Alien: Covenant was released in its last major market, Japan, on Friday the 15th of September. According to Box Office Mojo, the film opened with a debut of $2.6 million.
“Fox also saw Alien: Covenant launch in its final international market with a $2.6 million debut in Japan bringing the film’s international cume to $162 million. Covenant’s $236.3 global total ranks it as the second largest film in the Alien franchise globally, though it remains $167.1 million behind Prometheus.”
For comparison, Prometheus opened in Japan with $3.8 million and would go on to gross $21.8 million. Alien: Covenant’s current worldwide taking stand at $236.3 with it’s biggest foreign market being China where it took $45.9 million.
Alien: Covenant opens with $2.6 million in Japan.
Today also sees the release of Alien: Covenant on home entertainment for the United Kingdom. If you enjoyed the film, be sure to head out and pick up your Blu-ray or DVD copy.
Keep a close eye on Alien vs. Predator Galaxy for the latest on Alien: Covenant! You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram to get the latest on your social media walls. You can also join in with fellow Alien fans on our forums!
So.....I answered your questions. Yet you still fail to answer my question on Aliens.......a film that you brought up to make some kind of point. Instead of delivering, you bring up irrelevant deflections and run. Well.......you certainly showed me! . . . .
I see. Whack theory, huh. .......
Penn State University research: "However, it is clear from the results presented here that, since the early 1990s, there has been an upwards trend in the number of fantasy/science fiction films..... From the breakdown by decade in Table 1, we see that the proportion of Genre trends at the US box office, 1991 to 2010 fantasy/science fiction films in the top 25 films has increased from 51% to 64% and with an increase from 26% to 50% for top 10 films; and in 2005 alone, fantasy/science fiction films occupied six of the top 7 rankings by total gross. "
Ooh...."upwards trend".....there's that nasty pattern talk again .....
Penn State continues: "This paper has presented an empirical analysis of genre trends at the US box office in the two decades since 1991. Overall, analysis of box office data indicates that the range of genres for the highest grossing films at the US box office has become narrower over the past twenty years. A limited range of special effects-based films from the action/adventure and fantasy/science fiction genres have come to dominate the US box office at the expense of character- and narrative-driven films (crime/thriller and drama films) that were previously identified as the most popular. "
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.393.8852&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
Well, well, well, that statement is just oozing with audience trend patterns for SF .....
Fools! All Penn State University had to do was email kwisatz and you could have told them they wasted their time doing all that research since analyzing audience trends by genre is a "whack theory," according to you. I'm sure they would have held your word as credible because you said so in a movie forum...........
Meanwhile, still waiting on your answer on Aliens.........tick tock says the croc.
I have no answer "why" there is a pattern, but there is a pattern. For example, if you reference the Penn State link above they show SF in the decade 1991 to 2000 with 35 top 25 box office films, which increased to 56 top 25 box office films in the decade 2001 to 2010.
And this is not a case of all genres likely increased. That same chart shows the genres Comedy, Drama, and Crime/Thriller actually decreased during those two decades. A pattern is a pattern no matter how much someone wants to desperately dismiss it as a "whack theory."
Also Sci Fi is like a genre inside a genre. It's most likely going to rule out kids, which rules out mums and dads. Unless you get something like Avatar....which is for kids.
and
Now all i want you to do, is go to some BO site and check out the highest grossing film of all time worldwide, the second highest grossing film of all time worldwide and the 4th highest grossing film of all time worldwide. Then check out their release dates! Genre too!
Then come back here and present a new whack theory.
Keep it up and have a good night!!!!!!!!!!1111111111------
What about Trek? It was in the top ten in 2009.
What about ROTJ? It was the only SF in the top 20 in 1983.
No offense, but I think you're struggling with keeping up with the conversation.
The only one suggesting a pattern is based on only one year, is you.
I don't even understand your point here. Trek 09 would be considered a box office success and launched two sequels. If you're going to compare it to the box office king, then that would include every other movie made since time began, that should be considered as "struggling" according to your strange logic.
The only one suggesting and clinging onto a "daily" pattern, is you. . . . .
Oh ja and as you said:
I know right? TFA and RO nearly bankrupted Disney thats why they refrain from going all space and starships with their other franchises...
