MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Sunday Box Office

I don’t have the numbers yet, but an on the run, so I will leave it to you all to check out Klady and have the discussion.
From the Friday numbers, it looks like a solid expansion for Brokeback Mountain. And as expected, great marketing overcomes crappy movie just like the first time on Underworld: Look At Kate’s Ass Some More.
Underworld 2/ Screen Gems/ 27.1 ((8460) / / 3207 / 27.1
Hoodwinked / Weinstein Co. / 16.7 (6,960) / – / 2394 / 16.6
Glory Road / BV / 16.4 (7,400) / – / 2222 / 16.4
Last Holiday / Par / 14.9 (5,940) / – / 2514 / 14.9
The Chronicles of Narnia / BV / 13.1 (4,050) / -35% / 3224 / 264.3
Hostel / Lions Gate / 11.7 (5,010) / -40% / 2337 / 36.9
Fun with Dick and Jane / Sony / 10.4 (3,220) / -27% / 3239 / 94.3
King Kong / Uni / 9.2 (3,280) / -40% / 2814 / 204.7
Tristan & Isolde / Fox / 7.9 (4,260) / – / 1845 / 7.9
Brokeback Mountain / Focus / 7.1 (10,380) / 3% / 683 / 32.1
Cheaper by the Dozen / Fox / 6.8 (2,450) / -40% / 2773 / 74.7

Be Sociable, Share!

136 Responses to “Sunday Box Office”

  1. Goulet says:

    Nothing wrong with Kate’s ass. And it’s her hubby shooting it, awww.

  2. Chucky in Jersey says:

    “Brokeback Mountain” is in the national top 5. Thanks, Utah!
    “Fun with Dick and Jane” goes over $100M pending the actual numbers. Thanks, Jim and Tea!
    “Walk the Line” goes over $100M on its awards re-release. Thanks, Golden Globes!

  3. MattM says:

    There’s also the quiet bomb (“Looking For Comedy In The Muslim World”) and quiet succesful indie expansion (“Transamerica”) this week. More interestingly, two flicks people wrote off as megabombs are doing decently–“Geisha” at 51 and “Cheaper by The Dozen 2” at 78, with the possibility of going to 85, plus a sure-to-be-big DVD market. Sadly, this means that we can look forward to more bad Steve Martin “family comedies.”

  4. Crow T Robot says:

    The New World. Just amazing. Kilcher should be taken seriously for a nomination — she’s a terrific Malick creation. It’s been two days and I still can’t get her smiling close-up out of my head.
    Favorite scene: James Horner swells as the Naturals get their first glimpse of the ships sailing in. Uncut, unprocessed cinematic grandeur.
    I’ll likely see it again tomorrow.

  5. cullen says:

    i am going for the 3rd time in an hour…it’s one of the best movies I have ever seen.

  6. Wrecktum says:

    Steve Martin’s career choices aren’t much different now than they’ve been for the past decade or so. These days he’s making Pink Panther and Cheaper By the Dozen 2. Back then he was making Sgt. Bilko and Father of the Bride 2. Same ol’ shit.
    Remember, he’s still throwing in performances in things like Novocaine and as long as he keeps writing great stuff like Bowfinger, then I’ll be content.

  7. joefitz84 says:

    Selling hot looking Kate Beckinsale in leather and some Nine Inch Nails songs works. It really does.

  8. martin says:

    outside of underworld and BM, kind of a slow weekend. Oddly, the non-promoted “End of the Spear” did more money than “The New World” on slightly more screens. New World may be a good movie but unless it picks up a bunch of noms it will be major red ink. Lack of Thin Red Line’s casting really hurt it. Farrell and a young unknown indian chick aint gonna get you a huge audience unless there’s awards to back it up.

  9. LesterFreed says:

    Narnia jut keeps chugging along. The little movie that could.

  10. Eric says:

    Narnia’s numbers are impressive, no doubt. But to call it “the little movie that could?” We’re talking about a Disney movie that cost 180 million dollars to make.

