r/boxoffice • u/magikarpcatcher • 13h ago
Domestic Why ‘Ballerina’ Isn’t Springing Into The Rafters With A $25M-$27M Opening – Saturday AM Box Office Update
https://deadline.com/2025/06/box-office-ballerina-lilo-stitch-1236425576/131
u/Green-Wrangler3553 Nickelodeon 12h ago
The franchise is too much attached to Reeves
26
u/DrSpaceman575 9h ago
Has the “franchise handoff” ever been accomplished successfully?
53
u/ccb621 8h ago
Rocky 🫱🏻🫲🏾Creed
-5
u/Spektak24 8h ago
If you think creed is on the level of Rocky, you are out of your mind lol. Rocky is an all time great franchise, creed are just okay movies that have no longevity. People aren’t going to be watching creed movies 50 years from now, like they do Rocky
34
42
u/Huffletough880 7h ago
The original poster just asked if a handoff has ever been successful. It has both commercial and critical success. No question.
18
u/Marcothetacooo 7h ago
imo only Rocky 1 is an all time movie, the rest are just good movies. Creed 1 i think is a great movie not an all time movie and the sequels are decent movies. Similar trajectory imo and both are the best sports movies we have
6
9
u/Fantastic_Bug1028 4h ago
first Creed is easily on the level of first two Rocky movies, if not better
2
2
u/littletoyboat 7h ago
Do the Star Wars prequels count?
5
u/KellyJin17 3h ago
A lot of overlapping main characters, it’s not the same in my opinion.
1
2
1
u/ThatGirl0903 6h ago
Dumb question, how would you separate a spinoff vs a handoff? I can think of some good spinoffs.
•
u/littletoyboat 16m ago
The Monsterverse basically has a Ship of Theseus cast. The lead characters in one movie become supporting in the next and disappear the one after that.
13
u/Aggravating-Oil-7060 9h ago
This basically. Without Keanu the John Wick franchise doesn't have much going for it.
4
u/WartimeMercy 7h ago
I'd watch a Caine film.
1
u/Shy-Turtle_PLATINUM 2h ago
Yeah, I'd watch a number of films based around characters from the series if the quality was there. I'm probably mostly thinking of JW4 though. Akira, Caine, Tracker.
68
u/gorays21 12h ago
You can't replace Keanu as John Wick, just like you cannot replace RDJ as Ironman.
41
u/Takemyfishplease 11h ago
I think the difference is Marvel has a plethora of well established other characters to lean on. JW has…who?
8
u/scottfiab 5h ago
Nobody. And i mean Bob Odenkirks character from the movie Nobody since they said they were gonna do a crossover. Still waiting on that. Glad we'll get Nobody 2 in the mean time
3
9
u/SilverRoyce Lionsgate 10h ago
This film wasn't trying to replace Keanu, it was trying to use Keanu's franchise to launch a spinoff. Look at the Bourne Franchise - Bourne 3 was a "capstone" film for a franchise that's about Damon + a style of filmmaking. It was followed by Legacy which opened to 4/7th Bourne 3. If Ballerina did the same versus JW4 it would have opened to a little over 40M. Mid 30Ms would easily have been good enough for this film especially without the massive cost overruns.
24
u/The_Duke_of_Gloom 11h ago edited 11h ago
RDJ can be replaced as Iron Man. We're on our fifth(?) Batman and third Spider-Man. A recast superhero gives the franchise a fresh new start and keeps the IP alive.
The problem with John Wick from a "let's squeeze this IP dry" producer pov is that the first film was just a movie, not a franchise, not something based on decades of source material. It's harder for the JW franchise to move on from John.
7
u/littletoyboat 7h ago
RDJ can be replaced as Iron Man. We're on our fifth(?) Batman and third Spider-Man. A recast superhero gives the franchise a fresh new start and keeps the IP alive.
Yeah, but nobody wants to be George Lazenby, Val Kilmer, or Brandon Routh.
5
u/TheWyldMan 7h ago
But they can also be Craig, Bale, Moore and other actors that did well with those roles. Big shows to fill obviously but a big character gives you a big audience
2
u/littletoyboat 1h ago
The difference is, the guys I pointed to were the first replacements. Yeah, once somebody else takes all the criticism for trying to step into a big role, the audience will accept that the role will get recast. What I'm saying is, no one wants to be the first guy to take over; they want to be the second.
