MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Predicting the Box Office Gets Tough

This weekend is the hardest I’ve had to predict in quite a long time. Why? Big stars, low want-to-see. The Jackal features Bruce Willis and Richard Gere, but there’s less buzz around than in a decaf latte. Disney hasn’t had big results from its re-releases since they became so video friendly, but The Little Mermaid may be special. Or not. And Bill Murray is far from a guaranteed opener in a film that isn’t as easily defined as his last hit, Groundhog Day.
So here’s my take. Starship Troopers drops just 20 percent to $17.6 million, taking first for a second week. The Jackal opens with a nice, but not overwhelming $14 million for second. The Little Mermaid surfs to a third place finish with about $12 million. Bean flatulates to the tune of $9.6 million, dropping 25 percent for fourth. Bill Murray’s The Man Who Knew Too Little will stay undercover with a soft $8.5 million for fifth.
The Second Five should all be repeat visitors, with New Line’s One Night Stand opening at only 700 screens. I Know What You Did Last Summer slices another $4.2 million — a 35 percent drop — for sixth. Also dropping about 35 percent should be The Devil’s Advocate ($3.3 million for seventh) and Red Corner ($3.2 million in eighth). Mad City should make its second and last Top Ten appearance in ninth with a 25 percent drop to $3.5 million. And Hot Button fave Boogie Nights should dance into 10th with a 20 percent drop to $3.1 million. Trailing closely should be surprise hit Eve’s Bayou with about $2.6 million.
And make sure to go to the movies this weekend, because the holiday onslaught will start burying you next week with Clint Eastwood’s Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil, Anastasia, Mortal Kombat: Annihilation and Francis Ford Coppola’s Grisham entry, The Rainmaker. And your Thanksgiving plans will probably include Flubber or Alien Resurrection or both.
Don’t think I’ve pegged this weekend’s results? Let’s see your Top Ten. If you beat me you will … “Win David Poland’s Money!” Well, no, but I might tell our readers about it.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments are closed.

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon