Another slow pre-Star Wars weekend…
Things will pick up next weekend with two comedies that could open with more than $30 million each. Crash was sold out through most of the westside of Los Angeles last night in its very limited run. That left almost nothing for an adult to choose from if you
amit on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
Christian on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
YancySkancy on: Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Hcat on: Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: I Should Be Doing Box Office
Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
see all »
[twitter-widget username="DavidPoland" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"][twitter-widget username="MCNTweets" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"]
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
has to be a disappointment for the studios, everything except Crash did poorly. But what’s this about Crash being the only adult film if you’ve already seen Kingdom of Heaven? They both opened the same day.. so unless people go to 2 movies the same weekend, that argument makes no sense.
It’s Dave, forgetting that not everyone gets invited to critics’ screenings.
House of Wax won’t lose money, but after so many horror/thrillers opening over 20m, it’s certainly a disappoint. They would probably had done better opening it in early march or something.
Kingdom of Heaven is the second disaster in two weeks of “summer”. If nothing opens over 30m next week, I guess we can expect articles about how early May may not be as full-proof as studios were starting to rhink (without any mention to the fact that both xXx2 and Kingdom of Heaven appeal were questionable and that both suffer even more for bad ad campaigns).
Felipe, I don’t think the B.O. failure of “Kingdom of Heaven” is in any way indicative of any problem with opening movies on this particular weekend. Instead:
1) Historical epics of this sort never open as big as other potential hits, and they always need to build upon good word of mouth. Despte all the premature comparisons to “Gladiator,” that film was the only one in the past seven years to open below $40 million on this calendar week, as Dave pointed out above.
2) On opening weekend, audiences will only rush out to historical epics that get unanimously good reviews. Sorry, but despite all the discussion here over the past couple of weeks, this was not an event movie. We on this blog are not representative of average moviegoers. Unlike many of us, Joe and Jane Sixpack won’t choose to sit through what comes across as a run-of-the-mill two-and-a-half-hour snoozefest.
3) Orlando Bloom cannot carry a movie. In fact, as a leading man he’s probably a hindrance to a film’s success. Case closed.
4) Ridley Scott may be one of our best directors, but his name above the title cannot guarantee attendance any more than Oliver Stone’s, Wolfgang Petersen’s or Antoine Fuqua’s could.
5) Whoever gave the greenlight to this film’s flaccid title should be fired.
6) Whoever approved the movie’s murky poster art should be fired as well. It made the film look even more miserable than “King Arthur.”
7) When you can’t figure out how to market a movie, you have to be out of your mind to release it at this time of year. Poorly marketed films simply cannot survive the summer onslaught.
Just wondering; Given how so much coverage for “Sith” has broken so early (Time magazine cover, reviews, on-line postings, etc.), I wonder how many people out there will be profoundly shocked (if not enraged) when they find the movie isn’t opening next weekend, but rather two weekends from now? I mean, doesn’t it just “feel” like the movie should be available THIS coming week? That’s the impression I’m picking up from an admittedly small sampling of civilians during the past couple of days.
Joe, I was thinking the same thing about this week’s “Revenge of the Sith” media barrage, and I’m wondering what effect (pro or con) it may have at the box office. It seems to me there may be too much of a cooling-off period before opening day. That’s not going to stave off the hardcore fans, but in today’s hot/cold marketplace the film may seem like yesterday’s news to average, more detached moviegoers. On the other hand, of course, there is the very real potential to build even more buzz. We’ll see…
Chester and Joe: I’m not trying to be a jerk but are you guys crazy? Sith is going to be huge. I think the early ads are good because they’re building tension, anxiety, and impatience. Do you guys know anybody who isn’t planning on seeing it?
G-Man: Please don’t misunderstand, I’m not suggesting that “Sith” will suffer box-office-wise because of fan misperception. On the other hand, if some of your scifi- and fantasy-loving friends seem unusually short-tempered and pissy this week, this could eb the reason why.
G-Man, I have no doubt that “Sith” is going to be huge. It’s just a question at this point of how huge. And yes, I know people who have little enthusiasm/interest in seeing it – but potentially could be swayed by all the current media coverage. If that coverage cools off by opening day, the pool of such “swing vote” audience members may diminish as well.
How hard are they marketing where you guys live? Here in the heartland I haven’t even seen that many TV spots. But I don’t know about the rest of the country or overseas.
The “Sith” marketing has noticeably increased, but I wouldn’t say it’s exploded. Still, as Joe pointed out, I think there’s a very real, understandable misperception that the movie is opening next weekend.
The same sort of thing happened with “Sin City,” which I believe did hurt that film’s B.O. gross.
How intense is the marketing effort? Let’s put it like this. The Kentucky Derby will run in a few minutes. If Yoda is riding one of the horses, I wouldn’t be surprised.
the combination of decent reviews and endless marketing will ensure a huge opening. But I don’t see the film doing more than Spiderman, we’re talking about $350 or so unless the other heavy hitters this summer completely strike out.
Btw, Hitchhiker’s doing $60 total has to be seen as quite a disappointment.
I will not be seeing Sith. No one in my family will be seeing it. None of my friends will be seeing it, at least no one that I’m aware of. So, yeah, there are some people out there who won’t be seeing the movie.
Stella’s Boy: You’re not at least a little curious? I wasn’t into Lord of the Rings but I saw all three because I wanted to know what the big deal was.
