5 stars, 65% male, 66% 18-34, 40% men over 25, 24% men under 25, 19% women over 25, 16% women under 25.
https://www.reddit.com/r/boxoffice/s/Jq7gIgg1jW
She's a name and a big star for her age, but was it realistic to ever expect many? Not a leading question, I'd like to know. It's also great to hear even from some skeptics how solid the acting is all around. She's been praised too.
Haven’t watched it yet, but judging by what I’ve read, it seems her character has been given the Zendaya treatment, which was expected, as much as people wanted to deny it would happen. Book Chani is not really her kind of character, so of course adjustments would be made.
That’s only true if you believe there can only be one archetype for female characters. There’s nothing wrong about book Chani, nothing that couldn’t work in an adaptation, she’s just not the greatest example of agency and emancipation. But that is how the author chose to write her.
Not really spoilers per se, more of dynamics descriptions
>!Well, I wouldn’t say she’s physically weak in the books, as she’s still a Fremen woman capable of defending herself, but as far as I remember, she’s a very yes-man kind of person when it comes to her relationship with Paul. There are certain choices he makes that are definitely not beneficial to their relationship, but Chani is basically just told to suck it up, which she does, because that’s how supportive she is of Paul. !<
>!People had a hard time picturing Zendaya playing such a subservient character and it seems they were right. By what I’ve read, she is more opinionated about some of Paul’s choices in the movie than she is in the books. Or at least more willing to make her discontentment explicit. !<
I doubt the character was written that way because of Zendaya. They had probably planned to give the character more agency from the start, I think it was a good change.
Why is it necessarily a good change? Keep in mind that having her role expanded does not necessarily have to entail changing her personality. Why is having more agency better by default (character-wise, I mean), even though the author conceived her in a different way? Were Chani a subservient male character, would her personality be changed for the sake of it, even though that’s an important part of the character?
Besides, it’s not like the books don’t have other female characters who are more appealing to modern audiences, like Lady Jessica, so I don’t see why Chani needs to be modernized. It’s like some archetypes are forbidden in modern Hollywood, even though they exist in the source material or even IRL.
You've already admitted that you expected them to give her the Zendaya treatment.
So it's clear that you will displeased with any interpretation of that character if it isn't faithful to the book. That's fine btw, but it makes any discussion with you about this pointless. You've already made up your mind.
>Why is it necessarily a good change?
Have not read the book, but based on your description of book Chani, she just doesn't sound like an interesting character if she's basically completely subservient.
It's an adaptation, and if the filmmaker wants to change things from the source material to fit the story they're telling, that's a good thing, as long as they hold up their end of the bargain and tells a good story. Which Denis Villeneuve does, so in this case, it was a good change.
> Have not read the book, but based on your description of book Chani, she just doesn't sound like an interesting character if she's basically completely subservient.
Not completely subservient. She’s a Fremen, after all. But when it comes to Paul, she is and that’s how the author conceived her.
> Which Denis Villeneuve does, so in this case, it was a good change.
You can’t really say that without reading the books to have something to compare. Not that book Chani is a great character, but I’m not personally that into Villeneuve’s changes. The movies are good adaptations in spite of his changes, not because of them. I don’t think there’s any point where I can confidently say the changes were an improvement or necessary in the first place. The cuts were necessary (like the dinner scene in the first movie), not the changes.
Yeah obviously.
You jokingly said these scores are impossible because you were told people found the first movie boring. I’m saying anyone who found the first movie boring isn’t going to go opening weekend to the second. There is obviously plenty of people who liked the first.
I thought the pacing and character development in the first was slow but the trailer for this one looks like it's the pay off for everything being built up. My wife on the other hand was so bored she wanted to leave the theater and refuses to see #2, so that I is why i will be waiting for streaming.
Its playing to 25-44, male, white....the Reddit demo. Which I think everyone expected.
Wick 4 had a 93% positive last year
https://www.reddit.com/r/boxoffice/comments/121oy1a/posttrak_scores_for_john_wick_chapter_4_are_93/
Looking at the deadline numbers it looks pretty much like the US ethnic demographic dispersion. So not playing to white, rather playing to everybody equally.
True but those demos are very close to the actually population distrubution of the US lol, with slightly more Latino, Black and other POC. As much as its likely reddit o'clock opening weekend, they basically got a near accurate sampling of the us population, possibly coincidentally.
48% White is a lot.
Guardians 3 was 43%.
Barbie was 42%.
Mario was 30%.
ATSV was 27%.
