Considering its not going to play in China a billion will be a long shot

The first Black Panther is one of the most overrated movies ever made. It was the worst MCU movie before the launch of The Eternals.

Now Black Panther 2 is better than the first movie but it's still a giant meh. Nothing special.

@NeoLosman said:

Apparently, Wakanda Forever isn't coming anywhere close to raking in the sort of dough that Part I did.

Most sequels don't, but Wakanda Forever outperformed the average for first sequels and, yes, I did the math.

In my movie ROI database of over 2,800 titles from 1924 to present, first sequels (2nd installments) have paid an average of 35% of the profit that 1st installments have paid.

Black Panther paid $6.73 in revenue for each production budget dollar spent. Black Panther: Wakanda Forever, thus far, has paid $3.07, which is 45% of BP's ROI.

So, in terms of relative numbers, BP:WF is doing okay. Of course, the average ROI for all the movies in my database is $3.62, which it is currently lagging. So, yeah, it's hasn't done spectacular business (yet?), but it is profitable ($2 is considered break-even).

For a more in-depth study of this, I did a running commentary on Top Gun: Maverick's box office performance - conclusion? Numbers are pretty neat!

Whether or not that's the fault of Chadwick Boseman's absence or the movie really leaning heavily into Wokeness is arguable

Now that we have some hard numbers showing that the movie is outperforming, relative to other first sequels, we perhaps ought to reconsider the term "fault". People have come out to see this movie, it's not a bomb, it's not a failure. Perhaps Chadwick Boseman's absence made the audience curious to go out and see how they'd navigate around it, and maybe seeing women lead and other cultures take the fore instead of the tired old status quo default presumptions of what a "hero" looks like also was a refreshing change people increasingly want to see.

@NeoLosman said:

Guardians Of The Galaxy depicted "other cultures"(nonhuman ones)in ways that no other MCU flick did

What has that to do with the relative success of BP:WF? You used the term "fault" as though something's gone wrong and needs a reason. I pointed out the numbers suggest otherwise. You don't acknowledge, but pivot to bring up GotG because....why?

But since you did, tell us, what makes "nonhuman" cultures preferrable to human cultures?

It is also interesting for those who want to see three movies for the price of one ticket: T'Challa's funeral and the new Black Panther, the mutant Namor and the Atlanteans, and the prequel to Ironheart.

And, as another testament to BP:WF's success, apparently it has set a record for MCU...

"Black Panther: Wakanda Forever has still managed to emerge from the wreckage with a record no other franchise has managed to accomplish.

"By taking the crown for a fifth consecutive week, the MCU sequel has cemented the Black Panther saga as the one and only property to have ever seen two separate installments spend so long as the number one film on domestic turf."

https://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/latest-marvel-news-fans-want-taika-waititi-exiled-from-the-mcu-as-black-panther-wakanda-forever-sets-a-unique-record/

So, again, numbers tell a story, and whatever factors went into it doing what's doing, "fault" is, clearly, the wrong term for them. I don't think anyone associated with bringing this film to screen is looking to roll heads for failing and, if it is "really leaning heavily into wokeness", well, the audience embraced it.

@NeoLosman said:

Quoting that same article: "Then again, that could all change little over a month for now should Avatar: The Way of Water dominate the way everyone’s expecting it to"

Whatever A:TWoW might do doesn't change the point of what BP:WF has done, nor does it support your contention that its "wokeness" suppressed its box office performance when the numbers indicate it's done very well at the box office.

I won't belabor the point though, seeing as we can both cite articles which will back our point of view,

If you had cited an article that backed your baseless point of view, you might have been able to.

Whether or not one enjoys their movies being weighted down with shout outs to Woke Thought, I'm confident we can agree: Things just aren't the same without ol' Chadwick in the picture

Yes, we agree, it was different without Chadwick. But then, Superman survived the sad passing of Christopher Reeve, and other actors got work through the character. And the Black Panther apparently will survive the sad passing of Chadwick Boseman, and other actors will get work through the character.

@NeoLosman said:

Reeves hadn't been Superman for eons prior to his providing fodder for one of Maddox's most superb riffs , and nearly two decades had passed between The Quest For Peace and Superman Returns in '06. This isn't comparable to replacing Boseman after he'd only played Black Panther in his own feature film once. To run with your Reeve analogy for a second: What Wakanda Forever did is the equivalent of casting the chick who played the secretary at The Daily Bugle as Superman in the second movie, and having her fight Zod and his goons instead

Sure, okay. Great. And here we are - audiences and critics alike loved it.

So, again, what you describe as "trying really hard to be woke" is not a feature of the film for which producers and studios and theatres are looking for "fault". If, as you say, trying hard to be woke was their aim, not only did they hit the target, but audiences are okay with that, and the numbers support this conclusion.