  11. Joe Leydon says:

    Klady says: “Brokeback added about 500 playdates and moved up to fifth position and a gross of more than $41 million. As with last year’s Million Dollar Baby, the cowboy yarn is on track to gross $100 million should it wind up with the Academy’s top prize.”
    I can’t begin to tell you how happy it makes me to know how much that news will piss off some of the people on this blog.

  12. MattM says:

    The MDB comparison seems a bit unfair to me–didn’t MDB start super-limited in the last week of December and then go super-wide around now last year, with maybe 1 intermediate step? In contrast, Brokeback’s had a considerably longer time in that mid-range theatre count.

  13. DannyBoy says:

    I don’t think so, Matt. I could be wrong, but we didn’t get M$B in my medium sized city until the final weekend in January. We’ve had BM, since the 6th. If anything, I think the release of BM has been slightly accelerated due to theater demands. I do think it might burn off more quickly than M$B, just because, sad as it is, there is a sizable group of closed-minded people who will not go, no matter how many Oscar nods it gets. I predict it will wind up with about 60-70 mil, maybe 80-85 if it wins best picture. It would be lovely if it hit 100 mil, but I’m not expecting it. (And didn’t M$B run out of gas at 90 mil?)

  14. jeffmcm says:

    Hey Crow T Robot: I believe that in the scene from The New World that you speak of, the music is not James Horner but rather Richard Wagner.

  15. Joe Leydon says:

    Dan: According to BoxOfficeMojo, M$B tapped out at $100.4 domestic. AND $116.2 foreign.

  16. jeffmcm says:

    I see that overseas, Brokeback has made $1.2m. Obviously it will not come anywhere close to M$B numbers in that regard.

  17. Wrecktum says:

    Warner’s had to beg, borrow and steal to get Million Dollar Baby to $100m (assuming that they did. I’ve heard there was a bit of book-cooking there). I suspect Brokeback Mountain will pose a similar struggle.
    Brokeback hasn’t rolled out in most international markets yet, so its B.O. is unknowable at this point. It opened very strong in the UK, if that’s a barometer.

  18. jeffmcm says:

    It just seems like the combination of more controversial subject matter, plus a more specifically American milieu, will limit Brokeback’s international take. I can imagine good business in Japan (really good, in fact) and western Europe, but that’s about it.

  19. Wrecktum says:

    It’ll certainly be interesting. Westerns don’t do as well overseas and it’s subject matter will no doubt be controversial in some markets, but Ang Lee has a worldwide reputation and Oscar Best Picture winners (a big assumption it’ll win, I know) do great business internationally. I suspect Brokeback’s int’l numbers will mirror the domestic.

  20. MattM says:

    My point is that Brokeback has been available for more people for longer than MDB was at a comparable point in its run. MDB was ultralimited from 12/15-1/6, then went to about 100 screens first weekend of Jan, then to 2,000 on 1/28. That meant there was substantial pent up interest still, with substantial markets not penetrated yet.
    Brokeback has now penetrated most (if not all) major markets, and many minor ones as well. It has far more in the bank than MDB did at this time last year, but also far less upside than MDB did as a result.
    (This isn’t a judgment on Brokeback, which I haven’t seen because of my loathing for Westerns.)

  21. PandaBear says:

    The worldwide numbers should hold up. This isn’t some indie movie with no credentials. Ang Lee is as international as you get as a director.

  22. Crow T Robot says:

    Wagner, huh? Even better! Anyone know the title of the piece?

  23. DannyBoy says:

    Sorry, Matt. Looking back I misread what you said. Reading it correctly, I think you’re right, that Brokeback, which I really like, is not going to post M$B numbers, and that, exactly as you say, most of the people who really want to see BM have had the opportunity–though I still keep running into people who haven’t seen it but claim they will be going, so who knows. I still stand my my initial prediction of 60-70 mil domestic.