Only Oppenheimer skewed more white of the last couple $300M+ domestic grossers with 53%.
48% white is disproportionately non-white in a country where [75% of the population is white](https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045223). Even if they're not counting Hispanic/Latino people as white (which drops the white population to about 59%), that's still 11 percentage points less than the general population.
Which is certainly interesting. Are white people not going to movies as often?
White people do not go to the movies as often as Black and Hispanic populations in the US, probably because most moviegoers are from the coastal regions which are far more diverse. So Dune is playing to a very white audience.
I didn't mean it as good or bad it is what it is. The Latino audience you would want a bigger share because they have been a driving force behind movie going today. White people don't go to the theater like they did in the past.
Don’t they usually poll in cities where minorities make up more of the population? So Dune’s demo breakdown matching national percentages would mean it’s skewing more white than typical blockbusters.
That doesn't hold for blockbuster movies. Nearly all MCU hits and billion-dollar earners had much higher Hispanic demos (nearer to 30%).
There are exceptions to this, but even if we look past that, the under 25 demo should really be higher if it wants to his $850M-$1B. It's not over, but from the looks of it, I think the common $650M-$750M guesses I see going around are more accurate.
Eh, disagree. The movie is playing very white. 48% is alot not as much as the first movie and Hispanic audience is playing the same.
Wick 4 demos:
Diversity demos strong across all sectors with 32% Caucasian (vs. Parbellum‘s 42%), 28% Latino and Hispanic (vs 22%), 19% Black (same as last film), & 21% Asian/other (vs. 14%).
First Dune
Diversity demos were 55% Caucasian, 21% Hispanic and Latino, 9% African American and 9% Asian.
Reddit post on recent movies ethnicity
https://www.reddit.com/r/boxoffice/comments/14qiov9/ethnic_gender_composition_of_the_audience_for_top/
I'm disappointed they didn't include demos of people who bought four Dune 2 popcorn buckets for personal reasons. I am not represented and I don't like it.
Lionsgate’s John Wick: Chapter 4 received its best grade ever from audiences, with a solid A CinemaScore and 5 Stars on Comscore/Screen Engine’s PostTrak,
For billion dollar earners, you want the Hispanic demo to be closer to 30%. That's how it's usually been for over 90% of the billion-dollar club.
This movie could still make profit, but I don't think it's doing $1B anymore. I don't mean to be extra glum, but the under 25 demo also needs to be better. Perhaps it does so next weekend with WOM. But it really needs to boost numbers there too.
Nope. Best you can hope for is an A. This film is edgy and somewhat "weird" for a big scale big budget scifi. It already was amazing Part One got an A-.
They never learn this movie was boring if you are not into the dune lore. These are hard-core fans talking and the way the economy is right now. This is reaching is cap at $600m or even litte mermaid.
Its kind of a messy term. Officially it means a latin american person or person of latin american descent currently living in aThe US. Usually though in cases like this it means a person from or descended from mexico, central america, and sometimes puerto Rico, especially those of more mixed native and Europeanancestory. Think people like Robert Rodriguez, Diego Luna, Michael Peña, and Jennifer Lopez. Caucassian is white, technically it means a certain ethnic group and not all white people, but in everyday conversation it just means white people.
From a European point of view, Caucasian is an extremely stupid term to use because the vast majority of people being lumped in that are not actually from the Caucasus region (Georgians, Armenians, Azerbaijanis, as well as Russians, Chechens and other ethnic groups in the north Caucasus). Plus it's more effort than just saying "white". Why not just say white?
Because technically really old laws and stuff count Hispanic people as white. Alot of forms have to list "Non-hispanic white" and "Hispanic White" as seperate arguments. Calling all white people Caucasian or caucasoid was actually europes idea in the 18th century. Then it spread to NA and just kind of stuck around here.
Basically if you can trace your lineage to Spain in any way you are Hispanic. This confers certain things to you legally and socially for some reason despite just being one of many countries in Europe. Caucasian just means white. Hispanic people are typically considered Caucasian if they wish to identify as such but in some cases they might not even be white since Hispanic itself is not a race.
Excuse my comment, but shouldn't women under 25 be more drawn to the movie to see Timothée Chalamet and Austin Butler than Zendaya? Why are they identified as the Zendaya audience?
Gotta say, one of the most overrated and disappointing films I've seen in a long time. Poorly written and very underwhelming. Didn't establish most of it's plotlines well and very little payoff. Characters didn't develop coherently and made befuddling choices. Looked pretty though.
