Latest News

Alien Covenant Stalks the US Box Office with $36 Million

After Alien Covenant was predicted to earn over $40 million at the domestic box office this weekend, the latest box office figures are just in. Alien Covenant still entered the charts at number one but its takings were slightly lower with $36 million. On Friday, it opened with $15.3 million in 3716 theatres including $4.2 million from Thursday night previews with $36 million for the entire weekend. In comparison, Prometheus opened back in 2012 with $51 million in its opening weekend so we have a $15 million drop.

This is to be expected unfortunately – Prometheus was pretty hyped as Ridley Scott’s return to science-fiction. Going back even further, AvP Requiem opened with $10 million over Christmas while Paul Anderson’s AvP opened with $38 million. Unlike Prometheus, Alien: Covenant hasn’t been released in 3D and it hasn’t opened in many IMAX screens in America (with most of them still occupied by Guardians of the Galaxy 2) so that causes a drop in revenue when compared to Prometheus.

 Alien Covenant Stalks the US Box Office with  Million

Alien Covenant made $36 million in its opening weekend domestically.

Last weekend, Alien Covenant took $42 million in 34 countries overseas and made another $30.3 million this weekend when it opened in a further 52 new countries giving it a foreign gross so far of $81.8 million. That combined with the domestic takings and we have a worldwide gross of $117.8 million. The good news is it has made more revenue than its $97 million budget and it still has yet to be released in China (June 16th) and Japan (September 15th) which are two heavy hitters when it comes to movies.

So where do you think the final box office gross will end up? Prometheus made $403 million so it’s safe to say Alien Covenant won’t reach those heights but it will surely do better than AvP Requiem’s $128 million and AvP’s $172 million. But then again, both AvP’s were made pretty cheaply compared to it (around $60 million and $40 million respectively).

Alien Covenant still received positive reviews from critics with a Fresh rating of 73% on Rotten Tomatoes and it should continue to perform well over Memorial Day weekend though next weekend also sees the release of Baywatch and Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales.

Keep a close eye on Alien vs. Predator Galaxy for the latest on Alien: Covenant! You can follow us on FacebookTwitter and Instagram to get the latest on your social media walls. You can also join in with fellow Alien fans on our forums!



Post Comment
Comments: 526
« Newer Comments 1234567891011 Older Comments »
  1. Jonesy1974
    Quote from: fiveways on May 30, 2017, 03:48:24 AM
    Quote from: Aquarius8 on May 30, 2017, 03:32:29 AM
    I with you guys, I'm from the Pre-RT era so I don't view it as the gospel, I only brought up the scores to show that "Prometheus" wasn't universally loved and that could be a carry over to "Covenant".   In no way was I blaming it, just analyzing that maybe some people were on the fence after it.  Yes "Covenant" still has to stand on it's own as a film and clearly there are flaws but you can't deny Predecessors effects on Box office.  Perfect example is "Episode I: Phantom Menace" which was a prequel too.   

    It broke so many records and didn't get horrible reviews at the time of it's release yet by the time "Episode II: Attack of the Clones" came it, it dropped in Box office from "Menace" because it was a polarizing film.   I honestly feel like Ridley can't win at this point.  They complained about the lack of Alien and then on "Covenant" he tries to bring that back and he still criticized. George Lucas also was criticized heavily for trying to tell Vader's full story.  Ridley only tried to tell the origin story for the Engineers but people criticized him.   Peter Jackson was also criticized for "Hobbit" prequels and the 2nd "Hobbit" film dropped after the first.   I think it's very difficult to do prequel series and satisfy everyone.

    The only people that complained about the lack of the alien were people on the internet and forums like these.  The general population didn't give a f**k if it was in it.  They were there to see Prometheus.  Scott switched gears and attempted to appeal to a niche audience and got burned for it.  He listened to the vocal minority of the internet.

    Prometheus's issue was never the lack of xenomorph to the majority of the view audience.  It was the lack of consistent editing.

    I don't think the general public ever had a desire to see a sequel to Prometheus to be honest.
  2. SPECIAL FORCES
    The major reason it does not do well is that they released it the after GOTG2 and before Pirates of the Caribbean. Also the trailers were not as good as the film deserved. I hope they make at least one more.I want to see the next film end before Alien starts.
  3. 900SL
    The bell curve tells us that half the planet is at or below average intelligence. Additionally 40% of the worlds population is below the age of 16.

    That's the Fast and Furious Target Audience.

    The old adage that nobody went broke underestimating the stupidity of the average cinemagoer holds true. There's big money in flashing lights and loud noises

    The R rating requires that AC delivers on more than an adolescent level. Additionally, and because it is a sequel/prequel, it inherently has a  pedigree to live up to. It fails in that regard, and as such, has been panned by those critics that are either invested or not in the pocket of Fox.
  4. AlienFanIL17
    I'm still hopeful that Covenant will get a sequel.  It will most likely be the last one, and the one that ties into the original Alien.  A lot of people have made a lot of good points on this site since the movie came out.  The powers that be just have to find that sweet spot between Prometheus and the Xeno. 

    Prometheus came out and a lot of people were disappointed that the Xeno was nowhere to be found.  Then the pendulum was moved across the spectrum to the point of Covenant being basically a full blown Alien movie.  They need to find that sweet spot, in my opinion, of balancing the philosophical aspects of Prometheus and the Xeno of Alien.

    I think the prequels tied their hands behind their back because of the nature of the Xeno.  It bleeds acid.  So you can't shoot it or blow it up if it's on your ship.  So the only option is the airlock like in Alien and Aliens, which has obviously already been done. 

    The future of this series will be in whatever will hopefully be in Alien 5, and I'm not talking about the cancelled Alien 3.5.  I'm also not talking about Ripley necessarily.  If they have a great story to finish her out, then great.  I don't believe the Engineers are done after Covenant.  They can re-appear in an Alien 5 on other worlds.  There can be different, exotic, and more deadlier versions of the Xeno.  They need to do an Alien 5 in order to move away from the traditional Xeno that we have seen so far.  Allowing the beast to change will allow the freedom to start giving us things we've never seen.  That way you don't know what's going to happen already.  Gives us a Xeno that can be shot or blown up on a ship because it wouldn't destroy the ship with the acid blood.  To counter that perceived weakness, give it a higher intelligence so the hunt would have more tension.  The scene that pops into my head is from Aliens when Hudson says, "How could they cut the power."  I think that's why I liked the Neomorph in Covenant, and would have loved to see more of it.  That little bastard was fast, lol.

    I think if Alien is to survive as a franchise, and I agree with what some have said, it can't be a traditional space horror with stupid characters just there to be lambs to the slaughter.  Alien 5 and beyond needs to keep the philosophical creation elements, I feel.  It doesn't need to be front and center, but those elements will keep the audience engaged and thinking. 
  5. dookie
    Quote from: fiveways on May 30, 2017, 03:48:24 AM

    The only people that complained about the lack of the alien were people on the internet and forums like these.  The general population didn't give a f**k if it was in it.  They were there to see Prometheus.  Scott switched gears and attempted to appeal to a niche audience and got burned for it.  He listened to the vocal minority of the internet.

    Prometheus's issue was never the lack of xenomorph to the majority of the view audience.  It was the lack of consistent editing.

    Nailed it, my friend. Absolutely nailed it.
  6. fiveways
    Quote from: Aquarius8 on May 30, 2017, 03:32:29 AM
    I with you guys, I'm from the Pre-RT era so I don't view it as the gospel, I only brought up the scores to show that "Prometheus" wasn't universally loved and that could be a carry over to "Covenant".   In no way was I blaming it, just analyzing that maybe some people were on the fence after it.  Yes "Covenant" still has to stand on it's own as a film and clearly there are flaws but you can't deny Predecessors effects on Box office.  Perfect example is "Episode I: Phantom Menace" which was a prequel too.   

    It broke so many records and didn't get horrible reviews at the time of it's release yet by the time "Episode II: Attack of the Clones" came it, it dropped in Box office from "Menace" because it was a polarizing film.   I honestly feel like Ridley can't win at this point.  They complained about the lack of Alien and then on "Covenant" he tries to bring that back and he still criticized. George Lucas also was criticized heavily for trying to tell Vader's full story.  Ridley only tried to tell the origin story for the Engineers but people criticized him.   Peter Jackson was also criticized for "Hobbit" prequels and the 2nd "Hobbit" film dropped after the first.   I think it's very difficult to do prequel series and satisfy everyone.

    The only people that complained about the lack of the alien were people on the internet and forums like these.  The general population didn't give a f**k if it was in it.  They were there to see Prometheus.  Scott switched gears and attempted to appeal to a niche audience and got burned for it.  He listened to the vocal minority of the internet.

    Prometheus's issue was never the lack of xenomorph to the majority of the view audience.  It was the lack of consistent editing.
  7. gantarat
    Quote from: PierreVW on May 30, 2017, 02:37:00 AM
    Quote from: Alionic on May 30, 2017, 02:15:02 AM
    Fox is clearly waiting on the Chinese box office returns before publicly announcing a decision on the sequel, which makes all the adamant assertions from many of you here that "hurr the franchise is dead kthxbye' that much more eye-rolling and pathetic.  If something as bad as Resident Evil: The Final Chapter made $160 million in China, then Covenant has a solid chance of making $100 million there at the very least.

    I hope you are right.

    Only if Covenant have 3D and a lot of actions.
  8. Aquarius8
    I with you guys, I'm from the Pre-RT era so I don't view it as the gospel, I only brought up the scores to show that "Prometheus" wasn't universally loved and that could be a carry over to "Covenant".   In no way was I blaming it, just analyzing that maybe some people were on the fence after it.  Yes "Covenant" still has to stand on it's own as a film and clearly there are flaws but you can't deny Predecessors effects on Box office.  Perfect example is "Episode I: Phantom Menace" which was a prequel too.   

    It broke so many records and didn't get horrible reviews at the time of it's release yet by the time "Episode II: Attack of the Clones" came it, it dropped in Box office from "Menace" because it was a polarizing film.   I honestly feel like Ridley can't win at this point.  They complained about the lack of Alien and then on "Covenant" he tries to bring that back and he still criticized. George Lucas also was criticized heavily for trying to tell Vader's full story.  Ridley only tried to tell the origin story for the Engineers but people criticized him.   Peter Jackson was also criticized for "Hobbit" prequels and the 2nd "Hobbit" film dropped after the first.   I think it's very difficult to do prequel series and satisfy everyone.

  9. PierreVW
    Quote from: fiveways on May 30, 2017, 02:52:14 AM
    Quote from: PierreVW on May 30, 2017, 02:42:04 AM
    Quote from: fiveways on May 30, 2017, 02:39:02 AM
    Quote from: Aquarius8 on May 30, 2017, 01:50:42 AM
    Total Lifetime Grosses
    Domestic:    $59,972,181      37.3%
    + Foreign:    $101,009,281      62.7%
    = Worldwide:    $160,981,462   


    Globally will save this movie overall.  I think this proves how polarizing "Prometheus" really was.   I'm sorry but you can't make an Alien movie without the Alien and this is coming from someone that liked the film.   If the Deacon had a bigger role, maybe people wouldn't be so on the fence with "Covenant".   I think us diehards forget general/causal audiences really complained about the lack of "Alien" in the last film.   Now they may be on the fence for this one.  With all that said I don't think it' doing that bad.   "Prometheus" and "Covenant" = 560+ Million Globally is not bad so Ridley shouldn't feel he failed bringing the franchise back.  I think "Awakening" should come quicker and not be a 5 year wait again.

    That still isn't break even point.  They have to make at least another 50m between Japan and China to even begin to break even.

    Quote from: PierreVW on May 30, 2017, 12:06:08 AM
    Quote from: NickisSmart on May 29, 2017, 11:33:54 PM
    Quote from: Spidey3121 on May 29, 2017, 10:32:57 PM
    LOL at the people taking shots at the Fast & Furious franchise. Yes, some of the movies are terrible, but others are undeniably awesome.

    The same could be said of the Alien franchise.

    I disagree.

    ALIEN and ALIENS are masterpieces and 2 of the greatest movies of all time.

    The 8 Fast & Furious movies are FAR from masterpieces.

    I hate everyone of those movies with a burning passion, but a few of them have higher critic scores on Rotten Tomato's than Prometheus and Covenant. 

    Also of interest is Covenant has slipped below Prometheus's RT score.

    Like I said before: you are taking RT too seriously. RT is nothing.

    Remember All Critics Killed BLADE RUNNER in 1982. All Critics NEVER worked in a film.

    That actually isn't true.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065466/?ref_=nm_flmg_wr_8

    That is because the original version of Blade Runner is actually kinda the shits,  It's filled with interesting ideas but is killed by the forced narrative choices.  The directors cut and final cut though are great.  Yes I am old enough to see every version in order of release, which is watching a movie get better and better as time goes on.  I'll never be a fan of the 1982 version. 

    People view RT as gospel in some circles.  I was just pointing out critic reviews.  I personally hate RT and most modern critics as most come off as people who more get off seeing movies before everyone else.  They are the review equal of people who post "FIRST" on youtube videos or make "reacts" videos.

    OK.

    Usually I disagree with RT. I don't care about RT. All Marvel Disney movies have HIGH notes in RT. All Marvel Disney movies are MEDIOCRE TO ME.
  10. fiveways
    Quote from: PierreVW on May 30, 2017, 02:42:04 AM
    Quote from: fiveways on May 30, 2017, 02:39:02 AM
    Quote from: Aquarius8 on May 30, 2017, 01:50:42 AM
    Total Lifetime Grosses
    Domestic:    $59,972,181      37.3%
    + Foreign:    $101,009,281      62.7%
    = Worldwide:    $160,981,462   


    Globally will save this movie overall.  I think this proves how polarizing "Prometheus" really was.   I'm sorry but you can't make an Alien movie without the Alien and this is coming from someone that liked the film.   If the Deacon had a bigger role, maybe people wouldn't be so on the fence with "Covenant".   I think us diehards forget general/causal audiences really complained about the lack of "Alien" in the last film.   Now they may be on the fence for this one.  With all that said I don't think it' doing that bad.   "Prometheus" and "Covenant" = 560+ Million Globally is not bad so Ridley shouldn't feel he failed bringing the franchise back.  I think "Awakening" should come quicker and not be a 5 year wait again.

    That still isn't break even point.  They have to make at least another 50m between Japan and China to even begin to break even.

    Quote from: PierreVW on May 30, 2017, 12:06:08 AM
    Quote from: NickisSmart on May 29, 2017, 11:33:54 PM
    Quote from: Spidey3121 on May 29, 2017, 10:32:57 PM
    LOL at the people taking shots at the Fast & Furious franchise. Yes, some of the movies are terrible, but others are undeniably awesome.

    The same could be said of the Alien franchise.

    I disagree.

    ALIEN and ALIENS are masterpieces and 2 of the greatest movies of all time.

    The 8 Fast & Furious movies are FAR from masterpieces.

    I hate everyone of those movies with a burning passion, but a few of them have higher critic scores on Rotten Tomato's than Prometheus and Covenant. 

    Also of interest is Covenant has slipped below Prometheus's RT score.

    Like I said before: you are taking RT too seriously. RT is nothing.

    Remember All Critics Killed BLADE RUNNER in 1982. All Critics NEVER worked in a film.

    That actually isn't true.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065466/?ref_=nm_flmg_wr_8

    That is because the original version of Blade Runner is actually kinda the shits,  It's filled with interesting ideas but is killed by the forced narrative choices.  The directors cut and final cut though are great.  Yes I am old enough to see every version in order of release, which is watching a movie get better and better as time goes on.  I'll never be a fan of the 1982 version. 

    People view RT as gospel in some circles.  I was just pointing out critic reviews.  I personally hate RT and most modern critics as most come off as people who more get off seeing movies before everyone else.  They are the review equal of people who post "FIRST" on youtube videos or make "reacts" videos.
  11. PierreVW
    Quote from: fiveways on May 30, 2017, 02:39:02 AM
    Quote from: Aquarius8 on May 30, 2017, 01:50:42 AM
    Total Lifetime Grosses
    Domestic:    $59,972,181      37.3%
    + Foreign:    $101,009,281      62.7%
    = Worldwide:    $160,981,462   


    Globally will save this movie overall.  I think this proves how polarizing "Prometheus" really was.   I'm sorry but you can't make an Alien movie without the Alien and this is coming from someone that liked the film.   If the Deacon had a bigger role, maybe people wouldn't be so on the fence with "Covenant".   I think us diehards forget general/causal audiences really complained about the lack of "Alien" in the last film.   Now they may be on the fence for this one.  With all that said I don't think it' doing that bad.   "Prometheus" and "Covenant" = 560+ Million Globally is not bad so Ridley shouldn't feel he failed bringing the franchise back.  I think "Awakening" should come quicker and not be a 5 year wait again.

    That still isn't break even point.  They have to make at least another 50m between Japan and China to even begin to break even.

    Quote from: PierreVW on May 30, 2017, 12:06:08 AM
    Quote from: NickisSmart on May 29, 2017, 11:33:54 PM
    Quote from: Spidey3121 on May 29, 2017, 10:32:57 PM
    LOL at the people taking shots at the Fast & Furious franchise. Yes, some of the movies are terrible, but others are undeniably awesome.

    The same could be said of the Alien franchise.

    I disagree.

    ALIEN and ALIENS are masterpieces and 2 of the greatest movies of all time.

    The 8 Fast & Furious movies are FAR from masterpieces.

    I hate everyone of those movies with a burning passion, but a few of them have higher critic scores on Rotten Tomato's than Prometheus and Covenant. 

    Also of interest is Covenant has slipped below Prometheus's RT score.

    Like I said before: you are taking RT too seriously. RT is nothing.

    Remember All Critics Killed BLADE RUNNER in 1982. All Critics NEVER worked in a film.
  12. fiveways
    Quote from: Aquarius8 on May 30, 2017, 01:50:42 AM
    Total Lifetime Grosses
    Domestic:    $59,972,181      37.3%
    + Foreign:    $101,009,281      62.7%
    = Worldwide:    $160,981,462   


    Globally will save this movie overall.  I think this proves how polarizing "Prometheus" really was.   I'm sorry but you can't make an Alien movie without the Alien and this is coming from someone that liked the film.   If the Deacon had a bigger role, maybe people wouldn't be so on the fence with "Covenant".   I think us diehards forget general/causal audiences really complained about the lack of "Alien" in the last film.   Now they may be on the fence for this one.  With all that said I don't think it' doing that bad.   "Prometheus" and "Covenant" = 560+ Million Globally is not bad so Ridley shouldn't feel he failed bringing the franchise back.  I think "Awakening" should come quicker and not be a 5 year wait again.

    That still isn't break even point.  They have to make at least another 50m between Japan and China to even begin to break even.

    Quote from: PierreVW on May 30, 2017, 12:06:08 AM
    Quote from: NickisSmart on May 29, 2017, 11:33:54 PM
    Quote from: Spidey3121 on May 29, 2017, 10:32:57 PM
    LOL at the people taking shots at the Fast & Furious franchise. Yes, some of the movies are terrible, but others are undeniably awesome.