  24. DannyBoy says:

    P.S. Thanks for the correct M$B numbers, “cooked” or not, Joe.
    It is true, isn’t it, that higher TV sales numbers come into play if a film hits baromitors like 100 mil or 200 mil, and that studios with a film that’s really close will go to great lengths to get it over those edges–i.e. spend 5 million on ads just to get 2 million in ticket sales, that kind of thing…

  25. Wrecktum says:

    ^ Yup. You have to hit certain plateaus to demand higher licensing fees. That’s the primary reason domestic boxoffice numbers are so important to a studio.

  26. DannyBoy says:

    I’m trying to remember… It seems like there was some film–I think it was a Miramax film but I could be wrong–that stopped at 98 mil. and the studio just kept it in theaters for weeks and weeks as it slooooowly hobbled across that finish line. Always this big ad in the NY Times for this film that had long since stopped making any real money. At the end I was imagining Harvey Weinstein personally ordering his employees to go see it in theaters…
    Then, after finally hitting something like 1,000,032, it was pulled!

  27. MattM says:

    That was Nicole Kidman/Amenabar vehicle “The Others,” which also got a push over the line because Miramax credited sneak grosses for “Serendipity” and “Jay and Silent Bob” to it.

  28. thelma says:

    No. “The others” topped at $96M.
    BTW, Brokeback has done $1.5M this weekend in Spain alone… and It also opened in Taiwan (#1 there) France and Italy, so international cume this weekend is going to be much higuer than $1.2M…
    And no way It stops at $50-60M… It

  29. djk813 says:

    I’m still using Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon as my box office comparison benchmark for Brokeback Mountain. Subtitles are probably slightly less of an audience repellent than a gay romance, and CTHD had more action to make the romance more palatable to male audiences, but CTHD definitely had some things going against its box office and used awards to slowly build to $128M.
    BBM is slightly ahead ($42m – $37M) at this point, but it has expanded more quickly that CTHD. I think the accelerated expansion for BBM is largely due to an accelerated awards season that it has now. CTHD fared better with its MLK Day weekend expansion to 693 screens ($10.3M) than BBM did ($7.0M on 683 screens). Basically, CTHD held its per screen average better and expanded more slowly, not hitting 2000 screens until Oscar weekend. It was able to average $4-6M ish throughout February and March to reach its total. BBM has a small Oscar window, but if it wins Best Picture it should get a bigger boost than CTHD did from the Oscars. $100M seems definitely doable. They should have an Oscar nominations bump, and Focus could do some creative Valentine’s Day marketing (with the move of Failure to Launch, the only romantic competition is Something New), and then there are the Oscars.

  30. Sanchez says:

    100 million is a benchmark for films. A nice round number. Helps it sell it to tv and it just looks that much better on the company bottom line. Helps with advertising too. Looks good for all of us when discussing the box office.

  31. Fades To Black says:

    I am not a fan of Steve Martin’s career choices at this point. A man with his talen should not be doing Cheaper by the Dozen 2’s.

  32. hepwa says:

    I’m not sure how this factors in, but last year the Oscars were held in February and now we’ve got an extra month to wait. I think BBM will probably slow down some in wide release, then (assuming it wins and MY GOD I HOPE IT DOES:) it should draw in a couple more strong weeks. My initial guess was 85mil domestic, but now I think it will just make $100mil.
    But they’re already talking an April DVD release, so who knows where the priorities lie at Focus. They’ve been pretty smart about the whole thing so far, so it’s interesting to watch.

  33. Josh says:

    It is going to need a lot of repeat business for it to reach 100$ million. It has been out over a month. Not in 6 theatres either. It can get there but I’m skeptical of it. I think 80 is a realistic figure. 100 would have to have everything clicking on all cylinders.

  34. martin says:

    in the lead-up to the oscars it could pull in perhaps another $25-30 mill. $100 mill. total will be a stretch though, it’s not a clint eastwood movie.

  35. Wrecktum says:

    “I’m trying to remember… It seems like there was some film–I think it was a Miramax film but I could be wrong–that stopped at 98 mil. and the studio just kept it in theaters for weeks and weeks as it slooooowly hobbled across that finish line.”
    It happens all the time. Buena Vista did it with Gone in 60 Seconds, I amusingly remember. The film was dead, but they kept the screen count as high as they could the whole summer just to get the 100m. They made it too, if I recall.

