Early Box Office Analysis
Guess Who?
Ashton Kutcher.
Ashton Kutcher Who?
Ashton Kutcher who is in the midst of registering the biggest opening in his remarkable and still advancing career.
True, the opening of Guess Who won’t break any records. It won’t even break the Top Ten for March launches. It won’t break the Top Four of this March’s openers. It won’t even be the top March opening for a movie starring a white and a black star of higher and lower box office value. (That would be Bringing Down The House, aka The Reason Columbia Thought It Might Work To Open This Film At This Time Of Year.)
But $22-$26 million is pretty impressive for an Ashton Kutcher comedy that is getting no benefit from the cache of the original film and with Bernie Mac coming off of Mr. 3000 and with a gimmick that probably isn’t all that interesting anymore. (Note: Start on sexually-flipped remake of Norman… Is That You? in which Norman’s parents are gay and black and catch Norman with a white girl. How much to get Denzel & Wesley to play a couple?)
Then there is Ms. Bullock. She’s made fifteen films in which she starred, starting with Speed in 1994. Eleven of the fifteen films opened to between $10 million and $16.2 million. These are movie star numbers, but it is striking that she has never had even one $20 million opener… not even by fluke (See: Most of the cast of Ocean’s Eleven & Twelve). The final number for this weekend will smell of disappointment, but only because people aren’t looking too closely. The first Miss Congeniality opened to just $10 million on its way to $108 million domestic, one of only three $100 million grosser in Bullock’s career. (I’m not counting The Prince of Egypt in any of these numbers.)
The disappointment that is The Ring Two is being confirmed at the box office, this Friday off by more than 60% from last weekend’s not-so-impressive start. It may have opened stronger than The Pacifier, but it will gross less than the Disney comedy here at home.
On the other hand, Disney is suffering from trying to get Ice Princess gliding a little too close to Fox’s modest success, Robots… and even to its own The Pacifier. Overall, March is not a great month to be on the Disney schedule. Splash, Pretty Woman, Bringing Down The House and The Pacifier are the only March releases from the company that really have worked. And with the exception of The Pacifier, gentle sex and movie star names have been key to each of those successes. I love Joan Cusack, but she is not Julie Andrews and March is not a summer month on this side of the equator.
Million Dollar Baby continues to slug its way to $100 million… and Hitch remains the box office king for the year so far by double the gross of #2 to date, The Pacifier. Robots will close that 2-to-1 margin… but it won’t come within $50 million of the Will Smith vehicle. And I would guess that Hitch will remain the year’s leader by at least a $20 million margin (probably much more) until Star Wars: Episode Three passes Hitch’s domestic total on or about May 30th.
Technically Hitch has made 163 and Pacifier $81, and Pacifier is bringing in more money now. More like 1.6:1. Haven’t seen Pacifier, but these numbers say to me that Vin Diesel is now worth $$. Miss Congeniality has done well considering that Guess Who targets almost the exact same audience. Is Sandra Bullock considered an opener? Vin Diesel and Sandra Bullock – back in the hollywood $$ game.
No offense Dave, but I do believe that Mac should
be given credit for this openning. This movie has
been sold as a Bernie Mac vehicle. Kutcher essentially
has a very similar role in this movie as he did
in Cheaper by the Dozen but bumped up to a co-lead.
Mac sold this film because it sold to an African-American
audience who want to see this version of the Bernie
Mac persona. A persona sorely missing from Mr. 3000.
To say that Kutcher opened this film. Does not only
misses the boat but flies RIGHT over it. Kutcher
had as little to do with openning this flick as
Mike Epps did. A differing of opinion of course,
but I cannot see how this film can be given to
Kutcher as proof of his box office might.
Only in Hollywood could a guy who terrorizes celebrities
(look like he did to Kirsten Dunst) become some sort
of serious celebrity. ONLY IN AMERICA! WHAKKA WHAKKA
WHAKKA!
Some credit is due Bernie Mac… but you are underestimating the power of Ashton Kutcher. Demographic exit polling will be interesting.
