MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Narnia's coming

Is it worth lining up for?
And how many of you got to that midnight screening of Memoirs of a Geisha last night?

Be Sociable, Share!

24 Responses to “Narnia's coming”

  1. Josh says:

    Narnia can make a fortune or it can tank. Huge. I got no idea what it will do.

  2. Wrecktum says:

    Will King Kong hugely affect Narnia’s legs? A month ago I would have said no. But now I’m not too sure. Narnia is a very good film, but it may seem too small and “twee” next to the Kong behemoth. Mix in Cheaper By the Dozen 2 and Fun With Dick and Jane, and Narnia may be a memory by January.
    But, that said, the pre-sales on Narnia have been strong, so perhaps my nervousness is unjustified.

  3. Stella's Boy says:

    http://www.worldofkj.com/
    Is anyone familiar with that site? Apparently they track in real time and are predicting a $20-$25 million opening day for Narnia.

  4. Mark Ziegler says:

    Kong could blow up everything in it’s path. A definate concern for Narnia.

  5. joefitz84 says:

    Narnia better do well with a budget in the 200 million range. Needs a fantastic opening weekend. The competition will just get more fierce.

  6. Wrecktum says:

    I think you’ll find most tentpoles have a $200+ budget these days, once you add production costs with P&A.

  7. PandaBear says:

    You can count the 200$ mill budgets on one hand. They’re not that many of them.

  8. jeffmcm says:

    That’s why they’re called tentpoles…one per tent.

  9. MattM says:

    I think it’s going to be a big weekend. At the AMC/Loews in Times Square tonight, Narnia, Syriana, and Geisha were all sold out, and the showing of Aeon Flux I went to was about 95% full. I think one of the big worries on Narnia was whether it was going to be seen as “too religious” to play in the big cities. 60-70 opening weekend, with an unusually strong Sunday. “Prince Caspian” is greenlit by next weekend.

  10. Joe Straat says:

    I don’t think I’ll make it, though I did see you on AMC’s “Movies That Shook the World: The Blair Witch Project.” Eh, didn’t tell me anything I didn’t already know, but that’s not your fault. It’s like “I Love the 90s.” Too late to be of social relevance, too early to be nostalgia. And by the time it was released in Nebraska, we already knew everything about it being a work of fiction disguised by a clever ad campaign, and most of us thought of it as unscary horseshit with three stupid kids who liked to use the “f-word”…. a lot.

  11. EDouglas says:

    Yeah, Narnia’s definitely worth seeing, if you were ever into the books…if not, probably not.
    BTW, the World of KJ predictions are not tracking ticket sales, but Yahoo reviews…it’s a faulty system IMO, because anyone can sign on and put a positive review without seeing it.

  12. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    Can I throw something into the mix?
    Memoirs of a Geisha is at a laughably destructive 29% at Rotten Tomatoes. 28% Cream of the Crop. Brokeback is at 86% and Mrs Henderson Presents at 65%.
    King Kong is at 95%!

  13. Bodhizefa says:

    I may be in the crazy boat here, but I honestly think Narnia’s going to pull in around $80+ million on opening weekend. I know I haven’t seen any other predictions even close to that large, but it essentially covers a TON of angles (action, drama, family fare, quasi-religious, LotR/Harry Potter genre mixer). It’s going to make a lot more bank than anyone’s giving it credit for in my opinion.

  14. Crow T Robot says:

    My 2 cents:
    Narnia = less than 40 mil
    – No name stars
    – No name director
    – Trailer without a money-shot.
    – Visual “look” that is taken from The Two Towers.
    – Nothing at all for adults
    – Talking animals.
    – Reviews that seem to average out at 3 stars.
    – Hardcore Christians might bite. But for lapse Christians like myself, could be like going to church. (And for the lapse Christian, nothing sux more than going to church)
    – “Narnia” sounds like a forbidden part of the female anatomy: “I kissed her at first on the thighs and slowly, carefully made my way to her narnia.”
    Hey, but what do I know… I’ve got 5 Heinekens in me.