  36. jeffmcm says:

    I believe they made a big deal of re-releasing Scream 2 to shove it over the 100m mark, and that was certainly a case where they probably spent more on ads than they made in box-office.

  37. Bruce says:

    Hostel should get to 50$ mill plus too. Get ready for Hostel’s 2 thru about 8 now.

  38. Wrecktum says:

    Hostel 2: Two D-level actors find themselves in a hostel in Caracas where there’re sold to cannibals.
    Hostel 3: Three D-level actors find themselves in a hostel in Ulan Bator where there’re used as test subjects by the Chinese military. In 3-D.
    Hostel 4: Two Z-level actresses find themselves in a hostel in Botswana where they’re sold into a sadistic white slavery ring.
    Hostel 5: Four Z-level non-SAG commercial actors find themselves in a hostel in an unknown country where they’re tortured for no apparent reason.
    Hostel 6: Three Ivy at the Shore waiters are thrown into an acid bath. One of the waiters plays a character named “Charlie Hostel.”
    Hostel 7: Five real-life students (staying at a hostel in Hollywood) are kidnapped by the production company and stabbed to death on film. This gritty new spin on a by-now tired franchise earns the most money since Hostel 2.
    Hostel 8: A homeless guy is eviscerated slowly on camera and his carcass is stuffed with dollar bills (claimed by the producer/star to be “profits from the last few movies”). It has a record $120m opening 3-day but falls 93% in its second weekend. At no point in the movie is the word “Hostel” used.

  39. jeffmcm says:

    The only thing wrong with the above post is that half of those sequels would get farmed out to European producers/directors. Uwe Boll, get ready (although some Italian would be the more likely fit).

  40. peteinportland says:

    I’m sorry, but 100 mill for BBM is a done deal. BBM will be somewhere in the 53-55 mill range by the time of Oscar noms. It will also expand very wide to over 2,000 theaters at some point after that. If as expected, it leads the Oscar noms, and is seen as the front runner, the movie will do anywhere from 30-40 mill in 2,000 plus theaters in the five weeks leading up to Oscar (especially as during that time the already taped Oprah show on BBM will air). If BBM wins Best Pic (looking likely) that will add more to the box office (definitely enough to put it over 100 mill and then some.
    And I won’t even start on other factors that will aid its steady box office march (success begating success, strong repeat viewing, strong word-of-mouth, continued press coverage of BBM as a cultural phenomenom). Nope, BBM has shown no signs of a sharp decline at this point (just the opposite), hasn’t opened as wide as it will, has yet to ride the Oscar nom/wins coat tails, and is still growing as a cultural phenomenom., and it will have close to 55 mill in the bank before any of those come to pass. NOT make 100 mill? You guys are joking, right?

  41. JBM... says:

    The unknown re-released film sounds a lot like The Italian Job (’03).

  42. Josh says:

    What movie ever made 50 million more from Oscar noms?

  43. DannyBoy says:

    I’m thinking the movie I remember that Miramax just kept flogging till it collapsed just the other side of 100 mil was Shakespeare in Love, which they kept in theaters and promoting till it hit $100,317,794. Seems like I also remember the “Scream 2” thing.
    I’d really like “Brokeback Mountain” to hit 100 mil, but I wouldn’t bet any money on it. Even if everything Peteinportland says happens, I’d say 80-90 tops, which is still cause for celebration and big fat bonuses for the wizards at Focus.

  44. Rufus Masters says:

    Everyone’s example of movies they keep in theatres to hit the 100 mark has the same ring to it. Each one is a Miramax movie.

  45. thelma says:

    Just like year, after nominations, Million Dollar Baby did more than $80M.
    The aviator did $48M. And we are talking just last year.

  46. MattM says:

    You have to remember release patterns. Nominations last year were announced on January 25. At that time, MDB was still at around 100 screens. It didn’t get access to the broader public until the weekend after. Here, before the nominations, Brokeback will have gone more than 10x that wide. Will it get a BP bump? Sure. But that’s not going to make it make 80M+ after nominations.
    (“Aviator” is a fairer comparison, though, but that was a “shove it hard” situation to get as far as it did with a bunch of big name stars involved in the film.)

  47. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    Paramount oddly rereleased The Italian Job in order to get it over $100mil. Also, i believe Vanilla Sky only just scraped over the $100mil line that year.
    I’m sure quite a few movies have made money after Oscar nods. TITANIC!! But scratching that one… Chicago? That grossed $170mi, surely it wasn’t up to $120mil by Oscar nominations in that year.
    Hoodwinked falling 11% – whod’ve thunk it.
    BTW, Brokeback has made more than $1.2mil overseas. It’s opened in Britain, France, Spain and a whole bunch of other places. Didn’t it make $6mil in UK? I think that’s what I read. It opens here in 3 days. YAY!
    But it definitely does seem like BBM will be the second highest grossing nominee and that’s a good sign.
    Can Uwe Boll direct Hostel 2. He’s a sure-fire way to kill a franchise.

  48. palmtree says:

    $1.2 mil refers to Spain alone I believe. It was also the top film in Taiwan, Ang Lee’s stomping grounds.
    Just wait til we get the next generation of tired horror films – Hostel vs. Saw: Sick, Sicker, Sickest!

  49. Bruce says:

    You mean Boll isn’t signed for Hostel 2 yet?

  50. James Leer says:

    If “Walk the Line” doesn’t get a Best Pic nom (and it’s definitely presumed to be fighting for that fifth slot), “Brokeback” could actually be the highest-grossing Best Pic contender. Which would be fun for Roger Friedman.

  51. Josh says:

    It’ll get a nice bump at the box office but 50-80 million??? That I seriously doubt. It will have been playing and been seen by most of its primary target audience. Who else they going to get in the theatre? A significant bump like that would be huge.

  52. MattM says:

    “Crash” would also have to be out in order for Brokeback to be the leading grosser (or Brokeback would have to do 13M in gross over the next 8 days).

  53. Rufus Masters says:

    I can’t see how “Walk the Line” won’t slide in to a spot on the top 5 list. Especially with thw two actors being odds on favorites and the movie winning a Globe for Best Picture.

  54. palmtree says:

    I think 13 million in 8 days is within the realm of possibility for Brokeback. While the target audience has seen it, one key besides finding new audiences is repeat viewers. I remember the thrill of Crouching Tiger and then going again and again to introduce more people to it.

  55. Lynn says:

    My 62 year old father went with my mom to see Brokeback Mountain. He’s not a religious guy, but he has, in the past, thought that gay things are…well, let’s go with “not appealing.” (We saw the play “The Fifth of July about 10 years ago, and the one kiss in it pretty much wigged him out.)
    That he voluntarily went to see Brokeback… and says it was a good movie — I mean, “astonished” is not the word. I’d have been slightly less surprised if he told me he’d taken a skydiving lesson.
    I guess I’m impressed with his ability to change his mind about something after 60+ years, but I can also see, at least in part, that it’s probably been something of a slow evolution for him over the past decade, generated from a lot of different sources, both media and personal.
    I would not argue that his reaction represents anything more than his reaction, but damn, still. If it was a multiple choice test about what he did last weekend, I’d still have picked skydiving over the gay cowboys.
    FWIW, they also live in the rather conservative (though less than it used to be) Orange County, California. The movie’s been open here since before Christmas. They went to a matinee last weekend and it was full — with women outnumbering men about 5 or 6 to 1.

  56. PandaBear says:

    It is the Oscar front runner. Getting awards by the bushel. Obviously it is going to sell out theatres. Especially in limited release. If it didn’t we’d be talking about how much of a dog it is right now.

  57. Mark Ziegler says:

    No matter what goes on with it and how much buzz it gets or how many awards its nominated for, BBM is still going to be a hard sell. Even if it gets 10 nominations, who that has wanted to see it hasn’t yet? They may pick up a few million. But 50 million? This movie is not going to build like Titanic around the country. They should be real happy with the numbers they have now. It’s a success financially. Anything more than this is gravy for them.