I could be underestimating Kutcher. Yet I feel
this film sort of falls away from his demographic.
Not that pretty white guys do not bring in all
ages, sexes, sexualities, and creeds but from the
ads I saw. This movie seemed sold on Bernie Mac’s
response to Kutcher more than the other way around.
Poland is wrong. The movie is a hit because it fits the “urban” demographic. Which means Berinie Mac deserves equal, if not more credit.
Are We There Yet, Diary Of A Mad Black Woman, Hitch, Coach Carter ect. All films with black leads or “urban” themes that have been getting 20 million + openings this year so far.
Guess Who fits that criteria. It’s foolish to overestimate Kutcher’s drawing power because of this. Replace Bernie Mac whith some random white guy, and you’d have an unremarkable opening in the mid-teens or less.
Just wanted to add that I’m surprised and disappointed that Poland refused to acknowlwdge the most obvious and important box office trend this year in his analysis of GUESS WHO (the increasing power of African American audiences and leading actors at the box office) in a favour of a lazy “Ashton Kutcher is now a megastar” diatrabe.
The complete dismissal of Bernie Mac’s prensce because of the failure of Mr 3000 is idiotic. Are African-American actors not allowed the odd flop? Does the relative failure of TORQUE prevent ARE WE THERE YET (or the upcoming XXX: STATE OF THE UNION) being hits for Ice Cube? Of course not.
This movie was sold to heavily appeal to the African American dollar/audience. Yet Ashton Kutcher deserves the credit for that !?!
Typical.
Let’s see, Star Wars picks up a 25+ million Thursday and about 85 for the three day to bring it to 110 for it’s first four days. make that about 150 by the first week and Star Wars should pass Hitch’s eventual total by its second Friday or Saturday, not memorial day monday, which should take it well past 200 million.
The question is, how big will Sin City open (20mil or 40mil, hard to gauge, I’m leaning high though) and will it sustain itself long enough to get to Hitch numbers (unlikely, but possible)? but to me the bigger question is how high will Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy go, it has the potential to also be a stronger grosser than Hitch, but whether or not it makes it past Hitch’s numbers in the three weeks before Star Wars passes them is also unlikely–unless Hitchikers gets some incredible trailers out there and front loads hard on ads to get sub-Spidey level numbers in the high 80s for that first May weekend.
Dave is correct here- indeed reports are indicating that the two key things were the film premise itself and Ashton.
None of you remember THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT- $9m film for New Line made all kinds of cash- ALL because of Ashton.
Complain away- This was mostly his fans.
Oh, please. Of course we “remember” THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT. Opening that film says absolutly nothing about the true strength of Kutcher’s box office power. TBE is a fantasy/horror genre hybrid that can literally be carried by anyone if released on the right day and marketed correctly. THE GRUDGE and THE FORGOTTEN, films of similar appeal to THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT, and which opened much bigger, do not make Sarah Michelle Gellar and Julianne Moore box-office powerhouses. TBE is a film that was suceeded on it’s premise and genre.
African-American audiences, themes and actors have been the box-office story of the year so far. That’s undeniable. Kutcher is simply benefitting from this year’s most prevelant trend. Take away Bernie Mac and the African-American elements of the film, and GUESS WHO would be lucky to make 13 million.
No one is saying Kutcher doesn’t have a fanbase. But it’s a limited one (so far). His wider appeal has not been proven. And it won’t be proven by opening a run-of-the-mill psychological horror flick or a comedy with African-American appeal and an African-American co-star. Those are industry trends, not evidence of individual box-office might.
I have nowhere else to post this, but I saw “Murderball” last night at New Directors/New Films, a small festival run at Lincoln Center in NYC.
This was easily the best documentary I have ever seen. It worked as a sports doc, but also transcended the sports genre and touched on universal themes of forgiveness and father/son relationships. You have to see this when it comes out on July 8th. I hope it gets nationwide distribution.
There was also a Q & A with the filmmakers and four of the film’s stars. It was a great night and I hope Dave gives this film a lot of press as it nears its release date. It should win the Oscar and deserves to be a huge box office success.