SB, are you sure you want to commit to that? What if the consensus is that “Sith” is the best the series has produced since “The Empire Strikes Back”? (Very possible, although that’s not necessarily huge praise, depending on one’s point of view.) Even with your understandably, justifiably low expectations, is there truly no chance you will see what is likely to be the biggest hit of Summer 2005?
Chester, I agree with you. I was just suggesting that we could expect articles saying that, not agreeing with them. As I mentioned in the parenthesis (and you expand in full-lengh), Kingdom of Heaven had limitations and they did a terible job selling it. I still don’t get why they were so sure that Bloom would be a big draw. Last year big epic (Troy) had Brad Pitt (whose box office potential is questionable, but is a far more estabilished star than Bloom) and WB was still careful enought to highlight him, but make sure people get it was an esemble piece, while here it was like instead of Bloom they had Mel Gibson.
I only disagree with you about the opening of historical epics. Troy got to more than 40m and its reviews weren’t much different from Kingdom of heaven. Gladiator were R-rated film with an oscar nominated guy whose big box office success were LA Confidential, in a genre that was not being produced for years. It was very hyped for sure, but in a 2000 context was a weird film, today it would got a large opening. I remember many were surprised that it got such a huge opening. The only historical epics that got this sort of opening were bombs (Alexander, King Arthur).
Good points all, Felipe. And you’re right about “Troy” as well, although I think audiences (and even the critics) perceived that as more of a hoot than the very somber “Kingdom of Heaven.”
There is not a chance in hell that I’ll see Sith. I passionately hated the last two. I am not even slightly curious. Even if everyone agrees that it’s good, I still won’t see it. No desire whatsoever. Just not my cup of tea.
SB, I didn’t think the first two were spectacular either (Phantom was horrible) but like Chester said, how are you going to talk movies w/o seeing THE movie of the summer? I mean, it’s going to be the topic of conversation and endlessly alluded to in all kinds of discussions for a LONG time. I can almost guarantee you’ll eventually break and watch it.
The force is strong.
On a separate note related to “Kingdom of Heaven,” am I the only one who is sick of seeing Liam Neeson cast as the doomed mentor figure? Between “The Phantom Menace,” “Gangs of New York,” “Kingdom of Heaven,” and the upcoming “Batman Begins” (although I don’t know if he’s doomed there), it’s well past time they stopped casting him in these parts. The guy is a phenomenal actor, as we were reminded with last year’s “Kinsey,” but my heart sinks every time I see him in a repeat of what is essentially the same supporting role. Frankly, his contribution to “Batman Begins” is the part of that film I am looking forward to LEAST.
I guarantee you I will not break. I have less than zero desire to see it. It means nothing to me. My friends won’t be seeing it either, so I really don’t care about missing any discussions related to it. I’ll live. Why is it so hard to accept that some movie lovers don’t give a shit about this movie? Not everyone in America loves Star Wars.
Jesus. Okay, Okay. You won’t see it.
That being said, you’ll break.
Willing to put a wager on that? You have no idea how easy it will be for me to never see this movie. I’d rather see Monster-In-Law.
I don’t think it’s peaked quite yet…next weekend it’ll be an all out assault though…
Before ‘Kingdom of Heaven’ last night there was a trailer for ‘Sith’ and there was more of a buzz for that in the theater than the next 2.5 hours would provide.
Don’t fight the system.
Resistance is futile.
(clich
More power to you, SB, but I still don’t get it. I understand that “Sith” does not seem like your cup of tea, but why would a serious moviegoer like you want to miss out on what may be a genuine film phenomenon? Just as one example, especially if the movie’s any good, there’s a good chance that elements of it could become part of our cultural and film vocabulary.
Back in the ’80s when films like “Flashdance” and “Dirty Dancing” became surprise smashes, believe me, I had to drag myself to see them despite all the “must-see” buzz that ensued. In the end, IMHO absolutely nothing I saw onscreen justified the hoopla. But I’m still glad I went, if only to be conversant about that era’s cultural touchstones.
That last post is for SB.
No Idea what to say
1- Dark Castle makes shit horror films- not one good one- fuck you Joel Silver.
2- Fox will lose a lot of money on a Ridley Scott film- but their marketing department cannot sell the Girl Next Door. Fuck you Tom Rothman.
3- Poseidon Adventure will NOT go- not when NBC will open their TV version the week before. Fuck you Nazi hack director. Say hi to Tamahori for me.
I am Spam Dooley and I hate you all.
SB: Why are you spending so much time repeating that you’re not going to see the movie? If you’re so dead-set, find something else to do with your time.
That said, only a movie snob would post to this site and refuse to see the biggest movie of the summer. Even if you don’t like the movies, it will be state-of-the-art and it will have anthropological interest.
It really looks to me that Sith is going to get killed from such high box office expectations. The first two had disappointing openings (relative to expectations) and I can’t see this one jumping much higher. People forget that the past two years, on that same mid-May weekend, we have seen HUGE $100 mill plus openings from Matrix and Shrek. I can’t see Star Wars doing that.
Memorial Day Weekend will be the zero hour for this summer season. If Star Wars, Madagascar, AND The Longest Yard can’t break $150 mill between them, I would be very surprised and you will certainly see the pundits calling this the death knell of summer, earlier than usual.
Spam, you’re so…. hostile.
I don’t think Stella’s boy is alone, I know some longtime Star Wars fans that are pissing their pants, but the non movie-geeks could care less about this one. I think the last 2 SW movies have really dropped the ball for alot of the audience and this film doesn’t have the credentials the last 2 had as far as box office clout. It will do quite well, don’t get me wrong. But the SW phenomenon is no longer at it’s peak, while other franchises like Spiderman are definitely more “hot” right now. The only thing this film has going for it is that it is the “last”. I don’t think much of the general audience really gives a shit about the “story” ending though. Unlike the last Rings film, which had quite a bit of emotional energy going into the last one. This SW just feels like alot of empty hype to me and its not going to be the biggest hit of the summer.
Joe- sucks to be right.
I am Spam Dooley and I Laugh at Leydon…..
Spam: You’re so…. derisive.
Martin, what do you think the biggest hit of the summer will be if not “Sith”? “War of the Worlds”? “Batman Begins”? Something else?
Geoff, explain to me how The Phantom Menace’s opening was lower than expected. If I’m not mistaken, the only thing that prevented it shattering all records was opening on a Wednesday, and a non-holiday weekend. The 5 day total blew whatever held it before out of the water.
Clones also did amazing initial business as well. Yeah, compared to Spider-Man I guess it’s a disappointment, but you better go check your figures again.
I’m assuming here that you’re talking domestic.
And Stella’s Boy, why didn’t you figure out that the prequels weren’t your cup of tea BEFORE seeing Episode 2? It seems ridiculous to have hated Episode 1 and then gone to see the second film, which most people said was more of the same. It’s even more ridiculous to refuse to see a third part that’s supposedly better than both of them. Where’s your logic?
I for one will not place TOO much faith in early box-office estimates for today (Sunday). Instead, I want to see the final figures, which won’t be released until Monday, before making any comments about which films are holding, and which aren’t. Why? Because I want to see how the Mother’s Day holiday affects box-office. Specifically: What relatively long-running films will get at least a modest boost because they’re “safe” choices for twenty-, thirty- and fortysomethings looking to see a movie with their moms? Think about it: If you’re taking, say, a 65-year-old woman to the movies today, what would you likely take her to see? (Assuming you don’t go to the sneak of “Monster-In-Law.) “Sahara”? “Fever Pitch”? “The Interpreter”? “A Lot Like Love”?
Martin, nothing describes “empty” more than Return
of the King. Talk about a bunch of hype. A film
that should have REVOLVED around Viggo, Orlando,
and Rhys-Davies gets put in the hands of the creepy
Elijah Wood, cant carry him Sean Astin, and a friggin
ratty hand-puppet named Gollum. Do not even try to
sell that movie, hammer, having the gut-punch of
Revenge. Nothing comes close to the end of Revenge.
Especially in terms of the last film in each of these
two trilogy. SW equates to being LEGION LOTR? Already
forgotten or the people have moved.
Of course Martin, you are more than entitled to
feel differently. Yet this is not hype. That flick
will be better than Empire. Since not every fan loves
Empire to death.
Now, even if it’s the best of the lot, Epics need
to take a few years off. Since Kingdom of Heaven has
seemingly been lumped in with a bunch of shite, that
possibly killed it’s grossing power in the US. At
least Europe loves American Epics. Hopefully they can
make money abroad.
If next week, nothing opens above Thirty, events might
be dire indeed. IF not, then I am sure EW will
write another dumb story about people not going
to the theatre anymore.
Why has Stella taken such a defiant stance, towards
a movie? Then lumps her friends and family into
the DEFIANCE he has for seeing the film. I guarantee
at least one friend and at least one family member
will want to see the movie of the Summer.
You think War of the Worlds will be any good? Come
on! That movie just screams “SUCKY SUCKY” from two
miles away. Yet, if you have to be defiant towards
something. It might as well be pop culture. Since
pop culture has yet to figure out a way to fight
such defiance.
Actually War of the Worlds feels like the kind of film that could play for a long time. Both prequels have had pretty good legs (doing about 4x their opening) so ROTS will do fine, $350 at the least. But it turns out that SW is the biggest film of the summer with that number, it will be a disappointing summer indeed.
And it looks like the final #’s this weekend are even scarier than predicted. Kingdom of Heaven $19.6 mill? House of Wax $13? This is not simply a sign of viewer disinterest, but a sign that people are simply not showing up at the theaters. Were there any sports or events on tv this weekend that would have competed? It almost looks like one of those Olympic summer weekends where everything gets killed. Kingdom of Heaven’s start is not as bad as Alexander’s… but stunningly not that far off.
At the risk of sounding like some theologian on the alert for early signs of Final Days: During the past few years, I’ve dreaded the day when it becomes all too obvious that the tipping point has been reached, and a large chunk of the moviegoing audience has decided, for various financial and social interactive reasons, that, what the hell, let’s wait for the DVD release, no matter what the movie might be. I’m NOT saying this weekend alone is enough to indicate that day has arrived. But I fear we must keep in mind the very real possibility that DVDs are becoming (if they haven’t already become) an attractive option to (and maybe a viable substitution for) the moviegoing experience, even among the most diehard movie fans. I mean, I know this sounds like heresy, but I wonder how many thousands (millions?) might take a pass on seeing “Sith” in theaters, and simply wait for the DVD. After all, even Dave indicated in his mostly postive review that a couple of major showdowns “seem a bit unfinished… as though another three months and another $20 million would allow them to be perfected.” These flaws doubtless will be “fixed” on the DVD. But maybe some people don’t want to pay first-run admission prices to see an unfinished movie.
I don’t know. IMHO I don’t think people will wait because DVDs take soooo long to come out now. Just today I was checking to see when I could buy Million Dollar Baby and was pretty surprised to see it doesn’t come out till 7/12/05! I know it won four Oscars but man that’s a long time.
I can’t get too many people to go see movies in the theatres these days in the USA–it’s $10 where I live, so people figure why not wait til the rental/purchase the DVD in a sale. SO many movies suck so why blow $10 at the theatre for a ho-hum experience.
In western Europe where I worked for years it was easy to get 4 or 8 week passes, so going to the show was cheap–it works out to less than $2/picture if you see 3-4/week so many folks did that, especially via the Virgin megaplexes in the UK & Irl where they made it worth your while.
(continued from above)
And even a lot of poorly performing movies seem to take a while. The Life Aquatic is finally being released on DVD the day after tomorrow. That’s almost 5 months after it’s release date.
G-man, that movie is a very rare exception. Release days of theatrical and DVD have gotten closer and closer and there are even plans now to do day and date theatrical/dvd releases. Ultimately I think home entertainment will only continue to grow. I believe that “moviegoing” is slowly but surely heading in the Imax direction. It will be about “big” entertainment that you cant get in your living room. Movies like Star Wars will continue to dominate multiplexes. Smaller fare will slowly move toward mostly home viewing. I could be wrong, but this is where I see it now. And you’re right, many more customers now wait for tv/internet/DVD/airplane or wherever else they watch their movies. As the availability and quality of home entertainment improves, theaters will slowly lose their attraction. SW3 may well have done more money 6 years ago than today, when the fans unsure about it’s quality will simply decide to wait.
Martin, I see what you’re saying but I think the facts seem to show that high-quality movies like Star Wars are still taking 4,5, or 6 months to go to DVD. And who wants to wait that long to see the biggest movie of the summer?
Again, let’s keep in mind that we on this blog do not necessarily reflect the mindset of average adult moviegoers, many of whom may not mind waiting an extra three or four months to see a movie. At current prices, you can routinely buy a DVD – actually own a quality print of a movie! – and have an entire evening’s entertainment for the whole family for less than $20 bucks total, including popcorn and soda for everyone. For a family of four where I live, Los Angeles, that’s easily about one-fourth the cost of taking everyone out on a Saturday night. And, if you’re so inclined, you can then resell the DVD on eBay to cut your costs even further.
And it’s not just the DVDs. It’s also the burgeoning number of homes that have 40+ inch plasma or LCD screens with Dolby DTS surround sound. People aren’t buying those setups just to watch the blown-up version of “Desperate Housewives.” They are investing in getting the movie theatre experience at home. And I think it’s possible we are beginning to see telltale signs that more and more people are looking for a return on that investment.
I agree, I also think that, despite the advent of stadium seating, people are just tired of all the BS in multiplexes. In addition to the crap that bugs me, like bad projection and blown out speakers, there’s the usual crap like annoying audience members, dirty shit under and on the seats, endless commercials and trailers, high ticket prices, absurb concession prices.. I just think the attractiveness of moviegoing has slowly gone down the tubes. This is hardly the end of movie theaters, but what I’m generally seeing is more young people willing to stay at home to watch DVDs. Movie theaters are almost quaint for this crowd, and older crowds have long ago started their move away from the multiplexes. In particular, I think the idea of the guaranteed marketing blockbuster is slowing down. The awareness of Kingdom of Heaven, XXX, Hitchhiker’s is quite high. But not many people bit, either postponing for home entertainment or disinterest altogether. This idea of “need to see” is slowly losing it’s power.
I hate to be Mister Negative today but I don’t agree. Relative to the population as a whole very, very few people have anything like a home theater capability. And having worked at a theater I still think people of all ages still enjoy the communal experience of seeing a movie with others. You just can’t get that alone. I think the real problem is shitty movies.
If so, then why have ticket sales continued to drop every year? They’ve tried to stop this with increasing prices, but the # of ticket’s sold has continued to drop. I don’t think that’s simply a matter of bad movies.
(continued from above)
And I don’t think we should write off senior citizens. It depends on the movie. I personally saw old people come out in droves to see Seabiscuit. I mean lines and lines of 55+.
Martin, maybe we’re not in such disagreement. Who wants to pay high prices (which you said and I agree with) to see a shitty movie?
I agree that theatrical exhibition is slowly going the way of…well, theater. Something that only a rarified audience goes to see while the masses stay at home with their big TVs. Which is a shame, especially for the filmmakers of the future who want to make non-blockbusters but still want them projected on the big screen.
I still think Star Wars will be the biggest movie of the summer, but War of the Worlds shows every sign of being another Spielberg blockbuster. If you think it looks sucky, then you haven’t been paying attention to his movies of the last ten years, which have been generally underrated.
I’m not so sure about the behemoth box office potential for “War of the Worlds.” Remember, even though it made plenty of money overall, “Minority Report” was considered a major underperformer with $132 million domestically. I haven’t seen anything to suggest we should expect better this time around, especially since lately there’s been a definite (albeit modest) decline in the drawing powers of both Cruise and Spielberg.
was Minority really an underperformer? it seemed like an adult sci-fi to me without the sort of teenage/franchise appeal that typically makes all the money these days. I thought $130 was a pretty good number for that film. WOTW definitely feels more commercial by half to me.
True about Cruise and Spielberg not being the box office behemoths they once were, but Catch Me If You Can made $164 million, and War looks more exciting and relevant than either of those movies. I would predict $200 for it.
That said, I’m surprised that Minority Report made that little…I would have sworn it ended up around 150-160.
After Star Wars and War of the Worlds, I don’t know what else there is going to be at the top of the heap this year. Batman will do fine but it is appealing mainly to a fan audience, The Island will make money but not as much as Armageddon…this will probably be the summer of many $150 million movies and not much beyond that.
According to Box Office Mojo, “Minority Report” made $132,072,926 domestically. It had a production budget of $102 million and marketing costs of $40 million. But it did gangbuster business overseas, raking in $226,300,000 abroad. Grand total worldwide: $358,372,926. But still a huge disappointment on the domestic front.
Don’t underestimate “Batman Begins.” If Chris Nolan comes through with the goods, as the fan base believes he will, the film could do over $250 million domestically.
I’m sorry, but Batman Begins looks way too dark to do $250 mill plus numbers. In it’s marketing it reminds me very much of Batman Returns. Which opened big but was a box office disappointment. This film may well get good reviews, but it will appeal primarily to the fanbase, and possibly gain a little more int the adult crowd, and lose quite a bit in the teen/kids crowd. It also has none of the romance that the previous Batman’s had.
Also it has little starpower and a not-compelling villain. Don’t get me wrong, I’m looking forward to it, but I don’t see it getting over $175-190 tops.
Who IS the villain? Is it Scarecrow? It just feels like a self-conciously arty take on the comic book. Which may well mean much critical praise, but not a huge reaction at the box office. But a guy in a wormy mask is not quite the draw of say, Jack Nicholson, or even a menacing Chris Walken.
Scarecrow is not the main villian. Ra’s Ghoul is. Ken Watanabe.
Too dark? Other than the Adam West years, when has Batman NOT been dark? Furthermore, one of the things that’s been surprisiing to me about what’s been shown so far of “Batman Begins” has been the unusual prevalence of earth tones in the scenic design.
Also, weren’t the “Lord of the Rings” movies extremely dark? And lacking familiar villains or big-name stars?
“Batman Returns” made about $163 million domestically, which was more than double the budget and a pretty impressive haul back in 1992. It’s true that the film was undeniably dark, but what really upset a lot of people was the perverse, genuinely nauseating portrayal of The Penguin, which I understand was one of the main reasons the studio lost confidence in Tim Burton. (Conversely, I don’t recall anybody having a problem with Michelle Pfeiffer’s leather-and-whips Catwoman.) I highly doubt this version has any comparable issues.
Batman is one of the most recognized characters/brands in the world, with an unequaled demographic of fans in every age group because he’s been around for somethiing like 65 years now. And I think you should NEVER dismiss the potential of a well-received comic-book adaptation. I remember a lot of people scoffed when I suggested early on that “Spider-Man” would do more business than “Phantom Menace.” I remain one of the few people who still thinks “Fantastic Four” could surprise a lot of naysayers who’ve already written it off. So I’m going to stand by my prediction, at least until the reviews start coming in.
I have a lot more faith in Nolan and Batman to make a good movie/lots of money than I do with Fantastic Four. FF is, to a mainstream audience, a much less well-known franchise. Plus, the movie looks like crap. It looks as bad as Lost in Space from a few years ago, and we all remember how that turned out.
jeffmcm, you may be right, but I’m not throwing in the towel yet. First, judging by the the admittedly weak trailers, it seems to me the film may have gotten the heroes right (although I confess I’m very concerned about the portrayal of the villain, Dr. Doom). Second, don’t kid yourself: Fantastic Four is a HUGE comic series. It was the very first produced by Stan Lee, Jack Kirby and Marvel, and it’s been around for (I believe) more than 40 years. Even if not nearly as popular as Superman, Spider-Man, Batman or even X-Men, you can bet your last cent that anyone who’s ever read comic books is familiar with the characters and almost definitely has a soft spot for them (unlike, say, Daredevil, Hulk or The Punisher).
I’m not saying it’s unreasonable to have diminished expectations for the film. But even if it’s not great, I think it’s going to be a huge box-office success so long as it’s not the object of scorn everyone is expecting. Trust me, it’s one of the adaptations that several generations of comic-book fans have been awaiting for a long time.
I would agree with you if I thought that I could walk down the street and ask any average moviegoer the name of any one of the Four. They were popular once but nowadays they do not have the same iconic power as, say, the Hulk. This is not a movie that the general public has been waiting for.
Oh, and the Batman villains: Ras al-Ghoul? Who the hell is that? Never heard of him, can’t vouch for him. Who’s the villain in the next movie, Egghead? King Tut?
IMHO if you don’t think as many people on the street are as familiar with The Human Torch or The Thing as they were with, say, Peter Parker or Dr. Octopus, you might be in for a rude awakening. Besides, like I said earlier, how many average moviegoers knew anything about the characters or villains from The Lord of the Rings series prior to those films? If Ras al-Ghoul and Scarecrow turn out to be cool villains, absolutely no one will care that they never heard of them before. After all, how many people knew in advance who Goldfinger was? Or Hannibal Lecter?
Chester, I think you are deeply out of touch with the avg moviegoer. There’s certainly a significant fanbase for the 4, but the avg person on the street has no idea who the Human Torch is. If you ask them about The Thing, 9 out of 10 will either not know or think you mean the Carpenter horror movie. No one reads comics anymore, they see the movies. So the only ones that still resonate are the few major ones, Spiderman, Superman, Batman, Hulk.. not much else. When you start getting into the Punisher’s, that sort of thing, most of the audience doesn’t recognize. LOTRs/Hobbit was actually required reading in our school in like 4th grade and I imagine it’s still on thousands of reading lists across the country. It’s a widely known commodity. No one knows the Batman backstory, they could have had Jack Nicholson playing a made up villain and it would have done the same box office. It’s about the Main character, Batman, and then whatever cool actors surround him. Story/side characters do not mean much except to a small fanbase.
Martin, while understandably you are a LOTR fan. I
just got to let you know that LOTR/Hobbit has not
been required reading for quite sometime. Something
about evil goblin brothers messing with a halfling
does not compute with the kids.
Unlike the thoroughly entertaining…books written
by a linguist. Who does not know Bats backstory?
Bats and Supes are two icons from this country.
People will go see a Bats film. This film does not
exactly seem dark to me. It will be more of an
homage to the animated series. Easily one of the
best animated series ever.
I have more faith in Bats then the Beard. I have
loved his most recent movie sans the Therminal
because it smelt like excrement from a ratty hand
puppet. Yet War of the Worlds just seems freakin
hokey to me. How many times must we suffer an
alien invasion in film? They show up every friggin
10 years or so. We somehow defeat them via a virus
from a 28.8 modem. Leaving the world in rumble, but
we defeated the aliens! Yay.
You’re arguing my point for me…where Independence Day was somewhat cheesy, I think Spielberg can be trusted to make an alien invasion movie that’s smarter and more thoughtful and relevant. How that’ll translate into box office, we’ll just have to see.
Please try writing in complete sentences, you sound like Harry Knowles.
G-Man: Actually, “relative to the population,” movie attendance has been on a fairly steady decline (save for occasional, fleeting upticks) for quite some time now. When people start talking about “more tickets bought than at any time since the ’50s,” or something like that, they overlook the obvious: The population of the US is something like 100 million larger (more if you undocumented aliens) than it was in the early 1960s. But the percentage of the population that can be described as regular moviegoers has actually shrunk. No, I don’t think this means theatrical exhibition is on the ropes, and will become obsolete in our lifetimes. In fact, I’ll go on record as believeing there will ALWAYS be theatrical exhibition of some sort. But the fact remains that, any way you want to measure it, movies simply don’t have the claim on our pop culture consciousness that they did even 30 years ago. There are a variety of reasons for this — cable TV, video games, Internet,post-9/11 cocooning urges, etc., etc. — but I would venture to say that a single breakout hit TV show like “Desperate Housewives” has more impact, and gets more attention, than any single movie of any sort can hope to achieve in this age of what Communication theorists call “demassification.”
Until a few weeks ago I had never heard of The Thing or The Human Torch. I’d heard of Fantastic Four before, but not the character’s names. I’m sure I’m not the only one. I’ve never read a comic book in my life and my knowledge of them is pretty limited.
Boy, it has become more than apparent that you are
no where near the average person. Since you would
rather see House of Wax over Kingdom of Heaven! I
mean, COME ON! I kid of course. That aside, the
FF has been around for almost 40 years. There has
to be some sort of knowledge out there in the
general public.
Joe, I would say that TV gets more press. Due in
large part to it NOT SUCKING AS MUCH AS FILM. TV
will give you a Veronica Mars, a Gilmore Girls, a
LOST, or even a Shield, but what does film give you?
Maybe 10 films a year that you really love? See?
TV gets all the love because when TV does well film
cannot even come close to matching it. Yet film
execs really believe we want a Bewitch remake.
Jeff, did you not say “if you have nothing nice to
say…”? I do believe you did. You did not get
my point. This flick will end just like ID4. Humanity
gets it ass handed to them. Only to have Humanity
somehow save planet earth in the end. What about
this have we not seen before? I love the Beard,
but not Tom Cruise. He has turned into a creepy
bastard. That aside, this film is nothing new.
When you have a radio play as the pentultimate moment
in this story’s existance. You know something must
be amiss. Did I mention the “Alien bowling earth
for a 7-10 split” poster? It just seems off to
me.
Of course I will see the film, but if it gives me
an Oldboy experience jeff. You are going to hear
about it.
I’m not looking to get into a tussle with anyone over “Fantastic Four” or the public’s familiarity with its characters. Suffice it to say that a lot of what has been said here was also forecast about “Spider-Man” before it came out. Peter Parker, The Green Goblin, Mary Jane, Harry Osborne, Aunt May…how many “average moviegoers” knew who the hell they were either? As if it mattered.
I’m not expecting “Fantastic Four” to post anywhere near “Spider-Man” numbers. But unless it’s another unforgiveably dreadful comic-book adaptation – WHICH IS VERY POSSIBLE! – I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if it did at least $125 million domestically, to be doubled internationally.
I don’t know what this means “gives me an Oldboy experience jeff. You are going to hear about it”.
Did you like or not like Oldboy? And why should I hear about it?
Cruise schmuise, I hated Last Samurai. It’s a new Spielberg movie I’m looking forward to.
Was Minority Report released for July 4? Because War of the Worlds is. That, i believe, will lead it to big things.
Batman however… I see $175mil-$190mil. The trailers seem a bit unfocused. Is it about how he became Batman, or is it about him in Gotham City. I’d much prefer it if he’s fighting evil in Gotham City.
I’m intrigued to know how the original War of the Worlds did.
Aanyway. I think we can all attribute the blahness of the “Summer” roster to far to the mere fact that these movie’s aren’t SUMMER MOVIES. House of Wax would’ve done better around Halloween like The Grudge or Texas Chainsaw. Kingdom of Heaven… well, I’m not sure when it may have done better but perhaps May was the wrong spot.
I actually think Monster-in-Law could do high 20s next week. Lots of advertising and lots of stuff about Jane and Jennifer. But, really, who knows now.
I also just wanted to throw something out about the The Phantom Menace… is it just my bad memory or did that movie debut on LESS than 3000 screens?
Sith will most likely be the biggest movie of the year and I still find it extremely odd that Stella is so defensive about not wanting to see a movie. Good for you Stella, but geez. SETTLE DOWN.
And that’s from someone who doesnt even like the Star Wars franchise (that Attack of the Clones is my favourite speaks volumes). But I am still interested in number 3 as I’m sure a lot of people will be. And even people who are like me are interested. Hell, even my mother wants to see it and she has only ever seen the original New Hope! So that whole “I will not be seeing Sith. No one in my family will be seeing it. None of my friends will be seeing it” bullshit don’t fly.
I’d love to see how Stella reacts to someone in real life when talking about this subject…
And also, Crash making 9.1mil is very good considering it has had no buzz or advertising (from what I can gather – a lot of people I know in the states didn’t even know it existed until I said I saw it).
And, somebody mentioned the lack of Star Wars 3 adverts. In Australia they’re everywhere…
Camel, I love Attack. Easily in the top 3, and that
says something because I love SW. Jeff, you really
cant fill in the block sometimes. It means that
Oldboy ruined my Saturday due in large part to it
being the dumbest movie ever. At least I had a good
laugh about, but it just left me feeling rather…”
ewwwwwwwwwwwwww.” And you will hear about WOTW
being ass. If it turns out that way.
I mean to say “blank” not “block”. If I do not post
it here. Jeff will be asking me what the hell I
meant for two weeks.
Just a thought:
Perhaps people aren’t spending money on the movies from the “summer” so far because theyre actually anticipating some that are coming up and like all desperate teenagers they do not have the cash to be throwing around on movies of questionable quality.
I mean, I know there are “event” movies that aren’t good at all but they feel like event movies. And there’s about 4 that I can think of right off the top of my head. So maybe that’s why…?
…or maybe not. It’s just a theory.
maybe its the fact that the movies released lately have been awful. and no one wants to see them. just a thought
Mixed reviews and an R rating hurt “Kingdom of Heaven”. In NYC one negative review (Village Voice) carried the ominous title “Holy Crap”.
“Crash” a limited release? It opened in 1800+ theaters — Lions Gate went for upmarket/arthouse venues where it could.
“Were there any sports or events on tv this weekend that would have competed?”
NBC had the Kentucky Derby on Saturday afternoon. CBS had a heavily hyped movie about Elvis Presley on Sunday night.
Right now Monster-In-Law has six reviews at rottentomatoes, five of which are negative. What do you think Chester? You were right about KOH. Or is this one critic-proof?
Using Chesters theory of 4 reviews equals good enough to make a judgement. It will have to go down as a bomb.
Gotta love it when someone inevitably breaks out the “duh: box office is down cause the movies suck, of course!” argument. Because you know, that’s stopped so many people from going to the movies in the past.
(Nor would I say that everything that makes a lot of money reflects middle-to-low-brow tastes; “mainstream audiences,” if you want to refer to them as a collective, are about as reliable as a randomly selected film critic; they’ll be right on about some things and way off about others.)
I’m not saying it’s been a banner year for movies, but there have been a handful of very worthwhile films (Millions; Sin City; Crash; Kung Fu Hustle). The best movies rarely come out in the spring, anyway. And there were a lot of mid-level hits on March and April, quality nonwithstanding.
Kingdom of Heaven didn’t open particularly well because there was an overreliance on release date “selling” the movie. Anyone see those ads that tried to sell it as the “first event movie” of the year or what-not?
It’s also interesting that so many different movies were circling the 5/6 date: Hitchhiker’s and Monster-in-Law both had that date for awhile, and House of Wax was bounced between 4/29 and 5/13, wasn’t it? It’s almost as if studios were just taking Fox’s word for it that KOTH was going to be a big summer smash, and no one stepped in with a bigger movie. Hell, I’m able to tap into that cheesy “summer movie season” excitement, and KOTH was probably my least anticipated early-May movie in years (yes, including Van Helsing, even after I heard it sucked). So I’m not too shocked that audiences weren’t super-psyched, although I guess it’s surprising that they couldn’t market it to at least 25.
I’m more puzzled about why House of Wax only managed 12 mil when Amityville Horror got to twice that. Guess it could be the PG-13.
House of Wax and Amityville Horror are both rated R.
And $56 million in international box office over one weekend is pretty good isn’t it?
Regarding the reviews for “Monster-in-Law,” we’re back to interpreting scarce evidence and reading the tea leaves. Yep, the reviews are dreadful so far and they are fairly consistent in their appraisals (lousy material, lousy execution), again with varying degrees of emphases (pro- or anti-Fonda’s performance). Even if the Tomatometer rating rises, I think it’s pretty safe to presume that it won’t break past the 35th percentile. So despite the fact that as of last week the movie was tracking extraordinarily well with preview audiences, I now expect the movie to get slapped at the opening weekend box office because IMHO this film is probably not review-proof. Even if the movie somehow continues to get good word of mouth from audiences, I doubt it will overcome the critical drubbing, especially when you consider public antipathy to Lopez and, to a lesser extent, Fonda. The only thing that might save it is if the female demographic, generally neglected by the studios, is determined to see it no matter what.
On the other hand, I haven’t seen any reviews yet for “Kicking and Screaming,” but there’s an example of a film that may turn out to be review-proof. Look at all the Will Ferrell supporters we have on this site alone.
Opening weekends are review proof. And Will f movies are review proof because we don’t expect critics to “get” Anchorman or Old School. Comedy is subjective and unique. No critic is going to say Old School is one of the best comedies of the past five years because it would kill them in the industry. They have to say the English Patient is a classic. Now tell me what guy under 35 would choose the EP over Old School?
$2.49 a galllon for gas (Southern California). Four gallons of gas or a movie ticket.
There’s your tipping point Mr. Leydon.
I’ll drag myself off to see Star Wars 3 (the force is strong on those with weak minds) but outside of that…
Probably Batman Begins since it will play at an IMAX theater.
Hope it’s better than those first two.
Yet it’s an “origins of Batman” story; predictable beat by beat.
I’d take The English Patient over Old School and I’m a male under 35.
Just a theory regarding Monster In Law.
Is there any other date movie in site. On the horizon? Coming into view? About to be released?
…why yes. It’s name is Monster in Law.
Again, just a theory.
Kamikaze, that’s what I was talking about when I spoke of the potentially determined female demographic, who I should have added might be dragging along their dates. You don’t honestly think many average males are going to be eager to see “Monster-in-Law” this weekend, do you? (You’d better believe I’ll be pushing for “Unleashed” on Saturday night!) I’m figuring that the only upcoming film in this genre that men as a group might be able to endorse will be “Wedding Crashers.”
old school is a comedy classic that people are going to be watching in 25 yrs. the english patient is a boring film that is already forgotten.
That may be true for you bobby boy, but certainly not for everyone.
Sorry, Bob, but I can’t remember the last time I heard anyone — either my own age or my son’s age — talking about “Old School.”
But “Road Trip”? That’s a different story. “Road” rocks. If you asked me if I wanted to see THAT or “The English Patient,” guess I’d have to start ogling Amy Smart again. (Even though Kristin-Scott Thomas is kinda easy on the eyes, too, and a lot closer to my, er, demographic.)
As someone who is over 35, I much prefer the comedy of Old School to the English Patient. I prefer Road trip to the English Patient too.
leydon maybe u should let ur son out more and see some good flicks besides crap like f 911 and the english patient. then he won’t get picked on so much.
I believe this is the first every blog entry to pass 100 comments…
Bob: Actually, my son went with me to see “Road Trip,” and we both loved it. He passed on “Old School,” though, because “it was all about those old guys.” Go figure. Oh, and by the way, he doesn’t get picked on. At least, not since they have him that Glock after he joined that Asian gang at his school.
You are invited to visit the sites about blackjack blackjack http://www.casino-y.com/blackjack.html free slots free slots http://www.casino-y.com/free-slots.html gambling gambling http://www.casino-y.com/gambling.html online gambling online gambling http://www.casino-y.com/online-gambling.html slot machines slot machines http://www.casino-y.com/slot-machines.html – Tons of interesdting stuff!!!
Please check out some relevant pages in the field of casino online casino online http://www.epraha.info/casino.html …
You are invited to check out some information dedicated to online casino online casino http://www.splendid-casino.com/online-casino.html online casinos online casinos http://www.splendid-casino.com/online-casinos.html slot machines slot machines http://www.splendid-casino.com/slot-machines.html casino on net casino on net http://www.splendid-casino.com/casino-on-net.html casino games casino games http://www.splendid-casino.com/casino-games.html casino gambling casino gambling http://www.splendid-casino.com/casino-gambling.html internet casino internet casino http://www.splendid-casino.com/internet-casino.html online casino gambling online casino gambling http://www.splendid-casino.com/online-casino-gambling.html casino online casino online http://www.splendid-casino.com/casino-online.html roulette roulette http://www.splendid-casino.com/roulette.html …
You are invited to check out some information dedicated to online casino online casino http://www.splendid-casino.com/online-casino.html online casinos online casinos http://www.splendid-casino.com/online-casinos.html slot machines slot machines http://www.splendid-casino.com/slot-machines.html casino on net casino on net http://www.splendid-casino.com/casino-on-net.html casino games casino games http://www.splendid-casino.com/casino-games.html casino gambling casino gambling http://www.splendid-casino.com/casino-gambling.html internet casino internet casino http://www.splendid-casino.com/internet-casino.html online casino gambling online casino gambling http://www.splendid-casino.com/online-casino-gambling.html casino online casino online http://www.splendid-casino.com/casino-online.html roulette roulette http://www.splendid-casino.com/roulette.html …
Please check out some relevant information about free poker free poker http://www.poker-adventure.com/free-poker.html .
Take your time to check the sites dedicated to internet casino internet casino http://www.scottishtutors.com/internet-casino.html – Tons of interesdting stuff!!!