  15. PetalumaFilms says:

    Crow- the first Harry Potter movie didn’t have any stars and did pretty O.K.
    The thing about Narnia is….I’m soooo “typical CGI”ed out. When I see the trailer for it, my mind just says CGI….Zzzzz. I had a thought though….and I’m sure I’m way behind on it…but don’t recall anyone else every saying it….
    I’m 34 and have seen a BUNCH of movies. As such, I’ve been smack in the middle of technological developments. There’s 2 times I distinctly remember being taken aback by new effects: JURASSIC PARK and the LOTR trilogy. Other than that, I see CGI I can see the man behind thew curtain.
    But kids/teens of this generation are seeing WAY more movies than my generation and don’t know the difference between stop motion, “regular” animation. etc. Their palate is being created on CGI so for them…it must look real. The future is in their pocketbooks and for “us,” we need the big advancement…as I hope KING KONG will be. Ands I trust DP on that one so I simply cannot WAIT until Wednesday!

  16. jeffmcm says:

    Harry Potter 1 may have had no stars but it was riding a much bigger wave of fan adoration and publicity than Narnia is now. I think it’ll do well, but not spectacularly, and a sequel will take a while to shake out.

  17. Eric N says:

    It was 85-90% full at the 7 o’clock show and the 8 was sold out here in Middle America. Not as full as I’ve seen it, but a little fuller than the same showtimes for open day of Batman Begins. It’ll certainly do more than $40M. If Batman’s a guide and Sunday numbers are stronger than typical because it’s a kids/Christian movie, I think $55 is a pretty conservative guess.

  18. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    But quite a few people may think that King Kong is out next week and just wait for their thrills with that one.
    Who knows though. I’m estimating $55 mil as well. It seems like a fairly good number.
    Here’s a question though. Was it a bad move for Sony to go limited then side for Memoirs, or should they have just gone wide straight away. The sort of reviews they’re getting aren’t the type for a platform release.

  19. Paul8148 says:

    here is the saturday numbers for showbiz data…….There is some crazy buzz of 100,000 PTA for Brokeback Mountain, but no numbers out yet……
    Title Daily Total
    CHRONICLES OF NARNIA: THE LION, THE WITCH AND THE WARDROBE, THE 23.4 23.4
    SYRIANA 3.8 5.3
    HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE 2.8 241.0
    WALK THE LINE 1.7 73.0
    AEON FLUX 1.4 17.1
    YOURS, MINE & OURS 1.4 37.2
    JUST FRIENDS 1.3 24.0
    PRIDE AND PREJUDICE .8 24.7
    RENT .7 25.6
    CHICKEN LITTLE .5 12.6

  20. Crow T Robot says:

    Ugh. I will never drink and prognosticate again.
    Anyway, who cares about movies this week. I’ve gotta find a way out of this town. They’re executing Tookie on Tuesday…
    “…and only ONE man can save him. This Christmas. Arnold Schwartzenegger IS…
    The Clemency Man.”

  21. EDouglas says:

    Narnia may be making a play for Return of the King’s December opening weekend… not sure where that’s going to leave King Kong next weekend…

  22. James Leer says:

    I think there’s plenty of room for both. Once the holiday break starts, every single weekday is a huge earner, and people go to see a lot of movies. Narnia has a real shot at a $150 million cume if it holds up like it should, and, of course, Kong will be enormous.

  23. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    James, Brokeback Mountain had a PSA of $38,000 on Friday, which should lead to a PSA of over $100,000 for the entire weekend. Pretty damn decent.

  24. Chucky in Jersey says:

    Those early numbers were pulled out of somebody’s rear end. Much of New England was shut down Friday by a big snowstorm.
    Sunday turnout will be affected thanks to some big NFL games.

The Hot Blog

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