Fishy
You don’t even make consistent sense within paragraph.
ANYONE could have opened the Butterfly Effect?
It wasn’t horror. It wasn’t even all that good.
Kutcher opened it.
Stop making me defend the untalented schmuck necause you are stupid.
NONE of his films have performed unsuccessfully.
No, TBE wasn’t a horror. But neither was THE FORGOTTEN.
The way they were both marketed, they might as well have been (a point I should have expressed with more clarity). Both made tremendous amounts of cash. Neither made that tremedous amount of cash specifically because of Ashton Kutcher or Julianne Moore, though their presences undoubtedly added a few extra bucks to the takings.
You and Poland really need to relax, and put things into prespective. Even MOVIE CITY NEWS is attributing the GUESS WHO’S 21 million opening to the large MULTI-ETHNIC crowd the movie attracted, and not rushing to tongue bath all the credit to Mr Punk’d. Kutcher does not have a multi-ethnic fanbase. You do the math.
Kutcher may have pulled in some frat boys and white teenage girls, but the “urban” section of that multi-ethnic crowd didn’t come for him.
Kutcher deserves some credit. But Poland went overboard. Waaaay overboard.
And when BEAUTY SHOP opens to 20 million plus next week, it’ll be that same MULTI-ETHNIC crowd that turns up.
For the record, I absolutely despise Ashton Kutcher and I hated The Butterfly Effect with a passion. But he did open that movie, an R-rated genre effort, to $17 million. It is mistaken to take the position that Kutcher had nothing to do with that movie’s opening. Of course he did. Also, look at the opening weekend of Just Married, another repulsive movie. The kid can’t act for shit but he can definitely open a movie. Has Bernie Mac ever opened a movie? Mr. 3000 did very poorly and I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that the success of Ocean’s 11 and 12 had little to do with him. Like it or not, Kutcher had a lot to do with the opening weekend of Guess Who. I wish it had tanked because the sooner Kutcher is done acting, the better. Unfortunately, he does have some decent drawing power.
Kutcher does have an ethnic fan base though. Maybe not a huge one, but he does have one. Plenty of African-American teenagers are big Kutcher fans because of Punk’d, That 70’s Show, Dude, Where’s My Car and The Butterfly Effect. He has been overexposed and then some in recent years and has a much more diverse fan base than you’d think.
well, I thought Murderball was way overrated, good film but hardly a “great” doc. If it does Supersize Me business it will be lucky. And to all the assholes out there, GW did $$ because of BOTH of the actors. The combination made it seem “cool” to the wiggers and bitches, and “hot” to all the ethnic crowds. Saying it would have bombed with a white dude in the lead is missing the point entirely – The appearance of amusing conflict between the well known leads is what got people in.. And if Miss Cong 2 didnt open, the movie probably would have done a good $30 mill.
Stella’s Boy: You make some good points. But I’m yet to be convinced of the true strength of Kutcher’s drawing power (though he’s undoubtedly got some. Same way Hilary Duff has). And I’m certainly not buying Poland’s spiel.
Yeah, he (and Brittany Murphy, at the height of her shortlived starpower and their overhyped relationship) opened JUST MARRIED. But he then went to make a remarkably similar formulaic comedy MY BOSSES DAUGHTER, where he was the only star of note, and it opened to around 4 million.
Then he went on to open a genre flick marketed like a horror movie. Not the most difficult proposition in the world.
Now he’s helped open a movie designed to draw in his fans as well as black audiences.
If he tries to open another “Ashton Kutcher” comedy (without African-American appeal, Bernie Mac or Brittany Murphy), will it perform like JUST MARRIED and GUESS WHO. Or MY BOSSES DAUGHTER? Probably somewhere in between both.
I don’t really think his fanbase has increased or moved on at all. He’s living on borrowed time. Like the male Hilary Duff.
I suppose we won’t have to wait long to get a true test of Kutcher’s drawing power. Doesn’t A Lot Like Love, which looks like a pretty formulaic romantic comedy, open in April? I guess my main point was that Kutcher does have appeal with urban audiences, more than people might think.