I give up, the daily swing pattern argument i can not beat.
So was yesterday a good day for scifi? Or no... or so-so?
I get it. You want me to do the counting for you, don't you. Nope, I have faith in your skill at basic arithmetic.
Aliens? Go to that link I provided for your benefit, look at the the top 20 in 1986......no, better yet.....look at the TOP 50 and count how many were sci-fi. I counted the total. I have full confidence you will deliver here the total out of 50 in 1986 that were sci-fi. The spotlight is on you.
And another one: no significant drop in BO performance from ROTJ to ESB. Unlike the significant drop from ESB compared to ANHs performance.
good game; no rematch
Heres another one for your theory:
In the same year 'Avatar' is skyrocketing the BO a critically acclaimed movie like JJs first Trek is struggling to reach the 400mio mark. MONTHLY SWINGS PROB
Now let me ask you, was yesterday a good day for releasing sci fi movie? What about tomorrow... You could save Hollywood millions--
Well, son, here's a tip: self discovery is a reward worthy of pursuit. Start here http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/ , look at the top 20 of each year, count how many were sci-fi of each year, and decide for yourself if there is pattern.
That tip, my gift to you, no thanks is necessary. . . .
And again, does this low hold till the the early 90s or what, cause i sure didnt heard Cameron complain bout the BO performance of Aliens.
Well well I'm not sure I would call it "magically back up again" in 84, Terminator wasn't even in the top 20 domestic gross in box office in 84.
Doah! SM, you beat me by one minute!
Well well i guess audience' interest was magically back up again for the first Terminator? Did it then stay up till the 90s or...?
I have a counter theory, totally pulled from my own a**: I think scifi movies are then heavily successful if their are linked to some kind of jump in the technological department.
This would apply to the 77-81 era as well as to the start of the 90s and to this otherwise more or less mediocre film:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b0/Avatar-Teaser-Poster.jpg
This might even be true for something like 'Inception', though its hard to seperate this film from the Nolan-factor.
But i surely never heard anyone say: "You nedd to see Prometheus duuuuude, cause i never saw anything like it before!"
And the original Blade Runner just looked like Star Wars directed by R. Scott. It even had that Han dude--
I haven't seen more recent research results, but I would be curious if it shows a sine wave-like pattern for sci-fi over the years since 82. Even without seeing the research, the pattern seems to indicate this is the pattern. Sci-fi was on a high in the early nineties with Terminator 2, Jurassic Park, Total Recall, Twelve Monkeys, Back/Future trilogy continues, Star Trek films, etc.
If there is any substance to this theory, perhaps we are currently riding the bottom end of the sine wave pattern on audience trend regarding sci-fi.
And that's fine, tbh.
Prometheus kinda felt like it was wasting some of its
budget in unmemorable scenes like the sandstorm
or the scrapped cgi-Mutant-Fifield
Keep it focused, keep it claustrophobic, plz.
But also keep it R-Rated, plz.
plz?
plz.
Good point. I can see Fox pushing Scott either take the rating or budget hit for them to green-light Awakening.
Have you considered that maybe Blade Runner (which bombed when originally released) and Alien aren't as popular as Star Wars or comic book films?
Nah screw that! It's much easier to just insult the general audience and bring up completely unrelated films.
Mind you, I really liked Blade Runner 2049, but it was never going to be a huge hit.
It's unfortunate how modern audiences just want their endless comic book movies and Star Wars retreads.
After Blade Runner, it's a good possibility that hard Science Fiction is sadly going out, and Covenant was the precursor for things to come.
Do you still hold the opinion that Covenant, which got pretty decent reviews, failed to crack $100 million because it was "bad" and not because adult sci-fi is unfortunately not a hot commodity in today's infantile cinematic environment?
I think there is plenty that can be done in the Alien franchise with the Engineers+black goo creatures+out of control androids+the nasty Weyland company.
New movies can have broader science fiction stories (like Star Trek).
Can money be made in the future with an Alien / Engineer universe?
It's possible. The budget just needs to be kept down as Ridley did with "Covenant" (which has allowed the box office to reach about 2.5 times the production budget).
Sea of Sorrows plasma rifles anyone?
Frwap. Fry half a city with one of those puppies.