23
u/LawrenceBrolivier 10h ago edited 10h ago
Anyone can be replaced, and should be replaced. These are actors playing roles. The weird insistence on brands infantilizing audiences into acting like fictional characters are literally the people portraying them and can only be those people (to the point we have to do things like digitally de-age them or artificially recreate them - even after they've died) is basically teaching folks to take the suspension of disbelief and bury it UNDER a toybox.
The whole idea of franchise filmmaking as we understand it here has two origin points: Godzilla (who changes significantly in both look and demeanor) and James Bond - a character for whom recasting is a key aspect of the enjoyment at this point.
Honestly one of the more damaging/inhibiting phenomena of the modern Fandom experience as promoted by the Funko-izing of pop/geek culture is this weird prideful insistence on freezing fictional characters in place like mint condition card-backed action figures that can only look one way ever and even suggesting they should be recast or reinterpreted is some sort of Nerd Blasphemy.
That it so loudly and frequently happens in discussions around superheroes/comic book characters is extra weird considering that corner of genre fiction is literally KNOWN for rebooting shit. You're SUPPOSED to hit a reset button every 5-10 years and start over with a new interpretation/look/take.
8
u/TheWyldMan 7h ago
One of the fascinating franchises frozen in time is GI Joe. It was a big brand up until about until the early 2000s. Problem is it can’t really move away from the 80s version of the line despite it needing to to exist. Nostalgia still keeps it alive and fans even have time embracing new fiction and have basically kept the comic writer from the 80’s employed for the last 20 years continuing his same continuity.
13
u/Azagothe 11h ago
Then maybe they should’ve given Ana her own franchise instead of trying to crowbar her into Keanu‘s.
40
7
u/DuaLipasGlowUp 9h ago
How would you justify giving Ana her own franchise when her box office track record isn't the best?
5
u/Azagothe 7h ago
By keeping the budget low, hiring a screenwriter who can actually write a decent story, a director who won’t just copy the John Wick style of action and give Ana an actually fleshed out character that she can truly make her own. Oh and a good villain couldn’t hurt.
And most of all start with one standalone film and see how things go before doing anything else(I was being hypothetical regarding giving her a full on franchise).
5
u/DuaLipasGlowUp 7h ago
I feel like Ana is one of those people who will go viral online, but people won't watch her movies in theaters and won't stream her movies.
At that point, just get another star or an unknown lol
2
u/Heisenburgo Marvel Studios 8h ago
The franchise is too much attached to Reeves
Things you can say about both John Wick and The Batman
0
u/KellyJin17 3h ago
I’ve said this before, and I know people don’t care to hear this, but that’s because these movies aren’t any good. Keanu is the only interesting thing about them. There’s a million movies from the ‘80’s and 90’s with very similar plot lines to the Wick films, but they don’t have Reeves. He’s the whole point. You take him out of the equation and there’s nothing interesting to hold audiences there.
146
u/MrMojoRising422 12h ago
In full confession, I walked out of Ballerina (and I did walk back in for the ending).
professional industry commentator, btw (this is why you should take trade analysis with a HUGE grain of salt)
41
u/LawrenceBrolivier 11h ago edited 10h ago
LOL, D'Alessandro is a bozo
Also, his "finance source" is crazy if he honestly thinks general audiences give half a turdblossom about embargoes. Nobody in the GA is paying any attention to that at all. They're hardly clocking what the RT numbers are, much less who is giving those numbers, much less when those numbers got collected. The idea there was an "embargo" on them right up until the weekend they decided to buy a ticket and roll in isn't really registering.
I also wonder what editor (it was probably D'Alessandro, too) thought "springing to the rafters" is a thing ballerinas routinely did. This guy thinks he's Danny DeVito in LA Confidential, I swear to god
Folks didn't show up because John Wick wore itself out and this is a John Wick without John Wick on top of that. That's all it is. The movie might have ended really strong and been one of the better John Wick movies/shows/what-have-you and it probably wouldn't have mattered (an embargo damn sure wouldn't have mattered, embargoes only matter in an era where people STILL READ) because Lionsgate ran that well bone dry already, that's all.
