"Ant-Man" Opens Slightly Below Projections, Still Hits No. 1

[MindofShadow]

I have to disagree, I don't think it is 'superheroes' that the audience is getting burned out on, but more likely the exact same tone and similar formula that Marvel has gone with for all of it's movies. People will continue to soak up superhero movies year in and year out for decades as long as there's variety in tone. That's why there's Hawaii 5-O and Law and order SVU. Marvel is just giving us Hawaii 5-O every single time. But with Fox and WB set out to start pouring in more of their stuff, the variety that's been missing so far will start evening things out.
But yeah, the super hero oversaturation/burnt out argument I don't believe.

We will find out if its the tone of the movies with F4 coming out soon... it has an anti-marvel tone and F4 is far more known than Ant-Man.

Should show us a lot.

[Colossus1980]

Next year will be interesting with 7 super hero films over 6 months.

Agreed. If you add in Fantastic Four this August, which of these movies will flop and not get another sequel?

[Vakanai]

We will find out if its the tone of the movies with F4 coming out soon... it has an anti-marvel tone and F4 is far more known than Ant-Man.

Should show us a lot.

Eh, it will also have to be of a certain level of quality (Fox has hits and misses there) and maybe deal with people still being sour on the previous F4 films. Then there's the race-changing, the fact it doesn't look like the comics, and maybe other factors. Even with a different tone the draw for a film can be wildly different. I'd say the real test for audiences wanting different/more varied tones will come more with Superman/Batman film and the X-Men film next year.

[MindofShadow]

Next year will be interesting with 7 super hero films over 6 months.

Deadpool
BvS
CW
X-Men
SS
Gambit
Strange

with Star Trek and Star Wars: Rogue One coming out that year correct?

If I was Suicide Squad and Gambit, I would be scared to death right now.... Even X-men could suffer due to being right behind BvS and CW. Why is X-Men opening anywhere near CW?

It will be very, very telling year...

[MindofShadow]

Eh, it will also have to be of a certain level of quality (Fox has hits and misses there) and maybe deal with people still being sour on the previous F4 films. Then there's the race-changing, the fact it doesn't look like the comics, and maybe other factors. Even with a different tone the draw for a film can be wildly different. I'd say the real test for audiences wanting different/more varied tones will come more with Superman/Batman film and the X-Men film next year.

BvS is gonna be fine. It will be huge... its BvS... a casuals wet dream

X-Men though... that will tell us a lot. It will be following BvS and is really close to CW.

[RobinFan4880]

Cross was more developed and justified in his actions than most MCU villains.

Has any one noticed how important Daddy issues are to the MCU?

Thor and Loki have daddy issues. Stark has daddy issues. Betty Ross has daddy issues. Hope and Cross have daddy issues. Ultron had daddy issues. Gamora and Nebula have daddy issues. Star-Lord is going to have daddy issues. Spider-Man is going to have (surrogate) daddy issues.

We should be at least somewhat honest here...

Yes, Ant-Man isn't one of Marvel's larger properties. But neither was Guardians of the Galaxy. Yet that managed to do tremendous box office with a cast that had less notoriety at the time than Ant-Man.

Given this, as well as Avengers: Age of Ultron's less-than-world-breaking box office, I think there should be some minor concern that the market is being saturated with super hero films and audiences are getting burned out.

Guardians of the Galaxy had zero competition in the box office for weeks and appealed to people who are not necessarily into superhero flicks but are into sci-fi action (a large demographic). Ant-Man looked like it was just going to be another Marvel superhero flick. Also Guardian's advertising campaign was huge and extraordinarily well done. Ant-Man had a few trailers, that's it. Additionally, the nerd rage about Pym not being Ant-Man and not inventing Ultron was a big no-no for the tiny but vocal nerd community.

Ultron had to contend with the "Fight of the Century!!!!" which had a price tag of 80 bucks to watch it on pay per view. That sucked away part of its potential audience both in terms of people not going to the theaters on the day of the fight and people not going to see the film period due to lack of funds (at least on the first week).

Even then, it still grossed over a billion dollars. It was still a massive success.

[Colossus1980]

It's still a great box office figure considering it's a solo hero with little brand recognition opening after quite a few super hero movies the past few years. The general public probably has become pickier on which hero movies to spend their money on since to them it's all the same, like how anyone lumps in any genre.

The true test will be to see how long it can last in the theatre. Can it reach 150M? 175M? 200M?

[MindofShadow]

It's still a great box office figure considering it's a solo hero with little brand recognition opening after quite a few super hero movies the past few years. The general public probably has become pickier on which hero movies to spend their money on since to them it's all the same, like how anyone lumps in any genre.

The true test will be to see how long it can last in the theatre. Can it reach 150M? 175M? 200M?

First Cap did 175

someting in the 150-160 range seems possible

[vaf2675]

This movie was amazing. It will have great word of mouth.

The reason Ant Man didn't do amazing at the box office was due to two issues, 1) lack of name recognition and b) stiff competition with Minions.

If Guardians of the Galaxy had to contend with Minions, it too would have underperformed.