I realize this may be a question that’s impossible to answer with absolute certainty, but…. How much do you think this weekend’s box office figures were affected by the college basketball playoffs and Easter? According to BoxOficeMojo.com, each of the top five movies – including newbies “Guess Who” and “Miss 2” — experienced a Friday-to-Saturday drop-off in admissions. (Quite often, that’s viewed as a tell-tale sign of bad word of mouth for a new film.) And while Saturday-to-Sunday drop-offs are fairly common, the size of this particular weekend’s drop-offs seems unusually steep. And this means? Well, might “Guess Who” have grossed more on Saturday if it hadn’t been competing with b-ball? (How many 12-to-25 males had their eyes glued to telecast games?) Would “Guess Who” AND “Miss 2” have racked up bigger numbers if so many potential ticketbuyers hadn’t been busy with Easter festivities? I don’t have an answer, just questions.
Fishy Salmon Kotex-
Are you really retarded Bicycle boy in diguise?
MY BOSSES’S DAUGHTER was not supported by its studio- it was dumped into the street smelling like the crud it was.
WHY do you speak without knowledge?
Perhaps audiences had the choice between two tepid-looking comedies and picked the one with a lead who’s actually funny, aka Bernie Mac.
“Take away Bernie Mac and the African-American elements of the film, and GUESS WHO would be lucky to make 13 million.”
Do that, add Ben Stiller and Robert DeNiro and call it Meet the Parents. It’ll make $13 million every day for two months.
If memory serves, polls after The Butterfly Effect shown that teenage girls was a far larger part of the crowd the the usual horror fare so Kutcher helped a lot. And My Boss Daughter was dumped by the studio in such way, no one could save it.
Now, Salmon has a point. Guess Who was targed to black audiences at least as much as to Kutcher fans and there’s indeed a trend this years so far (and is good to point out that both Are You There Yet and Coach Carter opened better than most films by their more proven stars). But if you see the film success as part of a trend, Mac is not very responsible for it. Put another well known black comedian in his role and the film would probably gross around the same, put Topher Grace in the place of Kutcher and it would drop some 4-5m.
Arguments like this are disheartening. Everyone is afraid to say it…THE EMPEROR IS WEARING NO CLOTHES.
It’s not a question of race, it’s not that Kutcher is an untalented idiot, or whether Bernie Mac can occasionally be funny…. it’s that these films being discussed here are not worth our time. They are March throw aways which don’t deserve serious discussion. The scripts are bad, the stories are bad, the acting is pitiful. They are really mediocre TV shows lengthened to waste 2 hours of a non discerning audience’s lives, while pulling money from their pockets.
No one has to tolerate bad films. Just say hell no, I won’t go. Wait until the films you’re really enthusiastic about are playing. Then pay your $10 for a ticket, and $5 for stale popcorn with artificially flavored transfatty acid topping.
In the meantime, there are plenty of great DVD’s to watch. Invite friends over, pop your own fresh popcorn for pennies, and top with real melted butter…dim the lights and enjoy.
But here is the rub, Hatchling… no Guess Who or Underworld or The Grudge means no Closer or All The King’s Men or Memoirs of a Geisha.
Discussing box office is discussing box office. In another thread, I was accused of not assuming that movies that alternately have no distribution, have been sitting in the can for a year or have no financing would likely be “little seen.” Part of that, it seemed, was the assumption that by questioning box office potential, I was questioning quality. That wasn’t true and I think that is where the box office obsession has crossed the line. There are true phenoms, but no one should ever pay to see a movie just because it was #1 in America. Films should be judged in their own vaccuum… and box office it its own seperate space.