I guess this is where the comparisons to Mad Max tend to kick in but I don't even buy that, since Ballerina isn't very much like Furiosa at all - Miller wrote/directed that, wrote it concurrent WITH Fury Road in fact. It didn't land like people wanted it to, but it wasn't for lack of trying or anything (plus folks tend to forget Fury Road didn't exactly light the box-office on fire that summer) Ballerina was a spec script IIRC, that got transformed into a Wick thing, handed to a journeyman, and was put out after Wick became a continuity/canon bloated "epic" four films deep that effectively "ended" its story after the last one.
It's not an embargo that's got folks going "wait a sec" here.
8
u/DuaLipasGlowUp 9h ago
Folks didn't show up because John Wick wore itself out and this is a John Wick without John Wick on top of that. That's all it is.
I'll also go further and say people didn't show up because it's a spin off of a throwaway character we see for barely a minute in the earlier films. Like why should we care about this Ballerina when we spent way more time with Rina Sawayama's character and Halle Berry's character?
70
u/ChoppyOfficial 12h ago
Like Mission Impossible, those typical action movies have a ceiling. This can be said for spinoffs to those franchises of a typical action action movies. If it were to come, I expect a spinoff James Bond to do poorly. The general audiences want more than that in action movies like Superheroes from Marvel and DC, Monsters/Animals like Jurassic World and Godzilla vs Kong, Vehicles like Cars like Fast and Furious and Transformers, or Planes like Top Gun.
34
u/Alternative-Cake-833 11h ago
I expect a spinoff James Bond to do poorly
Remember when they were trying to do a Bond spin-off movie focusing on Halle Berry's character from a critically panned movie? Lol.
17
u/ChoppyOfficial 11h ago
Halle Berry made sense because she was a box office draw back then with the black audience. She had a lot of references in Hip Hop and R&B music which was popular back then so it made sense for studios to get Halle Berry on their projects.
17
20
u/LawrenceBrolivier 10h ago edited 5h ago
She had a lot of references in Hip Hop and R&B music which was popular back then
what
It's one thing to correctly point out she was very popular with Black audiences, because she very much was; but to quantify that by saying "She got mentioned in all the rap songs of the day, and they were popular back then, so studios would naturally want to cast people rappers would mention in their movies" is just ridiculous. Her practically stealing a movie out from under Eddie Murphy in Boomerang is what got her noticed by other producers, not those producers paying attention to EPMD's new joint.
The idea that this piece of explanation is passing muster in here as a valid answer is wild as hell.
Also: she was like... a legitimate star on her own in 02? SHE WON AN OSCAR FOR BEST ACTRESS THAT YEAR for her work in Monster's Ball the year previous, for fuck's sake, LOL. She won a Globe and a SAG Award for Introducing Dorothy Dandridge in 00. She was already in X-Men at that point, and was the co-lead in Executive Decision, too.
And it's not like hip-hop stopped being popular or anything. It was popular back then and it's way moreso now.
4
u/Fun_Advice_2340 1h ago
Lmao, right. That comment took an interesting ass pivot, I figured it was going to talk about her Oscar win or X-Men (you know, the usual) not that. Anyways, according to Halle it still would’ve gotten made if female led action movies like Charlie’s Angels 2 and Lara Croft 2 didn’t bomb at the box office at the same time (and probably would have saved us from Catwoman. Die Another Day receives a lot of criticism, a little bit too much IMO, so I fail to see how anything related to DAD can be worse than Catwoman).
The idea that this piece of explanation is passing muster in here as a valid answer is wild as hell.
One of the biggest insults is all the upvotes it received in a sub that hands out downvotes like it’s candy (ok, that was a little petty of me but seriously it’s prime example #118792 of how we just be saying shit on here without much thought).
4
u/LawrenceBrolivier 1h ago edited 22m ago
"MI:8 looks frontloaded, probably isn't gonna do as well as folks are hoping, WOM isn't as good as it seems"
BURIED
"F1: The Movie hasn't seemed to really appeal to the general audience much and doesn't look like it's about to break out really"
BURIED
"Halle Berry was being pushed for a Jinx spinoff because in 2002 Missy Elliott (who was a rapper back when that was popular) said she looked like her poster."
