11 votes

Making sense of ‘The Exorcist: Believer’s $27m+ opening after Universal and Blumhouse shelled out $400m for franchise

Posted by cloud_loud
Tags: horror, usa, franchises.film, the exorcist.believer, universal.pictures, blumhouse productions, box office, author.anthony dalessandro, source.deadline
https://deadline.com/2023/10/box-office-the-exorcist-believer-1235565802/

Link information

This data is scraped automatically and may be incorrect.

Title
'The Exorcist: Believer' Looking At $28M Opening - Saturday AM Update
Authors
Anthony D'Alessandro
Published
Oct 7 2023
Word count
1108 words

6 comments

  1. [3]
    PantsEnvy
    Link
    What do you get, when you spend $400m for the rights to make a story entitled "The Exorcist?" The name, a fifty year old story, plus maybe some iconic scenes of a head spinning, spider walking,...

    What do you get, when you spend $400m for the rights to make a story entitled "The Exorcist?"

    The name, a fifty year old story, plus maybe some iconic scenes of a head spinning, spider walking, vomiting child?

    I think almost everyone is familiar with the iconic scenes and iconic story line, they simply aren't interesting or novel anymore.

    Halloween has the iconic Michael Myers, which is instantly recognized and loved even by children who have never seen the original movie.

    In fact, most of the successful scary movie franchises and remakes I can think of, involve an iconic character that is easily replicated. Freddy Krueger. The Chucky doll. The Scream.

    If my theory is correct, any remake of a horror movie without an iconic character is doomed to failure. Psycho. Rosemary’s Baby. The Shining. These all have great actors in iconic roles, rather than an easily reproduced character.

    10 votes
    1. [2]
      Flocculencio
      Link Parent
      In addition, as far as I can see the successful classic horror franchises tend to also be firmly self-aware and at least slightly tongue-in-cheek (cf Freddy, Chucky etc). Its easier to...

      In addition, as far as I can see the successful classic horror franchises tend to also be firmly self-aware and at least slightly tongue-in-cheek (cf Freddy, Chucky etc). Its easier to franchise/remake horror-comedy than serious horror- in a serious horror movie like the Exorcist you can't just rehash the original, because people will say it's derivative but you also can't just do something totally new because people will wonder why this had to be an [Exorcist] movie rather than its own thing.

      4 votes
      1. phoenixrises
        Link Parent
        I don't disagree with you but I can't believe you say self-aware and tongue in cheek but never mention the Scream franchise!

        I don't disagree with you but I can't believe you say self-aware and tongue in cheek but never mention the Scream franchise!

        3 votes
  2. MrAlex
    Link
    I mean, all these articles poopooing this purchase, as if horror movies in general don't make massive returns on investment. Yes, this film won't break them even on the property, but they own the...

    I mean, all these articles poopooing this purchase, as if horror movies in general don't make massive returns on investment. Yes, this film won't break them even on the property, but they own the exorcist now. They can churn out flick after flick just like the conjuring universe. Crossover for 20 million down anyone? Profit pretty much in the bag.

    2 votes
  3. [2]
    blivet
    Link
    The trailer for this thing looked absolutely dreadful.

    The trailer for this thing looked absolutely dreadful.

    1 vote
    1. CptBluebear
      Link Parent
      High praise for a horror movie, though I'm going to assume you meant it in a negative way.

      High praise for a horror movie, though I'm going to assume you meant it in a negative way.

      4 votes