  58. Angelus21 says:

    I don’t see why BBM wouldn’t expand big now. They have everything on their side. They’re going to have to do it eventually. Now seems like the best time.

  59. Mark Ziegler says:

    What they’ve done to “A New World” in regards to makreting has been terrible. After this week you can pretty much stick a fork in this movie. They only have themselves to blame. Malick is a tough sell but you got big stars and a famous story and an up and coming star to sell. And they’ve done nothing for it.

  60. Fades To Black says:

    I caught “New World” over the weekend. Didn’t see the old cut so I can’t reall compare it to anything. It’s challenging and moves slow. But it is so well shot. It is not a crowd pleaser. If they wanted that kind of movie they should have avoided Malick as the director.

  61. jeffmcm says:

    It was always Malick’s project. If not for Malick, there would have been no script, no Colin Farrell attached to it, no Q’orianka Kilcher. New Line knew exactly what they were getting into when they greenlit the film.

  62. Chucky in Jersey says:

    The weekend wasn’t slow in the great Garden State.
    Saturday, Voorhees — Long box office lines thanks to “Brokeback” and upmarket titles. “Mrs. Henderson Presents” (kind of nice if a bit overdone) drew 100+ to a 5 PM show.
    Sunday, Clifton — Long box office lines thanks to “Brokeback” and other titles. “Match Point” drew 100+ to a late-afternoon show opposite the NFL playoffs.
    Sunday night, Mountainside (on the way home from Clifton) — Parking lot almost as full as a Saturday night thanks to “Brokeback”.
    There’s no stopping “Brokeback” now. It officially goes wide next weekend and wider after the Oscar nominations. Oscar Night is one week later due to the Winter Olympics (not one month as hepwa said).

  63. Bruce says:

    Did you check out every theatre in Jersey for the lines and the parking lots or just those? The old school way to do market research.

  64. James Leer says:

    “The New World” was a negative pickup for New Line.

  65. Hopscotch says:

    You are correct about that James Leer.
    Lynn, I have a similar father experience. For the last three years or so my dad and I do a spreadsheet right before Oscar Noms are announced, each of us have our picks, the person with smaller amount pays the other. And we do it again during the awards.
    But my dad this year is lowballing on Brokeback, he thinks it’ll get a couple of nods, but none of the big stuff. Reason: probably is having a hard time convincing himself that it might actually be a good movie and the front-runner. He still think Syrianna is in the running. Sorry pops.

  66. Hopscotch says:

    Btw, I think BBM has a shot at getting to $100M, but that’s still a fight. A long fight. And I was actually thinking it was going to do better this weekend, I thought it’d finish #2. I’m sure the notion that it’ll hit really big after the oscar nods are announced is true. But you can’t deny there’s a contingency that just aren’t going to see the movie.

  67. palmtree says:

    Brokeback still hasn’t really even gone wide (1200 isn’t really close to today’s standard of 2500-3500). When Million Dollar Baby expanded, it did it in one shot from 147 to 2010. Brokeback’s graduated expansion is working for now, and it still could more than double its theater count. That says to me it has at least 30 million more left to earn.

  68. Sanchez says:

    Your Pops is saying it won’t get any of the big ones? If we wants to compete he really has to get over it. It is assured of nod’s in at least 5 off the top of my head. Pic, Dir, Actor, Supp Actress and Screenplay. Whether it wins or not is anyones guess. Tell him to play it safe and write it in.

  69. Hopscotch says:

    I’ve tried Sanchez. But at the same time this is a betting game between the two of us, it’s more money for me when it’s all said and done if he thinks Brokeback is going to come up short and it doesn’t. Dad thinks that Walk the Line will get the most nods and become front-runner status.
    I’m still holding on to a Munich comeback, but I probably should let that go too.