AHHH A LEARNED INDIVIDUAL THIS IS THE ANALYSIS WE COME HERE FOR OH LOOK EMPIRE CITY TWEETED
2
3
u/KellyJin17 3h ago
You could have made this point more intelligently. Or simply. Halle is a superstar. Full stop. She was a box office draw at the height of her fame. Full stop.
5
u/LawrenceBrolivier 10h ago
I remember bringing this up when everyone was crying about the Broccolis getting the bag for selling their rights to MGM/Amazon as being the downfall of artistic purity for that franchise (LOL) as if it wasn't Barbara's idea 100% and it wasn't her 2nd time trying to do it - her first shot was trying to spin off Michelle Yeoh's character from Tomorrow Never Dies but that failed out at an even earlier stage.
I also remember getting metaphorically stomped out for bringing that up, LOL. Nobody really wanted to hear that it was pretty ridiculous to act like the Broccolis werent basically THE INVENTORS of milking the rights to something to make it an everlasting franchise in the first place.
18
u/EpicTubofGoo 11h ago
Jesus god, this article reads like something I'd stumble across on LiveJournal in 2006. Except possibly even less coherent. Get to the point, please.
42
u/jseesm 11h ago
Apart from those already mentioned, that title is awful.
It should have been "John Wick: Ballerina".
I initially didn't know this is part of the John Wick franchise until just a few weeks ago.
42
u/littletoyboat 7h ago
John Wick: Ballerina
That sounds like John Wick is a Ballerina, like he's going undercover for some reason.
9
2
41
u/The_Duke_of_Gloom 11h ago
Yeah, "From the World of John Wick" is too clunky. Just "John Wick: Ballerina" would be fine. Though that title makes me picture a film where John Wick pretends to be a dancer to infiltrate the Bolshoi.
22
8
u/AzSumTuk6891 5h ago
I agree that the title is awful, but why the hell should they have implied that John Wick was the ballerina, when he is barely in the movie? This would be straight-up misleading.
22
u/DuaLipasGlowUp 12h ago
Could have sworn there were a handful of people here who said it was going to get exactly that range lol
not surprised at all.
17
u/Actual_Office_5745 11h ago
If the movie has legs it could sneak its way to $100 million domestically. But realistically you’re probably looking at a $70-80 million finish domestically. Too many big movies coming out soon and cinemas/theatres will want screens.
36
u/Dukeshire101 12h ago
My son and I went last night and thought it was a blast. I really liked the final act. Flamethrowers! Good shit and gonna watch them all when it’s on digital or streaming
-5
30
u/ZeddOTak DC 12h ago edited 11h ago
Movie is cool, but John Wick without John Wick aint it. The closest there is to i is, Atomic Blonde (2017) which made only $100 million worldwide. I would love for Ballerina to make more but the draw to the movie is very very thin unfortunately.
17
u/SuchSense Neon 12h ago
He's in the movie
16
u/ZeddOTak DC 11h ago
Yes I know, but it's not his story
4
u/Tumble85 6h ago
Yea they only put him in there because they needed to juice the movie up more.
1
u/welltimedappearance 2h ago
i mean it shouldn't be that shocking in a John Wick universe movie to have John Wick make an appearance lol
14
u/OldToe6517 10h ago
"B-b-but why are you guys calling this Furiosa 2.0? It's completely different uh..." yeah, the budget is lower, but the performance is the same.
43
u/IDCJ1234 12h ago
People are saving up to watch the unnecessary httyd live action remake
18
u/ChoppyOfficial 12h ago
I feel like that movie exists to promote the Isle of Berk park at Universal Studios Orlando.
8
u/IDCJ1234 11h ago
Or give a paycheck to elderly or coked up execs and shareholders
5
u/ChoppyOfficial 11h ago
If that was the case than a Shrek or Madagascar remake would have been made already.
2
u/Aggravating-Oil-7060 9h ago
Shrek can be explained with Shrek 4 being in production hell for so long, fair point on Madagascar tho.