Since I’ve razzed David a bit lately, it’s only fair to wholeheartedly agree when he’s right: Commerce drives art, not the other way around, and a studio that doesn’t occasionally score big bucks with crowd-pleasing pabulum doesn’t stay in business very long. I haven’t seen “Guess Who” yet – frankly, it looks like the kind of movie I don’t see in theaters unless I’m paid to do so – but for all I know, it’s laugh-out-loud hilarious, and may eventually be championed by a small but enthusiastic band of critics. (Note how some critics came to the defense of “Flight of the Phoenix” – and, for that matter, “Mr. 3000” – during year-end wrap-ups last December.) And besides, I think what we’re doing here is having a theoretical debate, not a discussion of quality. Is Bernie bringing in the crowds? Or is it Ashton? Or must we give most of the credit to the ad department? And if the latter is true, why did the Sony ad team drop the ball with “Man of the House”? Was that movie doomed to fail under any circumstances? Or might it have fared better with better promotion, or a better release date? Also worth pondering: Cedric the Entertainer played a relatively minor role in “Man of the House,” but the trailers and TV spots made him look like a co-star. Was that a blatant (but unsuccessful) bid for the “urban” audience?
I think that sometimes “concept” gets short shrift in these discussions. “Guess Who” is a good box office concept, whether it was Ashton and Bernie or Topher and Cedric. Man of the House – bombed because the concept fucking sucked. Bland story, and Tommy Lee Jones is hardly the sign of a good comedy. I don’t think anyone expected Guess Who to do poor #’s. A movie like Pacifier doing well – I get it. Big lug known for action movies playing family man, with the hint of action plus comedy. I understand how it did money. Now Miss Congeniality, with the promise of neither laughs, nor entertainment, I just don’t get. Maybe people want to see Shatner play gay. The concept of that film does nada for me.
That’s a good point about concepts Martin. Every time I saw a trailer for Guess Who in theaters, the audience laughed a lot. Overall, they responded well to it. I’d have to say the opposite is true for Man of the House. I don’t remember seeing that trailer nearly as many times as the trailer for Guess Who, and when I did, the response was pretty tepid. Maybe it’s as simple as that.
As David and many others have noted: “Miss Congenialty” wasn’t just a hit, it was a long-legged, word-of-mouth hit. Which means that the people who liked it really, really, REALLY liked it, and kept telling their friends about it. Not only that: The movie has posted great ratings during multiple reruns on cable and broadcast TV. So I’m not at all surprised that many folks wanted to see a sequel. I’m just surprised that more of them didn’t show up on opening weekend. Of course, if the sequel has the staying power of the original…
By the way — at the risk of sounding even more perverse than I am, do you think that a sequel to “The Shawshank Redemption” could be a hit, considering how popular the movie has proved to be in cable, broadcast and home-video venues?
Miss Congeniality made over $100 million domestically, but its opening weekend was only a shade over $10 million. That is very impressive staying power. Incredible, really. But I am not surprised at all by the sequel’s disappointing opening. It looks awful, even to fans. Over the weekend I talked to my mom, aunt, sisters and cousins about it. All very big fans of the first one, they expressed zero desire to see part 2, unanimously stating that it looked terrible and not remotely humorous.
Joe, I think some people here (not me) would argue “Shawshank” already had a sequel. It was called “Million Dollar Baby.”
Chester: True enough.
I would like to add just two things. 1) Butterfly
Effect should be seen as the STARTING point of the
recent boom of genre flicks somehow managing a
number one weekend. There happens to be an audience
out there who does crave genre titles, and that film
came out in a January with nothing going on.
2) Saying Kutcher has box-office clout should at
least wait til his next film. A film that will
probably, rather good or bad, bank about as much
as Kutcher’s other solo efforts.
It should be interesting to see how A Lot Like Love performs the weekend of April 22. Kutcher won’t have any help with that one, unless anyone considers Amanda Peet a box office draw.
I don’t think that Butterfly Effect was a concept hit, I think alot of teens went to it as a good date movie, primarly because of the young stars. That it happened to have sci-fi elements made it a little more unique, but it came out at the crest of the Ashton craze and had a good release date. Time travel/existential stuff tends to do poorly, look at The Jacket and Primer, no stars and total bombs. Back to the Future – hot young actor got it going. I guarantee that movie, and Butterfly Effect, would not have done anywhere their numbers without their stars.
Mr. 3000 made $8 mil on debut.
Butterfly Effect/Just Married made $16.5 mil on debut
add those together and you get $24.5 mil.
Minus a few million for people with taste and what do you get?
…$21 million.
So, is that that? Can we leave it.
And on Miss Congeniality 2 I know a lot of people who don’t want to see the sequel because they can watch the original on DVD. The new one looks exactly the same. People got burned by Legally Blonde 2 (exact same plot, but just not good) and decided not to do it again.
But, yeah, Sandy is known more for films with legs. But Speed 2 didn’t have legs and I think that’s the film we should be looking at when comparing MC2 to something.
It’s a shame though, cause the original was really fun. I know the people who don’t have an ounce of humour in their body will scoff at it, but normal people can at least find some amusement in it and that’s why it was so popular. It wasn’t pretending to be anything than frothy fun with Sandra Bullock looking saucy and falling over a whole bunch.
…alas, this one looked the exact same.
However, we can look forward to Sandy in ‘Crash’ which should be good.
Uh we cannot drop it. Due in large part to Poland’s
statements about Kutcher being some of his whackest.
Since my favourite, “Jennifer Garner is the new
Gretchen Mol.” Absolutely ridiculous statement
from anyone with any knowledge about film marketing
and box office.
And if people want to keep on bringing up Mr. 3000.
Someone at least bring up the DVD sales. Which I
believe were above average for an 8 million dollar
grossing film.
how is saying garner is the new mol wacky? name one movie she has thats been a hit or made money? shes just like mol. a product of marketing. shes a small screen star. some just can’t make the leap.
13 Going on 30 Bob. Any other dumb statements you
want to make? Seriously? Come on. No other actress
working to day has the range of Garner. Not one of
them can act as tough as she can nor can they display
the emotional turmoil she has displayed on Alias
time and time again.
Anyone who thinks otherwise obviously lives in a
world where the apes have somehow taken over.
I am not a fan of Garner’s. She was absolutely horrible in Elektra. One of the worst performances so far this year in a major release. Didn’t care much for 13 Going on 30 and don’t watch Alias. She is not anything special.
Did I just read someone say Garner has range from 13 Going on 30? I hope not. Did we watch (or rather endure) the same movie?
ur defense of garner is 13 going on 30? please tell me ur kidding with me here. what range did she show? watch that and then watch big. then u will see what talent does in the same role. watch elektra. actually don’t. its that bad. shes a small screen star and thats where she should stay
Garner is certainly no female Tom Hanks. Heck, she’s barely a female Mark Harmon. I’d say that she’s meant for tv, but her tv show sucks too. Maybe she should just stick to bending over for Affleck in between rounds of cards.
I get the weird feeling that those of you writing off J.Garners career have all read the same book that Ben Affleck’s character in Jersey Girl read when he wrote off Will Smith’s career before a room of magazine editors.
Not sure how big she’ll be but I believe that more scripts will come her way and some of them will even be good scripts. Remember S.Bullock from Demolition Man and Love Potion #9. Did you really think she’d reach this far. Sure she’s had her bombs, but she still has a career that most actreses would kill for.
I thik Garner has the looks and talent to go far in the movie business once she hooks up with the right directors. She should’nt be the star of every movie she makes, e.g Catch me if you Can, and I’m sure that the lead female role opposite a major male lead like Will, Mel, Toms 1 & 2, and a Bond flivk directed by Quentin would cement her femme fatale status.
Garner is a star of magazine covers, nothing more. She’s not even a TV star. “Alias” is a consistently low-rated show that hangs in there becuase a few bone-headed critics and horny teens like it. The only time it showed a Nielsen pulse was in January, when it aired after “Lost”–and before “American Idol” returned to knock it back into the cellar. 13 GOING ON 30 could have starred anyone from Calista Flockhart to Christina Applegate and it still would’ve clicked; people bought the premise, not the star. ELEKTRA proved she doesn’t open a picture, and in all likelihood she never will.
ı wonder sho maked this song.the song is playing end of the film.ı again wonder where can ı find this song’s editor…
Blah Blah Blah!