    The same could be said of the Alien franchise.

    I disagree.

    ALIEN and ALIENS are masterpieces and 2 of the greatest movies of all time.

    The 8 Fast & Furious movies are FAR from masterpieces.

    I hate everyone of those movies with a burning passion, but a few of them have higher critic scores on Rotten Tomato's than Prometheus and Covenant. 

    Also of interest is Covenant has slipped below Prometheus's RT score.
  13. PierreVW
    Quote from: Alionic on May 30, 2017, 02:15:02 AM
    Fox is clearly waiting on the Chinese box office returns before publicly announcing a decision on the sequel, which makes all the adamant assertions from many of you here that "hurr the franchise is dead kthxbye' that much more eye-rolling and pathetic.  If something as bad as Resident Evil: The Final Chapter made $160 million in China, then Covenant has a solid chance of making $100 million there at the very least.

    I hope you are right.
  14. dookie
    Quote from: Aquarius8 on May 30, 2017, 01:50:42 AM
    Total Lifetime Grosses
    Domestic:    $59,972,181      37.3%
    + Foreign:    $101,009,281      62.7%
    = Worldwide:    $160,981,462   


    Globally will save this movie overall.  I think this proves how polarizing "Prometheus" really was.   I'm sorry but you can't make an Alien movie without the Alien and this is coming from someone that liked the film.   If the Deacon had a bigger role, maybe people wouldn't be so on the fence with "Covenant".   I think us diehards forget general/causal audiences really complained about the lack of "Alien" in the last film.   Now they may be on the fence for this one.  With all that said I don't think it' doing that bad.   "Prometheus" and "Covenant" = 560+ Million Globally is not bad so Ridley shouldn't feel he failed bringing the franchise back.  I think "Awakening" should come quicker and not be a 5 year wait again.

    I came from that "general audience." The only Alien film that interests me is original. The rest all trash, especially the pathetic Alien vs Predator iterations.

    Prometheus brought me back to the alien franchise. Finally, Ridley returns and delivers something new, refreshing, and thought-provoking. But then everything went awry with A:C. The reason A:C fell on its face is because they completely discarded and butchered the only compelling aspects they had cultivated in Prometheus. The third act of A:C was one of the worst movie segments I've ever seen, and I hope Ridley and Fox realize nobody wants to see mind-numbing, stalk-and-kill sci-fi movies anymore.

    This movie needed less xenomorph, not more.
  15. Alionic
    Fox is clearly waiting on the Chinese box office returns before publicly announcing a decision on the sequel, which makes all the adamant assertions from many of you here that "hurr the franchise is dead kthxbye' that much more eye-rolling and pathetic.  If something as bad as Resident Evil: The Final Chapter made $160 million in China, then Covenant has a solid chance of making $100 million there at the very least.
  16. BishopShouldGo
    Quote from: Aquarius8 on May 30, 2017, 01:50:42 AM
    Total Lifetime Grosses
    Domestic:    $59,972,181      37.3%
    + Foreign:    $101,009,281      62.7%
    = Worldwide:    $160,981,462   


    Globally will save this movie overall.  I think this proves how polarizing "Prometheus" really was.   I'm sorry but you can't make an Alien movie without the Alien and this is coming from someone that liked the film.   If the Deacon had a bigger role, maybe people wouldn't be so on the fence with "Covenant".   I think us diehards forget general/causal audiences really complained about the lack of "Alien" in the last film.   Now they may be on the fence for this one.  With all that said I don't think it' doing that bad.   "Prometheus" and "Covenant" = 560+ Million Globally is not bad so Ridley shouldn't feel he failed bringing the franchise back.  I think "Awakening" should come quicker and not be a 5 year wait again.

    You have to lump Covenant in with the vastly superior Prometheus in order to reconcile Covenant's failure. Come on man. And people complained about the lack of aliens in Prometheus, but weren't sure about ALIEN: Covenant? Come ooooooon.

    And don't be so confident about Awakening coming out sooner rather than later, if at all.
  17. Aquarius8
    Quote from: Protozoid on May 30, 2017, 01:53:52 AM
    Quote from: Aquarius8 on May 30, 2017, 01:50:42 AM
    Total Lifetime Grosses
    Domestic:    $59,972,181      37.3%
    + Foreign:    $101,009,281      62.7%
    = Worldwide:    $160,981,462   


    Globally will save this movie overall.  I think this proves how polarizing "Prometheus" really was.   I'm sorry but you can't make an Alien movie without the Alien and this is coming from someone that liked the film.   If the Deacon had a bigger role, maybe people wouldn't be so on the fence with "Covenant".   I think us diehards forget general/causal audiences really complained about the lack of "Alien" in the last film.   Now they may be on the fence for this one.
    The general public liked Prometheus.  It ranked higher for home video sales than theatrical, which means interest went up over time.  It's still a discussed movie.  Prometheus was significantly more successful financially and got slightly better scores from critics and audiences.  You can't blame Prometheus for Covenant.

    I don't know if I was blaming it as much as I saying it was slightly polarizing.   I think their critical scores are about even (Prometheus critics 72/audience 68, Covenant critics 71/ audience 61 RT).  There were audiences asking about the more Alien though and Ridley even admitted that.  "Covenant" numbers are definitely a lot of factors technically it's the 2nd film of the Prequel Trilogy even though it's the 8th Alien appearance on the big screen and 6th film.  A majority o the time Sequels do drop from their predessors in the box office but notice with "Guardians of the Galaxy", Part 2 increased over the first film and it's not getting better reviews than the original.  I think Time played a role, 5 years was probably too long.  Also I agree with people that maybe August would be a better release date.  "Covenant" is the 3rd May release (Alien, Alien 3).  Hopefully "Awakening" can come out sooner. 
  18. Protozoid
    Quote from: Aquarius8 on May 30, 2017, 01:50:42 AM
    Total Lifetime Grosses
    Domestic:    $59,972,181      37.3%
    + Foreign:    $101,009,281      62.7%
    = Worldwide:    $160,981,462   


    Globally will save this movie overall.  I think this proves how polarizing "Prometheus" really was.   I'm sorry but you can't make an Alien movie without the Alien and this is coming from someone that liked the film.   If the Deacon had a bigger role, maybe people wouldn't be so on the fence with "Covenant".   I think us diehards forget general/causal audiences really complained about the lack of "Alien" in the last film.   Now they may be on the fence for this one.
    The general public liked Prometheus.  It ranked higher for home video sales than theatrical, which means interest went up over time.  It's still a discussed movie.  Prometheus was significantly more successful financially and got slightly better scores from critics and audiences.  You can't blame Prometheus for Covenant.
  19. Aquarius8
    Total Lifetime Grosses
    Domestic:    $59,972,181      37.3%
    + Foreign:    $101,009,281      62.7%
    = Worldwide:    $160,981,462   


    Globally will save this movie overall.  I think this proves how polarizing "Prometheus" really was.   I'm sorry but you can't make an Alien movie without the Alien and this is coming from someone that liked the film.   If the Deacon had a bigger role, maybe people wouldn't be so on the fence with "Covenant".   I think us diehards forget general/causal audiences really complained about the lack of "Alien" in the last film.   Now they may be on the fence for this one.  With all that said I don't think it' doing that bad.   "Prometheus" and "Covenant" = 560+ Million Globally is not bad so Ridley shouldn't feel he failed bringing the franchise back.  I think "Awakening" should come quicker and not be a 5 year wait again.   
  20. Robopadna
    Quote from: Denton Smalls on May 30, 2017, 12:51:22 AM
    Quote from: Robopadna on May 30, 2017, 12:16:22 AM
    Quote from: Denton Smalls on May 29, 2017, 07:21:52 PM
    Quote from: Robopadna on May 29, 2017, 03:47:03 PM
    Quote from: Denton Smalls on May 29, 2017, 02:45:12 PM
    Quote from: Kerrod33 on May 29, 2017, 02:24:01 PM
    I may sound really stupid in saying this (but I haven't been one to follow box office ratings),  but wasn't the budget for this film $97mil? And from what I have seen it has earnt in the region of $150mil, isn't that a profit? Doesn't seem like a bomb to me... and I quite enjoyed the film. If I don't leave the cinema and ask questions or talk about the film, then it's a failure in my book

    It's weird, man. That does seem like a solid profit, but studios usually need a considerably high margin for their films to be considered a commercial success.

    Also, in addition to the $97 mil production cost, the cost of marketing was most likely substantial, so in that regard, I'm not sure the film did much better than break even yet, if that.

    We are in a strange cinematic era where the only films that seem to do well (outside animated or live action kids' movies like "Beauty and the Beast" or "Boss Baby") are monster budget comic book films that flood the market and appeal to a massively large audience demographic, or micro budget genre movies like "The Purge" franchise, "Get Out," "Don't Breathe" or "Split," which are made on such a cheap budget that even a ~$100 mil worldwide box office haul is considered successful on a $5-$20 mil budget.

    Blumhouse is an example of a studio that churns these lower budget films out regularly. It makes me wonder if Alien might do better if it were made as more of an independent movie.

    First, you are REALLY underestimating how well those movies did.  You said they can make a profit on 100 million WW..   they can, but they make far more than that.

    Split = 280 million WW (138 domestic)
    Get Out = 240 million WW (astounding 170+ domestic)
    Don't Breathe = 157 million WW (90 domestic)

    All of those will outpace Covenant's domestic take (where the studio keeps the majority of the money).

    Quoteor micro budget genre movies

    A majority of those fail (at the box office).  You only remember the ones that succeeded.

    QuoteBlumhouse is an example of a studio that churns these lower budget films out regularly. It makes me wonder if Alien might do better if it were made as more of an independent movie.

    Finally, it would make no difference if it isn't a good movie.  An 'indie' movie doesn't make it better by default.  If you threw Covenant on a 10 million dollar budget you would have to have an entirely different vision for the film (and it would be far more restricted).  Good luck seeing Paradise...  they can't afford it.  You can say that it would be a good thing to make it more character driven but that only works if it is well written and being 'indie' (I think you really just mean smaller budget) doesn't guarantee that.

    Lol, I'm sorry dude I was just trying to get the point across that those 3 smaller films were successful. I don't live on or spend the majority of my day on Box Office Mojo so I'm just making a broad statement without the numbers in front of me.

    I did not simply mean "smaller budget." Of course it would be restricted and big effects pieces would be out of the question, going to Paradise included, but the whole point would be to, as you said, make it more character driven. That means new script, new concept, the works.

    The thing about successful indie films is that they require much more attention to the script, character interactions, etc. because they don't have the big pretty set pieces to fall back on. Therefore much more energy is spent perfecting the actual storytelling. I'm not suggesting they re-stage an indie version of A:C where the Covenant is made out of cardboard.

    The requirement for any good film is attention to detail and usually believable characters and motivations.

    I don't think there is anything in Prometheus and covenant that ever relied on the set pieces to carry it. I think both movies felt they were establishing characters well and that they had interesting interactions.  Essentially you would get the same thing but without the amazing visuals.

    I don't think alien lends itself well to a small budget anyway. Some of the best aspects of Prometheus as covenant were in the visuals that would be absent in a 10 million dollar budgeted movie.

    I see your point and disagree. Outside of Fassbender's performance in both movies, none of the characters were 3 dimensional. That isn't just me saying this. Plenty of reviews back this up and a lot of people here would likely agree. But to each his own.

    Basically all Prometheus had going for it was the visuals. There were character plot holes galore in that film. Hell, they even show actors driving off in a transport in the Fifield scene, only to show them perfectly fine tending to old man Weyland in the next.

    About 1/4 of the actors in the film had names outside of "mercenary 1" or "mechanic." How lazy is that to not develop any characterizations when there's only like 17 people in the film?

    The same for A:C. Did we learn, beyond what we know from interviews that Rosenthal had a mate in cryo? No. Did we learn who her lover was? Maybe Ankor from the one brief interaction they had. Outside of the brief shot where Lope cradles Hallet's hand in his showing off the matching wedding bands, it wasn't even established that they were married! The only interaction they had besides standing close by to each other was "that's why you should do yoga."

    I could go all day but I'm not trying to change anyone's mind.

    I thought both movies were visually stunning but lacked in other areas that a smaller budget, smaller cast film would capitalize on.

    It all comes down to a quality script. They felt they had it. You can disagree but nothing would have changed with the characters. In the end Ridley doesn't work with those small budgets anyway so it's moot.

    I don't think the series would be inherently helped in anyway by a reduced budget. Yeah it could be good but it could just as equally suck. The budget isn't the problem in the resulting quality of movie and I think you would sacrifice a lot as a result.