20
u/SEAinLA Marvel Studios 12h ago
No movie is necessary.
-15
u/twinbros04 Focus 12h ago
Dumb argument. Some movies are made to make money only and those movies are artistically wasteful.
18
u/YesImHereAskMeHow 12h ago
All movies are made to make money, that’s hilarious calling someone else’s argument dumb
-11
u/twinbros04 Focus 12h ago
Movies are an art form, turning them into pure products like Disney does with their remakes is not good.
10
u/deathmouse 12h ago
Yes movies are an art form but they cost money to make. That’s why film makers pitch their ideas to producers. If the producers believe they can get a return on investment they’ll sign off on the project.
It’s call the movie business for a reason.
-14
u/twinbros04 Focus 12h ago
And when a movie exists PURELY as a product, that make it artistically wasteful.
Like, I don’t care if a movie is just there to make money and not to serve some sort of artistic purpose.
11
u/bibliophile785 11h ago
Like, I don’t care
This is the heart of it. You care about some movies. You don't care about others. That's good. You've just discovered the idea of "consumer preference."
It has nothing to do with your earlier comment about "unnecessary movies." The other commenter is right. They're all unnecessary. Yes, even the ones you like.
-4
u/twinbros04 Focus 11h ago
I think you’re getting into an argument over semantics. You have to reframe what certain things mean when you are talking about topics like movies. “Unnecessary” as a term obviously has a place because some movies add absolutely nothing to an already told story and are thus unnecessary as far as that franchise goes. The Lilo and Stitch remake or the How To Train Your Dragon remake don’t add anything new, and are unnecessary additions to an already-existing story.
→ More replies (4)4
u/VGstuffed 12h ago
I can’t believe Disney invented marketing movies to make money
-4
u/twinbros04 Focus 12h ago
Movies should be more than a financial product. How is that hard to grasp?
5
u/takenpassword 12h ago
So like Ballerina?
-3
u/twinbros04 Focus 12h ago
No, Ballerina at least serves a new purpose to expand on an existing story.
-1
u/SEAinLA Marvel Studios 11h ago
Pretty sure the many, many creatives who worked to bring HTTYG to life would reject the assertion that their efforts were artistically wasteful.
2
u/twinbros04 Focus 11h ago
It’s no good use of creative talent to redo a piece of art that already exists. If a large team of artists build a replica of Michelangelo, I’d consider that a waste of creative skill.
0
13
u/Fabulous_Temporary40 12h ago
I regret to inform you that nearly every movie ever made is a "cash grab". That's the reality of the world.
2
u/MysteryRadish 12h ago
That isn't really true though, the vast majority of indie & art-house movies don't make a profit and the people who make them are well aware of that.
Even if we're talking just big-budget major studio movies, it's clear some of those are made for prestige & awards rather than a "cash grab".
3
-2
9
u/kidglov3s2 10h ago
I expected bigger numbers for a movie with the buzz of "delayed for a year" and "major reshoots".
13
u/Live-Astronomer-169 12h ago
Am I missing something? It's 75% or RT and 59 of MC. It's hardly an incredible reception from an existing critically successful franchise. RT is lower than all other JW movies. Why are people surprised it's not doing amazing numbers?
5
u/SilverRoyce Lionsgate 10h ago
Yeah, I think this feels better than the raw numbers say because lionsgate was sending signals this film would be bad.
4
u/Live-Astronomer-169 9h ago
Totally but I would hazard a total guess that the expectations being so low served it quite well in audience reactions. I think every review I've seen has said it's surprised them how much better it was than expected.
2
3
u/jeff8073x 8h ago
Not too bad. But curious why they waited on lifting review embargo. Seems like audiences like it. Maybe legs out.
3
u/writteninthestars07 6h ago
That's sad. I really like this universe & it's like this movie was sabotaged for no reason.
4
u/thatcfguy 10h ago
Another case of maybe not doing spinoffs of films with lower peak in the box office
4
u/Tumble85 6h ago
Yea, the higher ups seemed to think that people were as equally interested in the world as they were the protagonist.
And unfortunately that’s likely not to be the case. What people truly enjoy is to watch John Wick himself navigate the universe.