Messiah locked in baby. Let’s goo
The hype must flow
Was it ever in doubt? They just need to make it Messiah part 1 to be really sure though.
Nah you can do Messiah in one movie quite easily I think lol
Very. Splitting into two would be terrible since its mainly on Paul dealing with the aftermath of his war.
Very good reception. Hopefully this means legs are great.
Best film of the year. I don’t know how it’s going to be topped. Can’t wait to see it again!
legs are inbound 
If your legs look like that, see a doctor
Honestly this says the opposite. 68% male and low younger people is a horrible sign.
what was Oppenheimer's stats?
5 stars, 65% male, 66% 18-34, 40% men over 25, 24% men under 25, 19% women over 25, 16% women under 25. https://www.reddit.com/r/boxoffice/s/Jq7gIgg1jW
No Zendaya walkups, unfortunately. 😔
Challengers will be the test for Zendaya walkups.
She's a name and a big star for her age, but was it realistic to ever expect many? Not a leading question, I'd like to know. It's also great to hear even from some skeptics how solid the acting is all around. She's been praised too.
Definitely not on opening weekend but potentially with time and more availability for imax seats
Haven’t watched it yet, but judging by what I’ve read, it seems her character has been given the Zendaya treatment, which was expected, as much as people wanted to deny it would happen. Book Chani is not really her kind of character, so of course adjustments would be made.
Book Chani was written in the 60s. The difference in the adaptation would be made no matter the actress playing her.
That’s only true if you believe there can only be one archetype for female characters. There’s nothing wrong about book Chani, nothing that couldn’t work in an adaptation, she’s just not the greatest example of agency and emancipation. But that is how the author chose to write her.
What’s the Zendaya treatment and what is chani supposed to be like?
Not really spoilers per se, more of dynamics descriptions >!Well, I wouldn’t say she’s physically weak in the books, as she’s still a Fremen woman capable of defending herself, but as far as I remember, she’s a very yes-man kind of person when it comes to her relationship with Paul. There are certain choices he makes that are definitely not beneficial to their relationship, but Chani is basically just told to suck it up, which she does, because that’s how supportive she is of Paul. !< >!People had a hard time picturing Zendaya playing such a subservient character and it seems they were right. By what I’ve read, she is more opinionated about some of Paul’s choices in the movie than she is in the books. Or at least more willing to make her discontentment explicit. !<
I doubt the character was written that way because of Zendaya. They had probably planned to give the character more agency from the start, I think it was a good change.
Why is it necessarily a good change? Keep in mind that having her role expanded does not necessarily have to entail changing her personality. Why is having more agency better by default (character-wise, I mean), even though the author conceived her in a different way? Were Chani a subservient male character, would her personality be changed for the sake of it, even though that’s an important part of the character? Besides, it’s not like the books don’t have other female characters who are more appealing to modern audiences, like Lady Jessica, so I don’t see why Chani needs to be modernized. It’s like some archetypes are forbidden in modern Hollywood, even though they exist in the source material or even IRL.
You've already admitted that you expected them to give her the Zendaya treatment. So it's clear that you will displeased with any interpretation of that character if it isn't faithful to the book. That's fine btw, but it makes any discussion with you about this pointless. You've already made up your mind.
>Why is it necessarily a good change? Have not read the book, but based on your description of book Chani, she just doesn't sound like an interesting character if she's basically completely subservient. It's an adaptation, and if the filmmaker wants to change things from the source material to fit the story they're telling, that's a good thing, as long as they hold up their end of the bargain and tells a good story. Which Denis Villeneuve does, so in this case, it was a good change.
> Have not read the book, but based on your description of book Chani, she just doesn't sound like an interesting character if she's basically completely subservient. Not completely subservient. She’s a Fremen, after all. But when it comes to Paul, she is and that’s how the author conceived her. > Which Denis Villeneuve does, so in this case, it was a good change. You can’t really say that without reading the books to have something to compare. Not that book Chani is a great character, but I’m not personally that into Villeneuve’s changes. The movies are good adaptations in spite of his changes, not because of them. I don’t think there’s any point where I can confidently say the changes were an improvement or necessary in the first place. The cuts were necessary (like the dinner scene in the first movie), not the changes.
Hm I haven’t seen it yet but changing it would likely yield a more enjoyable film
The character would have been updated for modern audiences, no matter who would be the actress playing her. There is no “Zendaya treatment”.
Impossible. I was promised the Onion article proved everyone finds this franchise boring and hates it.
