to 3D upcharges.

 As can probably be gleaned from the above examples, the saturation point is often hit by the first film in a franchise. So, why do I think the defacto seventh film in the X-Men franchise will hit it? Because for one thing, it has already been proven that the first film was not the highest ticket seller of the franchise. X-Men(2000) sold less tickets than both X2: X-Men United(2003) and X-Men: The Last Stand(2006). The latter two being in a virtual tie for first, with “X3” just edging X2 by a mere 135,000 or so. As far as franchises go, only the anomalistic Lord of the Rings franchise has multiple(all three, really) films so close to the series’ saturation point. Exceptions to a rule do not make or change the rule. Also, even the highest point in the X-Men series, “X3“, sold less than half of the top tier of the above examples. There is room for improvement, and I think X-Men: Days of Future Past can capitalize on that fact.

X-Men: The Last Stand would have made over 300 million if it was released at today’s prices and had the advantage of 3D upcharges.

 Now that we have established that the X-Men franchise has yet to reach its peak, we can move on to why this particular X-Men film has more going for it than any of the past seven editions. Marvel’s The Avengers was a phenomenon, and while I firmly believe phenomenons cannot be predicted, they can be seen with 20/20 vision once they have occurred. Let me state for the record that I think X-Men “7” has zero chance at replicating The Avengers’ success. That said, I see no reason it can’t do half of it. Both X2: X-Men United and X-Men: The Last Stand adjust to between 285-290m when inflation is taken into account. Neither film had what The Avengers had….the team-up gimmick. X-Men: Days of Future Past has both the original cast from “X1” to “X3” and the more recent X-Men: First Class.

 The Avengers had a team of four different franchises: Iron Man, The Hulk, Thor and Captain America. However, I believe the real pull of The Avengers was seeing Iron Man with these other superheroes. Iron Man, as played by Robert Downey Jr, is unequivocally the star of Marvel’s connected universe of films. Just as Wolverine, as played by Hugh Jackman, is the star of the X-Men universe. Yes, Wolverine is nowhere near as popular as Iron Man in film. But he is probably half as popular, considering the average of his spin-off films is basically half of the average of the three Iron Mans. Attendance-wise, Wolverine’s two films average 20-21 million tickets. Iron Man’s average is 40-44 million. X-Men First Class was a bit lower than Wolverine’s average, but having an X-Men film without Wolverine(Cameos don’t count) makes one wonder just how well an Avengers film would do starring just Captain America, Thor and Hulk. Surely not 600 million plus. In addition, First Class has done very well for itself in the ancillary markets, which has boosted that X-Men group’s fanbase. Even though the last two entries in the franchise, the aforementioned First Class and The Wolverine(2013), may not have blown the world up, they were still well received by theater-goers and on video.

No, cameos don’t count toward the typical Wolverine and the X-Men boost.

 Having Wolverine team-up with the First Class team(as well as the original team) is going to be more appealing than either “X2” or “X3” were.  And considering that those two films nearly reached an inflation-adjusted 300 million without the advantage of the team-up gimmick or 3D prices(and as long as director Bryan Singer delivers a quality product), I don’t see how X-Men: Days of Future Past does not make over 300 million dollars. If X-Men: Days of Future Past sells half of Marvel’s The Avengers‘ tickets, it will make 310 million. I believe it can go even higher.

 Another good comparison for the X-Men franchise is the Fast and Furious franchise. After two rather great outings, the franchise fell to its low point with The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift(2006). And even though that film and 2Fast 2Furious(2003) before it, failed to become classics, the next chapter Fast and Furious(2009) managed to just squeak by 2Fast in admissions. Fast and Furious brought back most of the original cast, much like Days of Future Past is. With its two stars, Vin Diesel and Paul Walker back together. That team-up(see a pattern here?) managed to bring the series back to a typical attendance level despite the failings of its predecessor. And then Fast 5(2011) took the team-up(there it is again) aspect to the next level by bringing back most of the characters from previous films and having them team-up(I know, it’s getting old by now) with The Rock, Dwayne Johnson. That film took the entire franchise to new heights and its sequel even more so(by teaming up yet another character from past films, OK I’ll stop now). Much like some pundits are saying about the X-Men franchise, most thought this franchise had left its glory days in the past, but they were proved to be very wrong.

Paul Walker, you will be missed.

 X-Men: Days of Future Past will make more than 300 million dollars in the domestic market. How much more? Only time will tell that tale. But, considering Fox has green lighted another sequel in 2016, I think it’s safe to say they know what they’ve got and are planning to milk it for all it’s worth. And really, who can blame them?

 

Comic to Film- Bottom 10 Adaptions of Supervillains(Blockbusters)

And, here we uh…don’t go…

Here are my opinions on the worst comic to film adaptions of Supervillains. Now, I’m concentrating on films that made over 100 million at the domestic box office. Their adaptions were the most significant, since they reached more people.

10. Green Goblin II

Film Version: “New Goblin”:

 WTF? It’s like they heard the complaints from fans about The Green Goblin’s Power Rangers-esque costume in the first film and decided to give us all the middle finger with this design. The only reason this is not higher on the list is that the motivations of the character and his overall arc are very much from the comic. At first, Harry wants revenge on Spider-man/Peter Parker for killing his father. After the initial battle, Harry is injured then develops convenient amnesia. Later, Harry uses the Goblin equipment to help Spider-Man. But, why, oh why didn’t the filmmakers use this as an opportunity to improve on the original design and give us a Green Goblin we could truly fall in love with? The “New Goblin”? That was the best they could come up with? Ugh.