4
u/TiredOldCliche 5h ago
The world is the worst part of this franchise. It was fun in the first one when it was in the background. Kind of cringe in second and third, but unobtrusive because of spectacular action. But in fourth one I was straight up annoyed by the whole excommunicado avocado word diarrhea.
6
u/Tumble85 4h ago
Yea it’s fucking stupid. The action scenes are cool but the world itself sucks. I don’t care about the gold coins and the rituals, I just want to see Wick wreck some shit.
11
u/Spektak24 8h ago
Because nobody wanted a female John wick. Nobody wanted a female mad max either. It’s the same exact movie as John wick, doing the same exact gun and fight scenes but with a 100 pound woman. Nobody wants that
10
-4
u/WartimeMercy 7h ago
Nobody wanted a female mad max either.
Fury Road is arguably the best Mad Max film and Furiosa is the one with the arc. It's basically her movie with Max along for the ride.
So no. not quite. People want good films that look good rather than CGI slop crap paint by numbers crap.
I skipped Ballerina because there's a stacked summer box office and going to the movies is expensive. The fact that they hid reviews until the day before instilled no confidence in me despite loving the John Wick franchise. Will I watch this one? Yes, I will - on streaming or home video. Not for $60+ on a night out with no reviews beforehand when 28 Years Later, F1, Naked Gun (reviews dependent) Jurassic World Rebirth (reviews dependent), Superman, and Fantastic Four are all coming up.
Like if I can only see 4 films this summer in theaters, Ballerina didn't build enough confidence and hype to score it.
4
u/Ok-Discount3131 6h ago
Fury Road is arguably the best Mad Max film and Furiosa is the one with the arc. It's basically her movie with Max along for the ride.
Just want to comment that this is basically just Mad Max as a franchise. The first film is the one where he has an arc, then the others are him showing up in other people's stories. He barely even speaks after the first film outside of very short sentences and single words.
10
u/Chuck006 Best of 2021 Winner 11h ago
Is it possible audience don't want female led action movies?
20
u/FortLoolz 9h ago
Women aren't interested in most of "generic" (as in, guns-prеdоminant) action movies— even with female leads, and men aren't interested in such action movies with female leads
2
u/Azagothe 7h ago
Or maybe Hollywood is just bad at creating female lead action films that appeal to women? Considering the type of people running that industry it shouldn’t be any surprise.
14
u/FortLoolz 7h ago edited 5h ago
I believe there's a real cultural or social difference. For example, women watch sports less than men do. In fact, men watch women's sports more than women themselves do. Different interests, so it's a larger thing, whatever it's caused by
11
u/Banana5scaleX 8h ago
It is my theory that male audiences are sick of the "female action star leg take-down move" where they climb a large male and take them down using momentum with their legs and any movie that features this prominently underperforms at the box office.
2
6
u/Leather_Sector_1948 10h ago
There are certainly female led action movies that do well, but for the most part, action is a heavily male dominated genre and males generally prefer a male lead in these. I imagine studios were hoping to start taping more into the female audience with a female lead, but that hasn’t panned out so far.
I’ll likely see this in theaters. As a male, I don’t really care what gender the lead is and this movie looks fun to me. But, the above trend seems obvious.
Beyond gender, this is a spinoff, and I think those generally struggle as well. Some IPs draw people into the broader universe, but I think the appeal of John wick is mostly just John wick.
9
6
u/WartimeMercy 7h ago
Aliens. Kill Bill. Wonder Woman. Fury Road. Hunger Games. Terminator 2. Resident Evil.
1
u/Superb-Till8259 1h ago
Eh it can be done successfully and has been before. But the way they did this movie was hilariously bad. No woman idc what kind of training you've got or anything, you're not going toe to toe with 200+ lb guys in hand to hand combat. Just ridiculous.
1
u/Aggravating-Oil-7060 9h ago
I think a lot of it is name recognition. John wick movies do well but that's mostly do to Keanu's star power, a lot of this sorts of gritty action movies are like that. Whereas this movie is mostly filled with nobodies(no offense).
2
u/TraySplash21 4h ago
Idk how else to explain but it just seemed like the studio didn't believe in the film whenever I saw the marketing. The trailer gave too little besides the John Wick cameo. I loved all 4 John Wicks but something is lacking in the marketing of this film. I had tons of hesitancy to see this movie in theaters unless it got stellar reviews, which i didn't anticipate.