    Sure make it for 10 million and you'll make money but nothing at all inherently means it will be any better.
  21. Richman678
    Say what you will about the fast and furious movies or the transformers movies. Both franchises pump out billion dollar performances. So your points are already moot. If a movie makes a billion dollars then that movie is gonna get a sequel unless it's a biopic (like titanic or Ray)
  22. Denton Smalls
    Quote from: Robopadna on May 30, 2017, 12:16:22 AM
    Quote from: Denton Smalls on May 29, 2017, 07:21:52 PM
    Quote from: Robopadna on May 29, 2017, 03:47:03 PM
    Quote from: Denton Smalls on May 29, 2017, 02:45:12 PM
    Quote from: Kerrod33 on May 29, 2017, 02:24:01 PM
    I may sound really stupid in saying this (but I haven't been one to follow box office ratings),  but wasn't the budget for this film $97mil? And from what I have seen it has earnt in the region of $150mil, isn't that a profit? Doesn't seem like a bomb to me... and I quite enjoyed the film. If I don't leave the cinema and ask questions or talk about the film, then it's a failure in my book

    It's weird, man. That does seem like a solid profit, but studios usually need a considerably high margin for their films to be considered a commercial success.

    Also, in addition to the $97 mil production cost, the cost of marketing was most likely substantial, so in that regard, I'm not sure the film did much better than break even yet, if that.

    We are in a strange cinematic era where the only films that seem to do well (outside animated or live action kids' movies like "Beauty and the Beast" or "Boss Baby") are monster budget comic book films that flood the market and appeal to a massively large audience demographic, or micro budget genre movies like "The Purge" franchise, "Get Out," "Don't Breathe" or "Split," which are made on such a cheap budget that even a ~$100 mil worldwide box office haul is considered successful on a $5-$20 mil budget.

    Blumhouse is an example of a studio that churns these lower budget films out regularly. It makes me wonder if Alien might do better if it were made as more of an independent movie.

    First, you are REALLY underestimating how well those movies did.  You said they can make a profit on 100 million WW..   they can, but they make far more than that.

    Split = 280 million WW (138 domestic)
    Get Out = 240 million WW (astounding 170+ domestic)
    Don't Breathe = 157 million WW (90 domestic)

    All of those will outpace Covenant's domestic take (where the studio keeps the majority of the money).

    Quoteor micro budget genre movies

    A majority of those fail (at the box office).  You only remember the ones that succeeded.

    QuoteBlumhouse is an example of a studio that churns these lower budget films out regularly. It makes me wonder if Alien might do better if it were made as more of an independent movie.

    Finally, it would make no difference if it isn't a good movie.  An 'indie' movie doesn't make it better by default.  If you threw Covenant on a 10 million dollar budget you would have to have an entirely different vision for the film (and it would be far more restricted).  Good luck seeing Paradise...  they can't afford it.  You can say that it would be a good thing to make it more character driven but that only works if it is well written and being 'indie' (I think you really just mean smaller budget) doesn't guarantee that.

    Lol, I'm sorry dude I was just trying to get the point across that those 3 smaller films were successful. I don't live on or spend the majority of my day on Box Office Mojo so I'm just making a broad statement without the numbers in front of me.

    I did not simply mean "smaller budget." Of course it would be restricted and big effects pieces would be out of the question, going to Paradise included, but the whole point would be to, as you said, make it more character driven. That means new script, new concept, the works.

    The thing about successful indie films is that they require much more attention to the script, character interactions, etc. because they don't have the big pretty set pieces to fall back on. Therefore much more energy is spent perfecting the actual storytelling. I'm not suggesting they re-stage an indie version of A:C where the Covenant is made out of cardboard.

    The requirement for any good film is attention to detail and usually believable characters and motivations.

    I don't think there is anything in Prometheus and covenant that ever relied on the set pieces to carry it. I think both movies felt they were establishing characters well and that they had interesting interactions.  Essentially you would get the same thing but without the amazing visuals.

    I don't think alien lends itself well to a small budget anyway. Some of the best aspects of Prometheus as covenant were in the visuals that would be absent in a 10 million dollar budgeted movie.

    I see your point and disagree. Outside of Fassbender's performance in both movies, none of the characters were 3 dimensional. That isn't just me saying this. Plenty of reviews back this up and a lot of people here would likely agree. But to each his own.

    Basically all Prometheus had going for it was the visuals. There were character plot holes galore in that film. Hell, they even show actors driving off in a transport in the Fifield scene, only to show them perfectly fine tending to old man Weyland in the next.

    About 1/4 of the actors in the film had names outside of "mercenary 1" or "mechanic." How lazy is that to not develop any characterizations when there's only like 17 people in the film?

    The same for A:C. Did we learn, beyond what we know from interviews that Rosenthal had a mate in cryo? No. Did we learn who her lover was? Maybe Ankor from the one brief interaction they had. Outside of the brief shot where Lope cradles Hallet's hand in his showing off the matching wedding bands, it wasn't even established that they were married! The only interaction they had besides standing close by to each other was "that's why you should do yoga."

    I could go all day but I'm not trying to change anyone's mind.

    I thought both movies were visually stunning but lacked in other areas that a smaller budget, smaller cast film would capitalize on.
  23. Noah
    Quote from: marrerom on May 29, 2017, 03:37:16 PM
    Quote from: 900SL on May 29, 2017, 07:56:33 AM
    It was shit. Gore is not a big draw. The script and plot were borderline idiotic. It wasn't failures in marketing, the whole planet has been bombarded with advance hype. Stop trying to offload the blame elsewhere.

    The fault lies with the Studio, and possibly the Director.

    It was shit? Personal preferences aside the majority of the reviews are positive.

    The real problem was the release date. An October or August release date would have been much better as the film would have had no real competition. Instead they bumped up the release date to May...A hard R-rated horror film was never going to do well against two pg-13 family friendly blockbuster franchises (GOTG2 and Pirates 5).
    This. August was perfect. It would have probably performed like Prometheus in terms of drops (Prometheus was froantloaded too),but it could have had some legs. Now it doesn't even have the opportunity to keep people interested.. It's a dark,gory R-rated horror movie that is competing with family-friendly movies. GoTG2 is still doing money. Pirates is underperforming but a 70+M opening is not bad.. Next week there's WW too. Tickets are expensive,not many people can afford to pay for two movies,or go to watch movies every week. Even if they're interested,it's more likely that those who have children choose kid-friendly movies.
  24. Robopadna
    Quote from: Denton Smalls on May 29, 2017, 07:21:52 PM
    Quote from: Robopadna on May 29, 2017, 03:47:03 PM
    Quote from: Denton Smalls on May 29, 2017, 02:45:12 PM
    Quote from: Kerrod33 on May 29, 2017, 02:24:01 PM
    I may sound really stupid in saying this (but I haven't been one to follow box office ratings),  but wasn't the budget for this film $97mil? And from what I have seen it has earnt in the region of $150mil, isn't that a profit? Doesn't seem like a bomb to me... and I quite enjoyed the film. If I don't leave the cinema and ask questions or talk about the film, then it's a failure in my book

    It's weird, man. That does seem like a solid profit, but studios usually need a considerably high margin for their films to be considered a commercial success.