  70. PandaBear says:

    New Line only has itself to blame for New World. They knew it could make less than 20 because of Malick. They were chasing prestige and Oscar. I can’t blame them because we’re all better for it as film fans but I’m not a stockholder or an exec there. Not going to look good on the bottom line.

  71. jeffmcm says:

    I don’t think there’s a lot of blame going on. They can use their Final Destination 3 profits to cover The New World, and New World’s $25m budget was a pretty small gamble.

  72. Rufus Masters says:

    Watch King Kong get the most nom’s. Half based on the great tech and sound work. If it can sneak in a Director, maybe a Picture, maybe a screenplay, then watch out.

  73. Fades To Black says:

    If there are any movies that don’t deserve to make a profit it’s the Final Destination series.
    Justice needs to be served.

  74. jeffmcm says:

    I actually like the first one quite a bit. It’s better than, say, Hostel or the original Underworld. The second one, not so much.

  75. waterbucket says:

    Have I told you guys lately that I love Brokeback Mountain?
    Well, then here it is. I love Brokeback Mountain! Woohoo!

  76. palmtree says:

    What’s worse is The New World has little to no heat in awards…if it can pick up a few noms then the gamble might pay off. As of right now, it appears as though New Line, ensconced in the Rings and Wedding Crashers, has forgotten how to sell to the arthouse prestige audience.

  77. palmtree says:

    I mean, they didn’t forget…they never knew, they just thought they did after Rings.

  78. jeffmcm says:

    That sounds completely correct. The New Line marketeers are best at the Final Destinations and Nightmare on Elm Streets.

  79. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    All I have to say is – New Line’s trailer for TCM’03 was probably the best trailer i’ve ever seen. They sure can market genre titles. The Final Destination movies are sorta fun – nothing more than silly kids being killed with wacky ways. Better than “Saw”.
    I haven’t seen “The New World” but I’d love for it to pick up something like a cinematography nomination. The look of it at least is fantastic.
    Rufus, I highly doubt it’ll get that many noms. I see it getting maybe 5 or 6. BBM is probably gonna lead with 9 nominations. Pic, Dir, Act, Supp Actress, Adapt. Screenplay, Cinematography, Editing (posthumus nominations are always good as gold), Score and possibly supporting actor – however, I could totally see them leaving Jake G off their list.
    I forgot about Crash when it came to nominee grosses. But remember when the advertisers for Cinderella Man claimed it was the year’s highest grossing drama, yet that wasn’t true. That was funny.

  80. LesterFreed says:

    “Saw” was much better than any ‘Final Destination’ movies. At least that had me on the edge of my seat. Unlike ‘Final Destination’ where I was staring at my watch.

  81. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    Oh trust me, I have not belief that the Final Destination movies are good movies, but i sorta had fun with them. It’s not like you can take it at all seriously.

  82. Hopscotch says:

    I know from a reliable source that the New World was a Negative Pickup…but the budget was more like $40M. And it finished shooting LAST October, so Malick’s been at the editing bay for over a solid year. There’s a rumor that Colin Farrell checked into rehab just so he didn’t have to do press for it.
    New Line can be very hit or miss. I personally think the teaser trailer for Austin Powers 2, was one of the best ever. Got everyone excited about it.

  83. Josh says:

    I like New Line. They take chances. Go out of the box. And churn out some good films. They have their misses but who doesn’t?

  84. Angelus21 says:

    40 million for a Malick movie is quite a sum. You are hoping and expecting Academy nods when you do that.

  85. jeffmcm says:

    The Thin Red Line was in editing for about a full year, so The New World being in the same situation is not big surprise.
    Likewise, TTRL grossed about $82m worldwide and got 7 nominations, so a production budget of $40 probably didn’t seem like a big problem. Maybe they’re disappointed now, but oh well.

  86. Hopscotch says:

    And that was a war film with a stellar, stellar cast. This is a romantic fable about Pocohontas and John Smith, I’m sure they knew it wouldn’t be as far reaching.
    I respected the movie, and like it to an extent. I was never bored, per say, but knew full well while watching that this movie’s length was not equivalent with it’s story.