9. Doctor Doom

Film Version:

 DOOM!!!! Or in this case: Doom?

 I think the film version of the good Doctor gets a bit of a bad rap. I think he works better than most give him credit for. But, as far as an adaption of the comic book version, he falls well short. However, I think the filmmakers had a steep hill to climb adapting a character that plays way better on the comic page than a scriptwriting page. It’s hard to have the main villain walking around saying “DOLT!” and “I AM DOOM!” without it coming off as corny. Still, it is what it is, and the film version of Doom is anything but a commanding presence. I like Julian McMahon, but my Dr. Doom is not a whiner or a lovelorn fool. And, in neither film do we see him as a monarch. He craves power, sure, but not the kind of power the comic version wants. The Dr. Doom I know would have only used Silver Surfer’s power as a means to an end, not the end. The end being total world domination, of course. Why? Because he is DOOM!

8. Whiplash/Crimson Dynamo

Film Version:

 Was it in Mickey Rourke’s contract that he never wear a mask? And what is with Marvel’s mask-ophobic thing anyway? I understand that it’s easier for characters to emote sans a mask, but even in posters, all of their characters don’t look the way they are supposed to look. It’s kind of silly to show all of the Avengers in the middle of a battle with no masks on, since they have them on in the film. But I digress…

This character was supposed be an amalgamation of two Iron Man villains, Whiplash(or Blacklash) and Crimson Dynamo. So, why, on God’s green Earth did he not have armor? I mean, the scene in which he is hit repeatedly with a limousine is just flat silly. His legs would have been shattered into hundreds of pieces. It is inherent that a villain be menacing, but I never thought for a moment this guy could beat Iron Man. His best scenes are merely humorous, which is appropriate since he was kind of a joke.

7. Mephisto

Film Version:

I love Peter Fonda. But he is not Mephisto. The makers of Ghost Rider had a chance to adapt a classic character from Marvel Comics and decided to just turn him into a basic Devil. A cool Devil, maybe, but nowhere near as dark and menacing as Mephisto is in the comics. I’m not going to even mention the sequel’s version because the sequel is not worth mentioning.

6. Bane

Film Version:

You thought I meant that version didn’t you?

 I could have placed Mr. Freeze or Poison Ivy from Batman & Robin on this list, but this brutish, mentally-challenged version of Bane makes their adaptions look like Martin Scorsese’s The Departed adaption. In the comics, Bane was smart, calculating and shrewd. It’s in his very character that he looks musclebound but has brains to match Batman’s. So, to turn him into a brainless pile of muscle was a slap in the face to anyone who liked the comic version. Thank you, Joel Schumacher. The only reason this is not higher is because he is just not that important to the “film”.

5. Venom

Film Version:

Topher Grace.

I’m sure they hired him since he looks a lot like Tobey Maguire. They were going for an evil twin—a doppelganger. But, in doing so, they ruined a quality inherent in Eddie Brock. Since the alien costume enhanced the traits of its host, the body builder Brock was much stronger than Spider-Man when the costume grafted to him. You see, the costume actually absorbed then replicated Spider-Man’s powers when it took over his body. So when it took over Eddie’s, who is physically superior to a non-enhanced Peter Parker, it made him that much stronger than Spidey. Add in the cosmically convenient origin of the costume itself and you have one of the top five worst adaptions in film history.

4. Silver Samurai

Film Version:

 Talk about your missed opportunities.

The comic battles between Wolverine and Silver Samurai are legendary. I mean, just look:

So, instead of this, we get an old man in a robotic suit. Genius.

3. Deadpool

Film Version:

Speaking of “genius”…

…what say we take a character famous for his big mouth and take his mouth away?

2. Parallax

Film Version:

I know, I know. They retconned the character in 2004 to be a fear entity, but the original Parallax was just Hal Jordan gone to the dark side of the force. That was the spirit of the character. Especially to those who stopped reading comics in the late 90s/early 00s when most comics just lost their way(“fun”). But the real reason this is at #2, is because they obviously didn’t learn from the worst adaption ever…

1. Galactus

 

Film Version:

Hey, Hollywood, we don’t like ginormous smoke monsters. There are no classic films in which the main villain is a cloud of smoke. Even the Wizard of OZ wasn’t a cloud of smoke(and he wasn’t a villain either). But, at least the cloud of smoke in Star Trek: The Motion(less) Picture had motivation. What was Galactus’ motivation in Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer? The munchies? I guess there were no planet sized Big Macs he(it?) could send the Surfer out for, so Earth just had to do? Personally, I found the best aspect to the character of Galactus was that he was just so darned big, he couldn’t be bothered to even notice humans. And if you got his attention it was a freakin’ huge deal. Hard to get a cloud of smoke’s attention. Maybe Reed should have just made a giant Dustbuster and Silver Surfer would not have had to risk his life to save the Earth.

But, of course, Surfer didn’t die because we’re going to see him in his own film. Right? Nope, not gonna happen and it was all because Galactus was a cloud of smoke.