'Hunger Games' and 'Twilight' duel for opening grosses

'Hunger Games' strives to beat the 'Twilight' opening weekend record – but it's all going to the same movie studio anyway.

Lionsgate
'Hunger Games' and 'Twilight' are from the same studio, so despite rivalry between fans, the movies' grosses go to the same place.

There is a fake war brewing between fans of Stephanie Meyer’s Twilight Saga and fans of Suzanne CollinsHunger Games trilogy, and the fate of entire worlds, universes, random chat threads across the Internet hang in the balance. The fake war in question will be waged by Oscar-nominated director Gary Ross’ big screen adaptation of The Hunger Games, and Oscar-winning director Bill Condon’s two-part finale to the Twilight Saga, Breaking Dawn.

We now have early reconnoissance reports stating that Hunger Games has gained some tactical financial ground, as early projections are that the film will break…er, Breaking Dawn – Part 1‘s opening weekend numbers.

THR reports the so-called “shocker” that Hunger Games is currently tracking to have a bigger late March opening than Breaking Dawn – Part 1‘s $138.1 million debut back in November 2011. The Hunger Games started racking up opening weekend projections a few weeks back, when we reported that the film had sold more advanced tickets than Twilight Saga: Eclipse; since that time, the profit predictions have only gone upward – a rarity in the film business.

If predictions hold true, Hunger Games would blow the original Twilight‘s $69 million opening weekend out of the water, and could come close to, or even best, New Moon‘s $142 million debut. Of course, New Moon, Eclipse, and Breaking Dawn – Part 1 were all sequel films, while The Hunger Games is an untested film property – making these lofty predictions even more surprising. We here at Screen Rant were even skeptical about whether the Hunger Games marketing campaign had done enough to attract the wider audience who weren’t already fans of the books. Apparently that skepticism was misplaced.

Of course, this fake war between Twilight and Hunger Games is just what the term would imply: it’s fake. Lionsgate owns the rights to The Hunger Games movie(s) and Summit Entertainment owns the rights to the Twilight movies – and earlier this year, Lionsgate and Summit merged into one studio, ostensibly brining both HG and TS under one roof. All the money on these big franchises now flows the same way.

More to the point: these movies based on popular Young Adult novels tend to appeal to the same crowds – those who like stories about teens thrown into fantastical situations / love triangles with sensitive, brooding men. Both have strong(ish) female protagonists, familiar genre tropes, etc…

…Bottom line: their similarities are stronger than their differences, and both will be cash-cows for Summit/Lionsgate.

Kofi Outlaw blogs at Screen Rant.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.