And, hey, I have to concede when the numbers are against me. I'm not interested in Terrifier 2, but it has its audience, and it has made terrific profit. I'm not a fan of whatever the movie makers were going for; they know who their audience is and are okay if I'm not among them. And, let's be clear - it's only brought in $11 million at the box office. $11 million. That is NOT a lot of money. Sheesh, the average BUDGET for the 19 movies in my database that were released this year, 2022, is $126 million. The audience for this kind of movie is not huge. But they brought the movie to screen for a paltry budget of just $250,000 so they are bathing in a $46 payday, which is historically exceptional (of over 2,800 titles in my movie ROI database from 1924 to present, only 65 movies have ever paid $40 or better, putting this movie in the top 2.3% most profitable movies of all time. My personal preferences aside, that number has some meaning.

@DRDMovieMusings said:

Yes, we agree, it was different without Chadwick. But then, Superman survived the sad passing of Christopher Reeve, and other actors got work through the character. And the Black Panther apparently will survive the sad passing of Chadwick Boseman, and other actors will get work through the character.

It's more like after the passing of Christopher Reeve, it was decided by TPTB that no one else can ever play Clark Kent. Then a younger sister of him appears and becomes the new Superman.

T'Challa could have been played by another actor, but in the times we live, that's not possible. Chadwick Bosman has become larger than life for many and it would be considered an insult to his memory and 'ism if anyone else would replace him and play a male Black Panther.

@wonder2wonder said:

@DRDMovieMusings said:

Yes, we agree, it was different without Chadwick. But then, Superman survived the sad passing of Christopher Reeve, and other actors got work through the character. And the Black Panther apparently will survive the sad passing of Chadwick Boseman, and other actors will get work through the character.

It's more like after the passing of Christopher Reeve, it was decided by TPTB that no one else can ever play Clark Kent. Then a younger sister of him appears and becomes the new Superman.

T'Challa could have been played by another actor, but in the times we live, that's not possible. Chadwick Bosman has become larger than life for many and it would be considered an insult to his memory and 'ism if anyone else would replace him and play a male Black Panther.

Sure. End result of their decisions are (still) a) the movie is a success, not a failure due to wokeness, and b) the brand/hero character can continue.

@DRDMovieMusings said:

Sure. End result of their decisions are (still) a) the movie is a success, not a failure due to wokeness, and b) the brand/hero character can continue.

It's not exactly a success for the board of the Walt Disney Company. They had hoped that the movie would have crossed the billion dollars with ease by now, especially as there is no significant movie in the theaters to challenge it, until perhaps "“Avatar: The Way of Water”, and it has had the number one spot for weeks now.

Chapek also hoped the same and it could have postponed his firing until after Thanksgiving.

@wonder2wonder said:

@DRDMovieMusings said:

Sure. End result of their decisions are (still) a) the movie is a success, not a failure due to wokeness, and b) the brand/hero character can continue.

It's not exactly a success for the board of the Walt Disney Company. They had hoped that the movie would have crossed the billion dollars with ease by now, especially as there is no significant movie in the theaters to challenge it, until perhaps _"“Avatar: The Way of Water”, and it has had the number one spot for weeks now.

Well, I'm not on the Walt Disney board, and haven't heard if they've commented on the business that BP:WF is doing but see my previous comments that include the math/profitability, in addition to the rankings including what you've mentioned. At any rate, its performance and critical reviews do not reasonably support any attempted argument that they "went too woke" and, as a result, the movie failed.

The Walt Disney Company doesn't really care about the culture wars, as long as they make a hefty profit. So there might be a part 3 if they're satisfied. Your and other 'numbers' does point to that possibility.

@NeoLosman said:

With the return of Blade apparently having fallen through...

Marvel's Blade Reboot Finally Has A New Director, And There's More Big News

@wonder2wonder said:

The Walt Disney Company doesn't really care about the culture wars, as long as they make a hefty profit.

Ah, but they do care - at least, somewhat. The original title for The Princess and the Frog was The Frog Princess but folks were not having it and let them know. That movie did not make great profit, but they did the movie. That would suggest that they're willing to tell stories that may not be big box office hits.

Fast forward to 2023 and The Little Mermaid is on its way, having already divided the potential audience between those who are embracing the casting and those clutching their pearls and won't watch it. Again, it seems Disney knows a movie like this is not going to be popular among a segment of the population which will hamper ticket sales, but they're still doing it.

So there might be a part 3 if they're satisfied. Your and other 'numbers' does point to that possibility.

Yeah - either a 3rd part...OR, just having Black Panther among the ensemble cast of whatever next MCU installment comes out.