Kung Fu Panda 4 Takes First Place at Weekend Box Office with $30 Million in North America, Dune: Part Two Comes Second Domestically and Internationally
Dune: Part Two came in second place domestically and internationally.
Kung Fu Panda 4 took first place at the weekend box office with $30 million in North America.
The weekend box office was dominated by Kung Fu Panda 4, which took first place with $30 million in North American theaters. Dune: Part Two came in second place with $29.1 million domestically on 3,847 screens plus $51.2 million internationally for a domestic cume of $205.8 million and a Shai-Hulud-sized global take of $494.7 million.
Kung Fu Panda 4 remained victorious at the domestic box office
Dune: Part Two added $29 million from 3,847 venues in its third weekend of release
The American Society of Magical Negroes struggled to find an audience with a smaller screen count and low Rotten Tomatoes rating
Accuracy
Kung Fu Panda 4 remained victorious at the domestic box office, collecting a solid $30 million in its second weekend of release. After 10 days on the big screen, it has grossed $176.5 million globally.
Arthur the King opened in third place with soft ticket sales and modest price tag.
The American Society of Magical Negroes struggled to find an audience with a smaller screen count and low Rotten Tomatoes rating.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that Kung Fu Panda 4 has grossed $176.5 million globally but does not disclose the revenue generated from each region or country where it was released. This information is important for understanding the success of a film on an international level and should be included in any article discussing its box office performance.
The article states that Kung Fu Panda 4 has grossed $176.5 million globally but does not disclose the revenue generated from each region or country where it was released.
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that critics were not fond of the film 'Arthur the King' without providing any evidence or context for their opinions. Additionally, the author makes a false dilemma when they state that all films are either family-friendly or edgy, implying that there is no middle ground. The article also contains an example of inflammatory rhetoric with the statement 'It has a 64% on Rotten Tomatoes' which implies that the film is universally panned by critics when in fact it received mixed reviews.
The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that critics were not fond of the film 'Arthur the King'.
The author makes a false dilemma when they state that all films are either family-friendly or edgy, implying that there is no middle ground.
Bias
(80%)
The article contains examples of religious bias and monetary bias. The author uses language that dehumanizes those who hold different beliefs than themselves by referring to them as 'stray dogs'. Additionally, the author mentions Lionsgate's spending on a film with no mention of any other studio's expenditures, which could be seen as an attempt to discredit or downplay the success of films that were not produced with such large budgets. The article also contains examples of monetary bias by highlighting the box office performance and production costs of certain films.
Additionally, the author mentions Lionsgate's spending on a film with no mention of any other studio's expenditures, which could be seen as an attempt to discredit or downplay the success of films that were not produced with such large budgets.
The article also contains examples of monetary bias by highlighting the box office performance and production costs of certain films.
The author uses language that dehumanizes those who hold different beliefs than themselves by referring to them as 'stray dogs'.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Rebecca Rubin has financial ties to Lionsgate and David A. Gross as they are the owners of Arthur the King.
$19 million after two weeks of release for Imaginary
$205 million in North America and more than $400 million globally for Dune: Part Two
$7.5 million from 3,003 theaters for Arthur the King
Lionsgate Spent $19 million on Arthur the King
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Rebecca Rubin has financial ties to Lionsgate and David A. Gross as they are mentioned in the article.
$19 million after two weeks of release for Imaginary
$205 million in North America and more than $400 million globally for Dune: Part Two
$7.5 million from 3,003 theaters for Arthur the King
The second weekend for Kung Fu Panda 4 is a great hold at -48%, rising to $107.7M stateside running total.
Legendary/Warner Bros◦ Dune Part Two isn't far behind with $29.1M, -37%, for a running total of $205.3M.
Accuracy
Legendary/Warner Bros' Dune Part Two isn't far behind with $29.1M, -37%, for a running total of $205.3M.
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author uses sensationalist language such as 'putting the Kung Fu Grip on Sandworm' and 'coming in lighter than expected', which creates a false sense of urgency and excitement for readers. Secondly, the author quotes sources without disclosing them or providing any context about their credibility. This makes it difficult to determine whether these statements are accurate or not. Thirdly, the article contains selective reporting by only mentioning positive aspects of certain movies while ignoring negative ones.
Despite excellent holds by the big guns, it's unfortunately, the middle of the box office dropped out
The whole marketplace is coming in lighter than expected at $89M
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. The first is an appeal to authority when it mentions that the movie did not have Canada in its mix and this was a factor in its poor performance. This statement implies that if Canada had been included, the movie would have performed better which is not necessarily true. Additionally, there are two examples of inflammatory rhetoric: 'exactly what' and 'unfortunately'. These words suggest strong negative emotions towards the subject matter which may be influencing the author's perspective. The article also contains a dichotomous depiction when it mentions that while Kung Fu Panda 4 had excellent holds, the middle of the box office dropped out. This implies that these two aspects are mutually exclusive and one cannot have both which is not necessarily true.
