ReelSociety Forums

Alright, folks, it's time to announce the new round of the Yearly Super Contest.

THE RULES

Each entrant must chose what they think will be the Box Office Top 20 of the year, in the correct order.

Each entrant also can pick 2 "bench" films. This means that if one or two of the films chosen in their Top 20 gets moved to 2014, their bench picks will now be added. Make sure to order your bench films correctly (i.e. your #1 bench film will be the first picked if a Top 20 choice loses its date)

Winners will be announced by the end of January 2014, to give films that open in late December a fighting chance.

The closing date for entries is midnight Wednesday Feb 13th.

If you want to pick a film from January on your list (and Zero Dark Thirty doesn't count, as it opened last year you must submit your list before the Friday the January film opens.

Good luck, and choose wisely.

1. Iron Man 3
2. Star Trek: Into Darkness
3. Man of Steel
4. The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug
5. Thor: The Dark World
6. Monsters University
7. The Hunger Games: Catching Fire
8. Frozen
9. Fast Six
10. Jack Ryan
11. White House Down
12. Mr. Peabody and Sherman
13. Oz: The Great and Powerful
14. The Smurfs 2
15. Saving Mr. Banks
16. Despicable Me 2
17. The Hangover Part III
18. A Good Day to Die Hard
19. Epic
20. Lone Ranger

Bench:
Walking With Dinosaurs
The Wolverine

Wow, that's early Boosch. Of course, your early instincts were right this time last year when you were the only person to pick up Hotel Transylvania and one of the few to nab Wreck It Ralph!

I've yet to have a proper think, but from your list I'm surprised to see Saving Mr Banks, which looks like a mid-level hit at best, and Mr Peabody and Sherman which feels a tad offbeat to be a blockbuster.

Looking at his list is really my fist time looking at the whole of 2013. I've got to say there looks tone a good amount of $300 m possible films, but nothing that's got much of a chance at $400 m. It should be a good year for this one.

Well, I doubt I would have chosen ZD30 anyway.

2012 was a great year for blockbusters. Including Les Mis and Django, 28 film broke the $100M mark, and that's likely to increase to 29 because Rise of the Guardians is less than $3M away.

Boosh, having Star Trek Into Darkness at #2 is ballsy. The original was a great film, but it only made $257M. For STID to get to #2, it'll have to do at least $325-$350. You think it's got that much momentum?


And Six, how is a winner determined? By who's got the most right, or is there a point system for the right order?

In my opinion, this year looks like a big step down from last year. The year's biggest movie could struggle to hit $300 million and many sequels (The Hangover Part III, The Wolverine, Catching Fire) will see declines due to either weak previous installments or quieter buzz. However, Into Darkness should improve over its predecessor due to a strong first installment and 3-D prices (I will see a flat version though since it's post-conversion).

Even so, I find it hard to believe that the second Hunger Games movie will only finish in 7th after the first one topped $400M in a March opening.

Shrykespeare wrote: And Six, how is a winner determined? By who's got the most right, or is there a point system for the right order?

Winner will be determined by Total box office. There's never been a tiebreaker because no two lists have ever been the same, but if that is the case then whoever gets closer to the right order will be determined the winner.

Shryke, the hype for the first film died out rather quickly (by the time The Avengers opened, it was old hat) and with Twilight now over, there really isn't a need to cheer on a rival fantasy franchise. Not to mention that the film changed directors (from the capable Gary Ross to the mediocre Francis Lawrence, who is contracted for the next three films).

Also, this one directly faces Thor: The Dark World (and of course, Chris Hemsworth has quite the following with women).

Hmm, I don't think people went to see The Hunger Games just to compete or rival Twilight. I think it's a whole movement onto itself, one that appeals not just to hysterical teen girls. Thor will be competition, but remember the first one only made 180m. Being part of The Avengers will help the sequel but I don't see Hunger Games 2 losing a huge amount due to it.

Am I right that Hunger Games 2 doesn't actually involve the games? If so, it could be a step down financially, but not that far.

Basically, the first Hunger Games amounted to "Twilight in middle America" and had elements that appealed to people in small towns (violence, the mainstream media, totalitarian societies) along with having the fantasy fans wanting something while while waiting for The Hobbit (that's another problem, Catching Fire only has four weeks before The Desolation of Smaug). I really can't see the same audience showing up for the same thing twice (especially since movies either about middle America or middle American morals or viewpoints are notoriously hit and miss at the box office).

With Thor, no one really knew who Chris Hemsworth was for the first film. Now with a few big hits, Hemsworth's a big deal and a guy who can bring in both the men and women with his manliness and good looks.

Buscemi wrote:Basically, the first film amounted to "Twilight in middle America"

No... no it really didn't.

Seeing the sequel to Hunger Games so low is quite a surprise indeed, as is Despicable Me 2 being only 16th on your list. If I was more of a gambler, I'd say this one might end up the number 1 animated film of 2013...

Geezer wrote:

Buscemi wrote:Basically, the first film amounted to "Twilight in middle America"

No... no it really didn't.

Look, The Hunger Games only got greenlighted because of Twilight. Lionsgate wanted their teen girl fantasy and got it here. To set it apart from the other Twilight clones, they picked a story that appealed to middle America and was violent to bring in the people that don't watch fantasy films.