    Also, in addition to the $97 mil production cost, the cost of marketing was most likely substantial, so in that regard, I'm not sure the film did much better than break even yet, if that.

    We are in a strange cinematic era where the only films that seem to do well (outside animated or live action kids' movies like "Beauty and the Beast" or "Boss Baby") are monster budget comic book films that flood the market and appeal to a massively large audience demographic, or micro budget genre movies like "The Purge" franchise, "Get Out," "Don't Breathe" or "Split," which are made on such a cheap budget that even a ~$100 mil worldwide box office haul is considered successful on a $5-$20 mil budget.

    Blumhouse is an example of a studio that churns these lower budget films out regularly. It makes me wonder if Alien might do better if it were made as more of an independent movie.

    First, you are REALLY underestimating how well those movies did.  You said they can make a profit on 100 million WW..   they can, but they make far more than that.

    Split = 280 million WW (138 domestic)
    Get Out = 240 million WW (astounding 170+ domestic)
    Don't Breathe = 157 million WW (90 domestic)

    All of those will outpace Covenant's domestic take (where the studio keeps the majority of the money).

    Quoteor micro budget genre movies

    A majority of those fail (at the box office).  You only remember the ones that succeeded.

    QuoteBlumhouse is an example of a studio that churns these lower budget films out regularly. It makes me wonder if Alien might do better if it were made as more of an independent movie.

    Finally, it would make no difference if it isn't a good movie.  An 'indie' movie doesn't make it better by default.  If you threw Covenant on a 10 million dollar budget you would have to have an entirely different vision for the film (and it would be far more restricted).  Good luck seeing Paradise...  they can't afford it.  You can say that it would be a good thing to make it more character driven but that only works if it is well written and being 'indie' (I think you really just mean smaller budget) doesn't guarantee that.

    Lol, I'm sorry dude I was just trying to get the point across that those 3 smaller films were successful. I don't live on or spend the majority of my day on Box Office Mojo so I'm just making a broad statement without the numbers in front of me.

    I did not simply mean "smaller budget." Of course it would be restricted and big effects pieces would be out of the question, going to Paradise included, but the whole point would be to, as you said, make it more character driven. That means new script, new concept, the works.

    The thing about successful indie films is that they require much more attention to the script, character interactions, etc. because they don't have the big pretty set pieces to fall back on. Therefore much more energy is spent perfecting the actual storytelling. I'm not suggesting they re-stage an indie version of A:C where the Covenant is made out of cardboard.

    The requirement for any good film is attention to detail and usually believable characters and motivations.

    I don't think there is anything in Prometheus and covenant that ever relied on the set pieces to carry it. I think both movies felt they were establishing characters well and that they had interesting interactions.  Essentially you would get the same thing but without the amazing visuals.

    I don't think alien lends itself well to a small budget anyway. Some of the best aspects of Prometheus as covenant were in the visuals that would be absent in a 10 million dollar budgeted movie.
  25. Spidey3121
    LOL at the people taking shots at the Fast & Furious franchise. Yes, some of the movies are terrible, but others are undeniably awesome.

    Also, this was the worst Memorial Day weekend at the box office in 18 years. Covenant was set up for success, but general audiences seemingly weren't interested.
  26. John Doe
    We don´t need Sigourney, i´m tired o hearing people say Ripley it´s the main star on Alien, for me it´s the Xeno created by H.R Giger.

    If the movie has faults, i really don´t think so, are not by not have Sigourney on the movie.
  27. Denton Smalls
    Quote from: Robopadna on May 29, 2017, 03:47:03 PM
    Quote from: Denton Smalls on May 29, 2017, 02:45:12 PM
    Quote from: Kerrod33 on May 29, 2017, 02:24:01 PM
    I may sound really stupid in saying this (but I haven't been one to follow box office ratings),  but wasn't the budget for this film $97mil? And from what I have seen it has earnt in the region of $150mil, isn't that a profit? Doesn't seem like a bomb to me... and I quite enjoyed the film. If I don't leave the cinema and ask questions or talk about the film, then it's a failure in my book

    It's weird, man. That does seem like a solid profit, but studios usually need a considerably high margin for their films to be considered a commercial success.

    Also, in addition to the $97 mil production cost, the cost of marketing was most likely substantial, so in that regard, I'm not sure the film did much better than break even yet, if that.

    We are in a strange cinematic era where the only films that seem to do well (outside animated or live action kids' movies like "Beauty and the Beast" or "Boss Baby") are monster budget comic book films that flood the market and appeal to a massively large audience demographic, or micro budget genre movies like "The Purge" franchise, "Get Out," "Don't Breathe" or "Split," which are made on such a cheap budget that even a ~$100 mil worldwide box office haul is considered successful on a $5-$20 mil budget.

    Blumhouse is an example of a studio that churns these lower budget films out regularly. It makes me wonder if Alien might do better if it were made as more of an independent movie.

    First, you are REALLY underestimating how well those movies did.  You said they can make a profit on 100 million WW..   they can, but they make far more than that.

    Split = 280 million WW (138 domestic)
    Get Out = 240 million WW (astounding 170+ domestic)
    Don't Breathe = 157 million WW (90 domestic)

    All of those will outpace Covenant's domestic take (where the studio keeps the majority of the money).

    Quoteor micro budget genre movies

    A majority of those fail (at the box office).  You only remember the ones that succeeded.

    QuoteBlumhouse is an example of a studio that churns these lower budget films out regularly. It makes me wonder if Alien might do better if it were made as more of an independent movie.

    Finally, it would make no difference if it isn't a good movie.  An 'indie' movie doesn't make it better by default.  If you threw Covenant on a 10 million dollar budget you would have to have an entirely different vision for the film (and it would be far more restricted).  Good luck seeing Paradise...  they can't afford it.  You can say that it would be a good thing to make it more character driven but that only works if it is well written and being 'indie' (I think you really just mean smaller budget) doesn't guarantee that.