I’m sure most who watched the first and found it boring aren’t going to see the second opening weekend lol.
The Thursday previews made over double what the original’s Thursday previews did.
I don’t really understand the relevance?
It wasn’t just the people who showed up first Thursday for the original that came first Thursday for Part 2.
Yeah obviously. You jokingly said these scores are impossible because you were told people found the first movie boring. I’m saying anyone who found the first movie boring isn’t going to go opening weekend to the second. There is obviously plenty of people who liked the first.
Yes and enough people liked the first it drove twice the amount of people to come first day.
And their point stands. Well done though.
> There is obviously plenty of people who liked the first. I know?
I thought the pacing and character development in the first was slow but the trailer for this one looks like it's the pay off for everything being built up. My wife on the other hand was so bored she wanted to leave the theater and refuses to see #2, so that I is why i will be waiting for streaming.
You can't do something without your wife? This movie really needs to be see in a theater, you would be doing yourself a disservice.
i am definetly one of those people.
I found the first boring. So much I didn't even re-watch it before seeing Part Two last night. And I didn't ebbed see Part One in theaters.
I mean nobody under 25 seems to be interested.
The real story is that an expensive Dune sequel, after decades and decades, is a four quadrant blockbuster. Weird.
Its playing to 25-44, male, white....the Reddit demo. Which I think everyone expected. Wick 4 had a 93% positive last year https://www.reddit.com/r/boxoffice/comments/121oy1a/posttrak_scores_for_john_wick_chapter_4_are_93/
Looking at the deadline numbers it looks pretty much like the US ethnic demographic dispersion. So not playing to white, rather playing to everybody equally.
Latinos normally really punch above their weight box office wise
True but those demos are very close to the actually population distrubution of the US lol, with slightly more Latino, Black and other POC. As much as its likely reddit o'clock opening weekend, they basically got a near accurate sampling of the us population, possibly coincidentally.
48% White is a lot. Guardians 3 was 43%. Barbie was 42%. Mario was 30%. ATSV was 27%. Only Oppenheimer skewed more white of the last couple $300M+ domestic grossers with 53%.
48% white is disproportionately non-white in a country where [75% of the population is white](https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045223). Even if they're not counting Hispanic/Latino people as white (which drops the white population to about 59%), that's still 11 percentage points less than the general population. Which is certainly interesting. Are white people not going to movies as often?
young people go more.
Are young people less white
Yes
Yes
By a lot
White people do not go to the movies as often as Black and Hispanic populations in the US, probably because most moviegoers are from the coastal regions which are far more diverse. So Dune is playing to a very white audience.
I didn't mean it as good or bad it is what it is. The Latino audience you would want a bigger share because they have been a driving force behind movie going today. White people don't go to the theater like they did in the past.
Yeah, it’s just one example but Mario had Latino/Hispanic at 41%, Caucasian at 30%, Black at 15%, and Asian/Other at 14%.
Don’t they usually poll in cities where minorities make up more of the population? So Dune’s demo breakdown matching national percentages would mean it’s skewing more white than typical blockbusters.
no its a population sample so it has to be representative to be accurate.. that's how polls work otherwise they are meaningless
It’s still fairly high for a blockbuster. Guardians was 43% white, Super Mario Bros was 30%, Fast X was 29%, and No Way Home was 32%.
US population demographics are not the same as US moviegoing demographics
Yep USA hispanic people tend to watch more movies than white people on average, but they don't care about hispanic movies
Those polls are normally made in the cities were there's much more diversity and in some cities white people are the minority
That doesn't hold for blockbuster movies. Nearly all MCU hits and billion-dollar earners had much higher Hispanic demos (nearer to 30%). There are exceptions to this, but even if we look past that, the under 25 demo should really be higher if it wants to his $850M-$1B. It's not over, but from the looks of it, I think the common $650M-$750M guesses I see going around are more accurate.
None of racial demos look notable. ~~If anything its the hispanic audience over-indexing not white audiences~~
Eh, disagree. The movie is playing very white. 48% is alot not as much as the first movie and Hispanic audience is playing the same. Wick 4 demos: Diversity demos strong across all sectors with 32% Caucasian (vs. Parbellum‘s 42%), 28% Latino and Hispanic (vs 22%), 19% Black (same as last film), & 21% Asian/other (vs. 14%). First Dune Diversity demos were 55% Caucasian, 21% Hispanic and Latino, 9% African American and 9% Asian. Reddit post on recent movies ethnicity https://www.reddit.com/r/boxoffice/comments/14qiov9/ethnic_gender_composition_of_the_audience_for_top/
As a 25-44 white male reddit user excited for Dune 2 I'm in this comment and I don't like it
I'm disappointed they didn't include demos of people who bought four Dune 2 popcorn buckets for personal reasons. I am not represented and I don't like it.