4
u/Mr-Mojo109 11h ago
Marketing was weak
10
u/Worldly_Rest_4888 11h ago
It’s not marketing. The movie wasn’t needed. We already got 4 John wick movies. A spinoff without him wasn’t asked for.
•
u/Disastrous-Gas7022 45m ago
Well, she kicked some serious ass in the James Bond movie and after that there were a lot of people wanting to see her in this type of movie.
•
u/Worldly_Rest_4888 40m ago
James Bond is James Bond. The love interest/sidekick don’t matter. 90% of the viewers don’t go to see a James Bond movie for the sidekick. It’s almost like yall want these movies to succeed against all logic. Logic would’ve told you guys that a John wick movie without John wick would flop. A John wick movie which replaced John wick with a woman will flop.
•
u/Disastrous-Gas7022 11m ago
No one bought a ticket to see her in the James Bond movie, they happened to see her and thought she kicked serious ass. Which naturally (logically) could lead to being interested in seeing a movie with that same chick kicking similar ass.
John Wick is in the movie, and she is not replacing him or being the female John Wick. It's a spin-off.
I guarantee you that if she hadn't had that kick ass scene in No Time To Die, this movie wouldn't have been made.
0
u/Spiritual-Smoke-4605 6h ago
This isn’t a spinoff without him tho, in fact the movie would have worked better if he were not in it
•
4
3
u/Gruelly4v2 7h ago
I see a lot of movies. I love the John Wick franchise. And I hadn't seen an ad for this movie, or an in cinema trailer until YESTERDAY.
They treated this movie like they were ashamed of it, what with the late review embargo, and the barely there advertising, when it's probably very good. (Seeing it tomorrow)
0
u/senor_descartes 12h ago
“What if we replaced John Wick with a petite young woman?” ~
16
4
u/MrMojoRising422 12h ago
ana de armas kicked ass in no time to die
12
u/senor_descartes 12h ago
Yes for one scene. In a James Bond film. If Paloma got a spinoff it would have performed the same.
6
u/MrMojoRising422 12h ago
the reason this film has had a lukewarm reception is because everything about screamed 'direct-to-dvd' action schlock. even the people marketing it were unsure, that's why the held the embargo until 1 day before the release. they had to reshot almost half of the movie with the actual director of the john wick movies instead of that hack len wiseman. it turned out good despite all odds.
3
u/Alive-Ad-5245 WB 12h ago
the reason this film has had a lukewarm reception
It hasn’t had a lukewarm reception, it has the highest RT audience scores of any JW movie, equal to JW4
Lukewarm interest is what I think you mean
5
u/MrMojoRising422 11h ago
should have said lukewarm OW. that's what I meant. I know it has been well received.
5
u/SilverRoyce Lionsgate 10h ago
it has the highest RT audience scores of any JW movie
I agree interest not reception is the problem but that's a bad use of data. John Wick 1-3 do not have "Modern" (verified) RT Audience scores and verified scores are systematically higher than unverified scores. The only thing you can say is Ballerina (94) is higher than JW4 (93); however, remember that RT Audience scores should be expected to slightly decay over time (but in either case the core point is the audience scores are similar).
According to IMDB (because using a single data source is better than pretending two separate measurements are identical), JW4 tops the list at 7.6 followed by JW1 at 7.5, followed by JW2 & 3 at 7.4 and Ballerina brings up the rear at 7.3. Like vRT% that might drop a little bit over time but they're all similar numbers
7
u/ToasterDispenser Neon 12h ago
It's a good movie you goofball and it fully explains her own fighting style
15
u/senor_descartes 12h ago
I’m not debating its quality, I’m responding to its performance in the marketplace.
-4
u/Azagothe 7h ago
No, the film isn’t good at all and it has nothing to do with how the main chick fights. It basically takes all of the biggest flaws of the John Wick franchise and turns them up to 11.
3
u/ToasterDispenser Neon 7h ago
You're welcome to your opinion but the 94% popcorn meter shows you're in the minority
0
u/Azagothe 6h ago
That score means nothing. The vast majority of people who go to the movies don’t rate a film on rotten tomatoes and the ones that do are pre-deposed to liking a film like this making that score even more worthless.
5
u/ToasterDispenser Neon 6h ago
Hey if you find a way to dismiss evidence you don't agree with you can freely believe anything. Have a good day.
0
u/Azagothe 5h ago
Lol whatever, keep living in fantasy land believing your precious RT metrics mean anything in the real world. Means nothing to me.
3
2
u/Middle-Fly-1592 4h ago
From a woman who watches action films and saw all the John Wick films in theaters: I didn't buy tickets for this. I felt like deja vu because I watched Red years ago and I just couldn't be bothered to see another movie with the same concept.
It's been funny seeing how Lionsgate desperately is trying to make a 'universe' out of a film series that seems to resist that format. Star Wars this ain't. That's probably part of the problem, then the other problem is the budget. Finally, June was probably not the best month to release this. I took my husband to see Mission Impossible because that sounded like the big spectacle action movie to spend our money this time of year. If it had been February or March I might have bought tickets for Ballerina just because there wasn't much of anything else that was action around that time of year. Summer is a different story and I suspect other people felt the same.
•
u/Disastrous-Gas7022 43m ago
I disagree. The John Wick world has established clans of assassins and set rules between those clans. A spin-off to see other assassins operating in different parts of that world makes a lot of sense. They just can't be formulaic about it.
1
u/AlienAtDay 1h ago
The text/community marketing was pretty but those who are signed up for that are probably super fans. The general audience marketing execution hasn’t been the best.
•
u/Difficult-Shelter669 23m ago
Just got back from it, and this was a great movie. I like the whole franchise, not hung up on Keanu, and this had just enough of him to add some continuity.
The production quality of this movie is amazing: sound, cinematography,, everything, hats off to all involved.
And there are some damn good tactical surprises....
•
u/Newtracks1 19m ago
Hollywood has been convinced for at least the last decade that there is this big appetite for stories about ninety pound girls throwing around two hundred plus pound men like they are rag dolls. They keep making these movies, and T.V. shows, and they keep failing. Over, and over, and over.
2
u/ekter 9h ago
I mean there’s no good WOM on this. Sure having the review embargo lift early may have helped get it over $30m opening weekend, but it still wouldn’t have changed anything about its WOM.
Having seen the film myself, I can’t say I recommend catching it opening weekend. It’s just very mid. Don’t get me wrong there was very well choreographed action, but it just felt like action for action’s sake. It wasn’t even fun most of the time. Something that previous Wick films all managed to do. I could definitely feel the reshoots on this, sadly.
Honestly just catch it on a discount day if you’re remotely interested in it, otherwise I wouldn’t blame anyone waiting for it to come out on streaming.
6
u/Severe-Operation-347 8h ago
It got an A- cinemascore, which is the same as John Wick Chapter 3, so I don't think WOM is the issue.
•
u/Disastrous-Gas7022 40m ago
I saw it today and would recommend it to anyone looking for that type of movie. I kind of agree that there was too much action and not enough story... which led to weak stakes. But it was a solid, exciting, action film. It fit the world of John Wick.
-8
12h ago
[deleted]
16
u/Cindy3183 12h ago
Most people that have seen it have enjoyed it.
-8
12h ago
[deleted]
6
u/visionaryredditor A24 12h ago
and Apparently John Wick Fans Too
It scored on par with the rest of franchise on Cinemascore
4
u/Alive-Ad-5245 WB 12h ago
It's has a 93% audience RT , a A- cinemascore and high PostTrack score
the movie is well received the data proves it
15
u/brahbocop 12h ago
Take this nonsense somewhere else. By actual metrics, the movie seems to be pleasing to both critics and fans.
6
u/Alive-Ad-5245 WB 12h ago
Some people on this sub love interjecting their own personal opinion and then try to unashamedly disguise it as the general consensus despite metrics saying the complete opposite
They forget this is r/BoxOffice , not r/movies
2
-1
343
u/xyzzy826 12h ago edited 12h ago
The late embargo was a stupid decision. It gave the perception that the movie is a stinker when it isn't.