    Lol, I'm sorry dude I was just trying to get the point across that those 3 smaller films were successful. I don't live on or spend the majority of my day on Box Office Mojo so I'm just making a broad statement without the numbers in front of me.

    I did not simply mean "smaller budget." Of course it would be restricted and big effects pieces would be out of the question, going to Paradise included, but the whole point would be to, as you said, make it more character driven. That means new script, new concept, the works.

    The thing about successful indie films is that they require much more attention to the script, character interactions, etc. because they don't have the big pretty set pieces to fall back on. Therefore much more energy is spent perfecting the actual storytelling. I'm not suggesting they re-stage an indie version of A:C where the Covenant is made out of cardboard.
  28. Jonesy1974
    Quote from: Evanus on May 29, 2017, 06:35:03 PM
    Quote from: Jonesy1974 on May 29, 2017, 06:33:11 PM
    Quote from: 900SL on May 29, 2017, 06:27:49 PM
    Quote from: marrerom on May 29, 2017, 03:37:16 PM
    Quote from: 900SL on May 29, 2017, 07:56:33 AM
    It was shit. Gore is not a big draw. The script and plot were borderline idiotic. It wasn't failures in marketing, the whole planet has been bombarded with advance hype. Stop trying to offload the blame elsewhere.

    The fault lies with the Studio, and possibly the Director.

    It was shit? Personal preferences aside the majority of the reviews are positive.

    The real problem was the release date. An October or August release date would have been much better as the film would have had no real competition. Instead they bumped up the release date to May...A hard R-rated horror film was never going to do well against two pg-13 family friendly blockbuster franchises (GOTG2 and Pirates 5).

    It doesn't matter how you spin it, AC has flopped because it is fundamentally a poor film. A 6/10 film.

    If it were just down to the quality of a film then films like fast & furious (whatever number it is now) would also flop.
    Yeah, the quality of the film has almost nothing to do with how much money it makes.

    Are you agreeing with me or being sarcastic?
  29. Evanus
    Quote from: Jonesy1974 on May 29, 2017, 06:33:11 PM
    Quote from: 900SL on May 29, 2017, 06:27:49 PM
    Quote from: marrerom on May 29, 2017, 03:37:16 PM
    Quote from: 900SL on May 29, 2017, 07:56:33 AM
    It was shit. Gore is not a big draw. The script and plot were borderline idiotic. It wasn't failures in marketing, the whole planet has been bombarded with advance hype. Stop trying to offload the blame elsewhere.

    The fault lies with the Studio, and possibly the Director.

    It was shit? Personal preferences aside the majority of the reviews are positive.

    The real problem was the release date. An October or August release date would have been much better as the film would have had no real competition. Instead they bumped up the release date to May...A hard R-rated horror film was never going to do well against two pg-13 family friendly blockbuster franchises (GOTG2 and Pirates 5).

    It doesn't matter how you spin it, AC has flopped because it is fundamentally a poor film. A 6/10 film.

    If it were just down to the quality of a film then films like fast & furious (whatever number it is now) would also flop.
    Yeah, the quality of the film has almost nothing to do with how much money it makes.
  30. BishopShouldGo
    Quote from: marrerom on May 29, 2017, 03:37:16 PM
    Quote from: 900SL on May 29, 2017, 07:56:33 AM
    It was shit. Gore is not a big draw. The script and plot were borderline idiotic. It wasn't failures in marketing, the whole planet has been bombarded with advance hype. Stop trying to offload the blame elsewhere.

    The fault lies with the Studio, and possibly the Director.

    It was shit? Personal preferences aside the majority of the reviews are positive.

    The real problem was the release date. An October or August release date would have been much better as the film would have had no real competition. Instead they bumped up the release date to May...A hard R-rated horror film was never going to do well against two pg-13 family friendly blockbuster franchises (GOTG2 and Pirates 5).

    It's called counter-programming.
  31. Jonesy1974
    Quote from: 900SL on May 29, 2017, 06:27:49 PM
    Quote from: marrerom on May 29, 2017, 03:37:16 PM
    Quote from: 900SL on May 29, 2017, 07:56:33 AM
    It was shit. Gore is not a big draw. The script and plot were borderline idiotic. It wasn't failures in marketing, the whole planet has been bombarded with advance hype. Stop trying to offload the blame elsewhere.

    The fault lies with the Studio, and possibly the Director.

    It was shit? Personal preferences aside the majority of the reviews are positive.

    The real problem was the release date. An October or August release date would have been much better as the film would have had no real competition. Instead they bumped up the release date to May...A hard R-rated horror film was never going to do well against two pg-13 family friendly blockbuster franchises (GOTG2 and Pirates 5).

    It doesn't matter how you spin it, AC has flopped because it is fundamentally a poor film. A 6/10 film.

    If it were just down to the quality of a film then films like fast & furious (whatever number it is now) would also flop.
  32. 900SL
    Quote from: marrerom on May 29, 2017, 03:37:16 PM
    Quote from: 900SL on May 29, 2017, 07:56:33 AM
    It was shit. Gore is not a big draw. The script and plot were borderline idiotic. It wasn't failures in marketing, the whole planet has been bombarded with advance hype. Stop trying to offload the blame elsewhere.

    The fault lies with the Studio, and possibly the Director.

    It was shit? Personal preferences aside the majority of the reviews are positive.

    The real problem was the release date. An October or August release date would have been much better as the film would have had no real competition. Instead they bumped up the release date to May...A hard R-rated horror film was never going to do well against two pg-13 family friendly blockbuster franchises (GOTG2 and Pirates 5).

    It doesn't matter how you spin it, AC has flopped because it is fundamentally a poor film. A 6/10 film. 
  33. Robopadna
    Quote from: Samhain13 on May 29, 2017, 06:17:08 PM
    Quote from: Robopadna on May 29, 2017, 05:44:26 PM
    Quote from: Samhain13 on May 29, 2017, 05:16:09 PM
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0rM4XOMW8I

    Is it out of the theaters already?

    Not sure what you mean. It had a horrific drop off but it is very clearly still in theatres.

    I'm asking if is it out of the theaters on where others live. Its out of the theater I saw in my country.

    It wouldn't have made 10 million if it was out of theatres.

    It actually showed an increase of 11 theatres from last weekend.
« Newer Comments 1234567891011 Older Comments »
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube RSS Feed