I'm waiting for plasma rifles a'la Fallout.
I don't care because after the prequels the series is done. There is nothing more logically you can do but fan service and reboots. Oh sure, you could do hundreds of different things, but most of those won't make money.
They'll likely go on to Plan B :
Ripley's mom and Colonial Marines with lots of pulse rifles.
Thanks for confirming my post about Stacey Snider greenlighting a sequel, I guess?
Hammer. Nail. Head.
lolnope. Since the story for Covenant II was already written, she's obviously not too keen on it. Any new Alien films (whether Scott is involved or not) will likely try and distance themselves from Covenant even more than Covenant tried to distance itself from Prometheus.
"It was a disappointment, but I trust Ridley [Scott] and Emma [Watts] to know the right story when they find it.
-Stacey Snider Fox CEO"
The Search for Plot continues...
Fox CEO Stacey Snider said there will be a sequel to Covenant a few weeks ago.
I'm willing to bet he'll get to make his fanboy film after Scott wraps up the prequels. Just watch.
I hope Ridley is right about a sequel. "Covenant" is still making money in Japan, from disk sales and streaming.
Current worldwide box office is; $240,739,641.
And that is very close to 2.5 times its production budget (of $97 million).
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=main&id=alienparadiselost.htm
It will certainly be news to them!
12 (9) Alien: Covenant - 7 weeks on chart
Chart Run: 1-2-4-5-7-9-12
Source: http://www.homemediamagazine.com/category/hmm/news/research
- "Life" had its good / interesting moments. I encourage everyone here to see it.
Sadly its box office didn't do well which continues the trend where sci-if / horror is often neglected.
Look at "The Thing" from 1982. I think it's brilliant but it flopped at the box office.
- With "Covenant", I'm doing my part.
For my personal taste it was very enjoyable.
* As for studio finances, I agree that Hollywood accounting is a mysterious subject with some strange results.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting
* I can only guess at what Fox cares about with the box office performance of an Alien movie.
- My current speculation is that studios are hoping that a film will have box office at least 2x the production budget to avoid a flop.
If the box office gets to 2.5 x the production budget, then that's in the range where a sequel is possible.
* Current box office for "Covenant" has reached $240 million.
Worldwide: $240,085,541
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=main&id=alienparadiselost.htm
- Japan is doing well enough. I'm hopeful that the final box office will be at least in the $243 million range (~2.5 x the production budget).
Agree that we can pick a few traits similar to The Thing and Alien, perhaps then maybe it was the presentation and tension of the creature's threat that affected my perception. I mean, hard to find a review on Life that doesn't mention Alien. The Thing film or novella don't really describe the individual, but thinking it further, seems logical the alien cell of The Thing would need multiple functions like muscle and nerve. Anyway, this is off topic from the thread......so....
I still reference IMDB quite a bit and saw recently a top summer movie list, which Covenant was in the top ten, I think it was at 7. The breakdown of percentages, net profits, etc......we really don't know for sure. Popular numbers have been bounced around among us fantasy studio executives, such as the studio receives 40-50% of gross return, is the most popular. But we really don't know. No studio is required to comply with the percentages we fans came up with.
Both Life and Covenant I have already done replays. If I'm voluntarily doing a replay of a film, it must have made some sort of impact on me.
Hi SFMzone! (Biomechanoid) Good to hear from you.
Agreed that the alien in "Life" was interesting with each cell acting in some ways as a complete organism.
A variation of this idea, of an alien being composed of multiple independent organisms, was mentioned in "The Thing" (1982) by MacReady before he did his blood test.
In addition; I figure you've seen the classic "The Thing From Another World". In that movie the aliens first grow as small plants. Baby Calvin (the alien in "Life") reminded me of this.
Then in "Life" there is the mouth rape trope and fast growth (from "Alien").
* Overall imo "Life" is worth watching though I prefer "Alien Covenant" much more.
As you can see I'm still in the role of a defender of the Alien franchise as I was on IMDb. And so it continues... LOL!
PS. And back to the topic of the thread. "Covenant" has made enough money, compared with its production budget, that Fox is leaning towards making another Alien movie with Ridley at the helm. I'm hopeful since as you know I enjoy the franchise quite a bit.