The Despicable Me franchise is a powerhouse, no doubt about it.

Even if Minions only drew a tenth of Ant Man's potential audience away (and I am willing to bet it was much larger than that), Ant Man would have earned 5 million more, easily putting it in the safe zone (63 million).

Have to agree. If Minions had not been around, this movie could have easily topped $75 million at least. But since Despicable Me has such a strong following and a humongous marketing campaign backing it up, plus this is the only huge children's movie dominating screens right now, it was obvious that Minions was going to hurt a lesser known Marvel property. Heck, it could have probably even hurt more well known properties like Thor or Captain America.

Marvel should just be happy that they were able to dethrone a monster franchise like the Minions just with Ant-Man.

[Luke Cage]

I have to disagree, I don't think it is 'superheroes' that the audience is getting burned out on, but more likely the exact same tone and similar formula that Marvel has gone with for all of it's movies. People will continue to soak up superhero movies year in and year out for decades as long as there's variety in tone. That's why there's Hawaii 5-O and Law and order SVU. Marvel is just giving us Hawaii 5-O every single time. But with Fox and WB set out to start pouring in more of their stuff, the variety that's been missing so far will start evening things out.
But yeah, the super hero oversaturation/burnt out argument I don't believe.

This is an overused and inaccurate statement. GOTG is not like CA:WS, which is not like Thor, which is not like Antman, which is not like Avengers. It just isn't.

[Mia]

I think that the box office was pretty impressive for a B level character with a rather chessy name. I had no plans on seeing this film, until I read two favourable reviews from non-comic critics. I actually enjoyed it very much and was impressed that they added a great deal of substance to the film. Namely the bit about redemption and wanting to be the sort of person that your child looks up to. They could easily have taken the lazy way out and just made it into a live action cartoon or relied mostly on special effects. But they didn't. The film reminded me why I started collecting comics all those years ago when creators would bend over backwards to make it so that the books weren't just something suitable for sub-literate 15 year old boys. But was something which could be enjoyed by people who had a post-secondary education. I liked the post credit scene and looks forward to the next CA film.

[Calighoula]

It seems like GoG was just a perfect storm movie wise. I think some looked at it as "It means Marvel can put any hero and make 94 million!" which is what makes Ant-Man seem "disappointing"

GoG just hit all the marks it needed to hit to blow the F up. There were a reasons projections were in the 60's and instead it made 94. No one saw that coming.

Projections for Ant-Man were always in the low 60's. Minions prevented it from getting there.

It depends on whether or not you think Marvel is a "brand." Marvel's people feel it is. I didn't expect Ant-Man to open at $58M, and I think Minions prevented zip. I concluded that an "ant-sized superhero" didn't have the same crossover appeal as a sci-fi movie or Downey's goatee. I wonder if what many consider the movie's money shot — the little Thomas the Tank Engine train toppling over in staggeringly bad time lapse — might have even cost the movie some money. I didn't like it in the trailer, and I didn't like it when I watched the movie.

[Mia]

Has any one noticed how important Daddy issues are to the MCU?

Thor and Loki have daddy issues. Stark has daddy issues. Betty Ross has daddy issues. Hope and Cross have daddy issues. Ultron had daddy issues. Gamora and Nebula have daddy issues. Star-Lord is going to have daddy issues. Spider-Man is going to have (surrogate) daddy issues.

Not suprising. Many people are affected by their parents. And the characters you mention above all seemed to grow under powerful/dominating men. So it would be of no surprise that would have rubbed off on them either positively or adversely. It’s not a comic book thing. It’s also factors into real life.

[Agent Z]

Cross was more developed and justified in his actions than most MCU villains.

Has any one noticed how important Daddy issues are to the MCU?

Thor and Loki have daddy issues. Stark has daddy issues. Betty Ross has daddy issues. Hope and Cross have daddy issues. Ultron had daddy issues. Gamora and Nebula have daddy issues. Star-Lord is going to have daddy issues. Spider-Man is going to have (surrogate) daddy issues.

Most of these are lifted from the source material.

[MindofShadow]

It depends on whether or not you think Marvel is a "brand." Marvel's people feel it is. I didn't expect Ant-Man to open at $58M, and I think Minions prevented zip. I concluded that an "ant-sized superhero" didn't have the same crossover appeal as a sci-fi movie or Downey's goatee. I wonder if what many consider the movie's money shot — the little Thomas the Tank Engine train toppling over in staggeringly bad time lapse — might have even cost the movie some money. I didn't like it in the trailer, and I didn't like it when I watched the movie.

everyone laughed at it in every preview I saw it in

everyone in my theatered laughed at it

every projections I saw for antman put it int he 55-65 range.


and you are telling me that minions (50 million) and trainwreck (30 million) didn't hurt Ant-Man at all?


Marvel is a brand right now. One that has resulted in 12 straight profitable movies right now. Doesn't mean they are all going to be crazy blockbusters like IM3, Av, Av2, GoG but they have all been insanely profitable. Ant-Man has already nearly made back its budget (115 WW on budget of 130) in one weekend