MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Posted Monday, March 9th, 1998 - Comments Off on Titanic vs Us Marshals
Be Sociable, Share!

Titanic vs Us Marshals

So, you want to know how Titanic survived the release of U.S. Marshals into every outhouse, doghouse, cathouse, rathouse and movie house this weekend? On Friday, U.S. Marshals actually beat Titanic by almost 20 percent, $5.1 million to $4.3 million. But by Saturday, bad buzz was catching up with Sam Gerard & Co. and they only went up about 50 percent when most films roughly double their take from Friday to Saturday. Titanic hit $8.3 million to U.S. Marshals’ $7.2 million. It got worse on Sunday with The Fugitive sequel dropping below Friday numbers ($4.8 million) while Titanic was about 30 percent above Friday ($5.4 million). What does this mean in the long run? Next week, The Man In The Iron Mask, a movie that no one has a good word for, will open over $20 million giving Leo the 1-2 split (with Titanic in the 2 slot, dropping about 15 percent to $15.3 million). U.S. Marshals looks like a 60 percent dropper, which is not good, but will still keep it in third place with about $8.5 million.
The poorly reviewed thrillers, Hush and Twilight, managed to tie for fourth place with $6 million each. It’s pretty hard to say whether that figure is a pleasant or unpleasant surprise. Neither film is likely to pass the $20 million mark in domestic box office, yet both were kind of dumped into theaters with minimal expectations, so what could their studios have expected? But, I am quite sure that PolyGram is deeply disappointed that the new film from the Coen brothers, The Big Lebowski, couldn’t muster more than $5.9 million for a sixth place finish.
THE GOOD: Titanic became the first film ever to pass $1 billion worldwide this weekend. And Jim Cameron won the Directors Guild Award, an award I feel he absolutely deserves. Among his comments: “I make movies for myself and I think of myself as the truck driver-audience member that I used to be. I’m making movies for that person, and if the critical acclaim comes it’s a bonus for me.” Cool.
THE BAD: Dark City dropped more than 50 percent in just its second week. This movie is far from perfect, but people are going to find it on cable and wish they had seen it on a big screen.
THE UGLY: The Boston reviews of Quentin Tarantino‘s stage debut in “Wait Until Dark” opposite fellow film refugee Marisa Tomei were really special. From Ed Siegel of The Boston Globe): “As the creepy psycho killer in this play, Tarantino packs about as much menace as Dennis, delivering his lines with a straightforward recitation in which his hands do more acting than any other part of his body.” He’s a little nicer to Marisa: “The only person to survive the charisma bypass operation performed on ‘Wait Until Dark’ by director Leonard Foglia is Marisa Tomei, and she, only by the skin-tightness of her jeans rather than her considerable acting talent, which she displays only in flashes in this production.” Well, maybe not. “When Tomei smiles, she looks more like she’s high than blind.” That said, the show has a remarkable $1.65 million in ticket pre-sales in New York. That’s more than 25 times as Jackie Brown did this weekend.
TWO BAD MOVIES EQUAL…: Hush + Twilight = Burn Career Burn. Paul Newman investigates why big-time actors Jessica Lange and Gwyneth Paltrow would subject themselves to doing a thriller with a first-time feature writer/director.
JUST WONDERING: Were you hoping, like me, that the SAG Awards would give you a hint about some of the tight Oscar races, especially the neck-and-neck contest between Kim Basinger and Gloria Stuart for Best Supporting Actress? No luck there. The two actresses tied for the award.
BAD AD WATCH: Love this one. Wide Awake, the Rosie O’Donnell comedy that is still weeks from opening, is offering glowing reviews from Jeff Craig of Sixty Second Preview (one of our faves) and Mike Lyons of the Long Island Parenting News. Yes. Long Island Parenting News. Oh, the humanity!
READER OF THE DAY: From Harris I: “Movies have always been those experiences that balance between illusion and reality. The best of them allow the viewer to enter that world portrayed, for better and worse.”

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments Off on Titanic vs Us Marshals

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