|
In response to
"family films take a pretty big hit the weekend after Christmas"
by
Reagen
|
Responses from B2:
Posted by
Inigo (aka Inigo)
Dec 30 '13, 13:17
|
While I agree that Tangled helped pave the way for Frozen's opening, it's a totally different thing to say the box office of both would be completely switched. I agree that Frozen would be lower, and Tangled would be higher, but a switch disregards quality completely. Frozen has "it" that makes kids films run Shrek-like. Tangled did not, imo.
Let me be more clear, and give a scenario as well. Let's take Christmas out of the equation.
Pretend Disney opens both Tangled and Frozen in July, but the same years. Both opening weekends were the same. I'm saying that because of better quality, more demand, and better word of mouth with female viewers, Frozen would have eventually ran better than Tangled (even in Summer) because it would reach the screen count crunch far later, and with more box office. Probably mid August. Tangled would be gone, but with Frozen still comfortably in the top 5, theatre owners would want it around, and Disney would keep it there.
That point of where the screen count crunch happened would seem like Frozen all of a sudden passed Tangled in legs. But in reality, we knew it would be coming based on normal behavior of blockbuster kids films.
A point should be made that the bigger film hardly ever has better legs. Especially sequels. In theory, if Frozen is the sequel to Tangled, it should have had a far bigger opening, but far worse legs. Right from the start. It was quite the opposite.
|
Responses:
|