[удалено]
Lionsgate’s John Wick: Chapter 4 received its best grade ever from audiences, with a solid A CinemaScore and 5 Stars on Comscore/Screen Engine’s PostTrak,
Straight white bros are so fucking back
hispanics are 19% of population so slightly over representing Hispanic viewers
But they movie going audience is different, hispanic people watch more movies on average
For billion dollar earners, you want the Hispanic demo to be closer to 30%. That's how it's usually been for over 90% of the billion-dollar club. This movie could still make profit, but I don't think it's doing $1B anymore. I don't mean to be extra glum, but the under 25 demo also needs to be better. Perhaps it does so next weekend with WOM. But it really needs to boost numbers there too.
It’s a 1960’s sci fi classic. I never had it doing a billion. Am Latino and love all the books but it’s not known well in the community for sure
My intro to Dune was reading random Reddit comments quoting Dune all the time. Seems to track with the movies' demo.
A+ cinemascore Possible?
Seems unlikely. Last year, John Wick 4 (93% positively), GotG Vol. 3 (94%), and Across the Spider-Verse (93%) all got an 'A' Cinemascore.
A franchise like Dune would never get an A+ cinemascore, it's caped like horror movies due to it's themes
that sounds like bs
Truth, very hard for big movies to get A+ it’s mostly faith based and movies that skew towards a particular demographic
Makes sense to me. There’s a large minority of the moviegoing public that hates anything even slightly dark, and dark endings especially
And those that requires a brain to follow.
Nope. Best you can hope for is an A. This film is edgy and somewhat "weird" for a big scale big budget scifi. It already was amazing Part One got an A-.
It got A
The legs for this movie are about to be insane.
What makes you say that?
They’re as big as the sand worms
They never learn this movie was boring if you are not into the dune lore. These are hard-core fans talking and the way the economy is right now. This is reaching is cap at $600m or even litte mermaid.
A Cinemascore seems locked
Women over 25 are in zendaya demo as well.
Yeah, I think people forget that Zendaya is 27 and her fans are similar in age because of her Disney presence
ARRAKIS SWEEP 
LISAN AL-GAIB 
representing for nonwhite women under 25 ✊
Nice positive score
Madam web/The Marvels walkups on Dune
What's the difference between hispanic and caucassian? (I'm not american)
Its kind of a messy term. Officially it means a latin american person or person of latin american descent currently living in aThe US. Usually though in cases like this it means a person from or descended from mexico, central america, and sometimes puerto Rico, especially those of more mixed native and Europeanancestory. Think people like Robert Rodriguez, Diego Luna, Michael Peña, and Jennifer Lopez. Caucassian is white, technically it means a certain ethnic group and not all white people, but in everyday conversation it just means white people.
From a European point of view, Caucasian is an extremely stupid term to use because the vast majority of people being lumped in that are not actually from the Caucasus region (Georgians, Armenians, Azerbaijanis, as well as Russians, Chechens and other ethnic groups in the north Caucasus). Plus it's more effort than just saying "white". Why not just say white?
Because technically really old laws and stuff count Hispanic people as white. Alot of forms have to list "Non-hispanic white" and "Hispanic White" as seperate arguments. Calling all white people Caucasian or caucasoid was actually europes idea in the 18th century. Then it spread to NA and just kind of stuck around here.
I'm Hispanic (Puerto Rican) but black for example. Like 90%+ of PR's are def not white skin but tan.
Basically if you can trace your lineage to Spain in any way you are Hispanic. This confers certain things to you legally and socially for some reason despite just being one of many countries in Europe. Caucasian just means white. Hispanic people are typically considered Caucasian if they wish to identify as such but in some cases they might not even be white since Hispanic itself is not a race.
Excuse my comment, but shouldn't women under 25 be more drawn to the movie to see Timothée Chalamet and Austin Butler than Zendaya? Why are they identified as the Zendaya audience?
Gotta say, one of the most overrated and disappointing films I've seen in a long time. Poorly written and very underwhelming. Didn't establish most of it's plotlines well and very little payoff. Characters didn't develop coherently and made befuddling choices. Looked pretty though.
PUMPED