The movie did not have Canada in its mix
Kung Fu Panda 4 had excellent holds but the middle of the box office dropped out
Bias
(85%)
The article contains multiple examples of bias. The author uses language that dehumanizes and demonizes certain groups such as white supremacists who are described as 'celebrating' a reference to racism and antisemitism. Additionally, the author makes assumptions about political affiliations based on quotes from individuals without providing any context or evidence for these claims.
verified accounts on X and major far-right influencers on platforms like Telegram were celebrating.
white supremacists online celebrated the reference to the racist and antisemitic conspiracy
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
Anthony D'Alessandro has conflicts of interest on the topics Kung Fu Panda 4 and One Life UK Jewish Film Festival.
The article mentions that Anthony D'Alessandro is a contributor to Deadline.com which covers the film industry, including box office numbers for movies like Kung Fu Panda 4.
Dune: Part Two took second place at the box office
Arthur the King took third place at the box office
Accuracy
Dune: Part Two took second place at the box office with an estimated domestic take of $29.1 million on 3,847 screens.
Arthur the King took third place at the box office with an estimated domestic take of $7.5 million on 3,003 screens.
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several examples of logical fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that Kung Fu Panda is the #1 movie for the weekend without providing any evidence or reasoning behind this claim. Additionally, there are multiple instances where the author quotes other sources as if they were their own statements, which can be seen as a form of plagiarism and misrepresentation. The article also contains an example of inflammatory rhetoric when it describes Dune: Part Two's success in terms of surpassing milestones such as $200 million and $400 million worldwide, which can be seen as exaggerated or sensationalized.
Kung Fu Panda is the #1 movie for the weekend.
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards the success of Kung Fu Panda 4 and its ability to outperform Dune: Part Two in terms of box office sales. The author uses language that portrays Po as a beloved character with an enduring appeal, while denigrating Dune by referring to it as 'a sandworm' and using negative language such as 'past its prime'. Additionally, the article highlights Kung Fu Panda 4's strong performance in international markets and its success at the box office. This bias is further reinforced by the inclusion of quotes from industry experts who praise Kung Fu Panda 4 while criticizing Dune: Part Two.
Kung Fu Panda 4 is highlighted for its strong performance in international markets and success at the box office. This bias is further reinforced by quotes from industry experts who praise Kung Fu Panda 4 while criticizing Dune: Part Two.
The article uses language that portrays Po as a beloved character with an enduring appeal.
The author denigrates Dune by referring to it as 'a sandworm' and using negative language such as 'past its prime'.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author of the article has a financial interest in Kung Fu Panda as they mention that it is owned by Dreamworks Animation and Universal Pictures. They also mention that Dune: Part Two was released on March 17th which could be seen as an attempt to compete with Kung Fu Panda's release.
The article mentions the financial interest of Dreamworks Animation and Universal Pictures in Kung Fu Panda.
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that Dune: Part Two has surpassed the entire domestic tally of the first film ($108 million) but fails to mention that this was due to a hybrid release on streaming which stifled ticket sales for the original film. Secondly, it claims that Dune 2 is currently the highest-grossing film of 2024 at both domestic and worldwide box office without providing any context or comparison with other films released in 2024. Lastly, it states that Dune: Part Two has enjoyed strong turnout in China but fails to mention that this was due to government subsidies for the film's release.
The article claims that Dune: Part Two has surpassed the entire domestic tally of the first film ($108 million) without providing any context or comparison with other films released in 2024. This is a lie by omission as it fails to mention that this was due to a hybrid release on streaming which stifled ticket sales for the original film.
The article states that Dune: Part Two has enjoyed strong turnout in China but fails to mention that this was due to government subsidies for the film's release. This is an example of selective reporting as it only reports details that support its position.
Fallacies
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Bias
(85%)
The article contains multiple examples of religious bias. The author uses language that dehumanizes and demonizes those who hold certain beliefs about the film's content.
> Director Denis Villeneuve’s science-fiction sequel has grossed $494.7 million globally, including $208 million in North America and $289.4 million internationally.
Kung Fu Panda 4 is expected to beat Dune Part Two handily for the second week running at the box office.
Nicolas Cage will not be getting paid for leaving Las Vegas in Kung Fu Panda 4.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it uses sensationalism by stating that Kung Fu Panda 4 has beaten Dune Part Two handedly for the second week running at the box office. This statement is not supported by any factual data and is likely meant to grab readers' attention.
Left: Kung Fu Panda 4 (Screenshot: YouTube), Right: Dune Part Two (Screenshot: YouTube)
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy by stating that Kung Fu Panda is the only force in the universe that can stand tall over Paul Muadib Atreides. The author also uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing Dune as a 'blood-soaked orgy of interstellar violence'. Additionally, there are several examples of informal fallacies such as hyperbole and exaggeration.
Kung Fu Panda is the only force in the universe that can stand tall over Paul Muadib Atreides
Dune 2 has more than doubled that domestic total, but it had an extra weekend in which to do so
Bias
(80%)
The article contains a statement that implies the Kung Fu Panda franchise is more successful than Dune Part Two at the box office. This statement is not supported by any evidence provided in the article and may be biased towards one movie over another.
]Kung Fu Panda 4 (Screenshot: YouTube), Right: Dune Part Two (Screenshot: YouTube)