  87. Mark Ziegler says:

    Oh well? I don’t think “Oh well” works with investors and moneymen and stockholders. I feel for the exec that walks into that meeting and throws out the “Oh well”.

  88. joefitz84 says:

    Thin Red Line was a war movie with an A list cast, based on an all time best selling book. An easier sell than a Pocahontas story that they are obviously downplaying. Not once have I heard that even said in an ad. Anywhere. They pushed Red Line more than New World. Maybe they got lucky that it came out against Private Ryan and the comparisons helped it. It also had the curiosity factor going for it. Is Malick still alive? Can he still direct? Where the heck was he?

  89. jeffmcm says:

    Well, Mark, I bless my stars that I don’t have to deal with moneymen and stockholders, whose input typically does not result in good movies. I don’t think the New Line execs are losing a lot of sleep over The New World. ‘Oh well’ means that the public isn’t responding to it despite the fact that it’s a great movie. It’s not like that’s never happened before.

  90. Rufus Masters says:

    No Oscar buzz for “The New World” is most troubling of all. It is almost like they are dumping it before it even started.

  91. waterbucket says:

    If “The New World” had been about a forbidden love story between John Rolfe and John Smith, I’d be willing to give it some Oscar Buzz.

  92. Hopscotch says:


  93. jeffmcm says:

    I think there are enough sex films out there with Colin Farrell right now.

  94. DannyBoy says:

    That’s right, Jeff, and a man-lovin’ Colin Farrell certainly didn’t give “A Home at the End of the World” or “Alexander” any Oscar traction. Now if he’d been in a cowboy hat…

  95. waterbucket says:

    Well, neither “Home” nor “Alexander” was very good. Well, “Home” has some good things in it but nowhere close to the quality of the book. I’m gay but a gay movie has to be really good for me to get behind it. Like my Brokeback baby!

  96. Sanchez says:

    What movie has Farrel done that has been a box office success? It’s like Hollywood annointed him a King because he has some apparent chops, good looks and makes some headlines.

  97. jeffmcm says:

    Worldwide grosses:
    The Recruit $101m
    Daredevil $179
    Phone Booth $98
    SWAT $208
    Alexander $168
    Granted he’s no Tom Cruise, and a lot of these are ensemble movies, but he’s not exactly box-office poison as I think Sanchez is suggesting.

  98. DannyBoy says:

    I heard the studio basically put a gun the the “Home” makers and forced them to cut the edge off of it (and the heart out of it). The writer says it was a much better film in the director’s cut. Maybe a film truer to the book would have been a “Brokeback Mountain” style breakthrough. As it was, the studio had them betray the material for profits, and it still didn’t make any profits.

  99. waterbucket says:

    Hey, why am I asked to share my email address? Is this a new thing?

  100. jeffmcm says:

    Maybe it’s some new security thing. Maybe Dave Poland wants to be able to track people down. Or maybe he’s submitting to a Justice Department subpoena.

  101. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    Maybe its a new security thing?
    I like that Colin is trying to go more serious. Sure Alexander and Home failed, and well so has The New World – but at least The New World is perceived as a good movie!
    I’m sure the people at New Line are too busy rolling around in their piles of cash from LOTR and Wedding Crashers still to worry about losing $20mil or so from The New World when you get world wide grosses and dvd into there.

  102. jeffmcm says:

    What’s more annoying about being asked about one’s email address, is being asked to share one’s email address EVERY TIME you make a comment.

  103. James Leer says:

    Well, it’s just one more click.
    I understand (I think) the reasoning behind it and am all for it, except that really, you can just input any email address — even make one up — and it doesn’t really matter, does it?

  104. BluStealer says:

    It’s one button. One.

  105. Kambei says:

    Just saw The New World last night. It’s a shame that movie didn’t catch on with the public or awards. I realise i’m taking my on-line life into my own hands, but in some of those magical montage sequences with Smith & Pocahontas, i thought it captured the “whoosh” of falling in love so much better than BM. Although I admit it is probably very very slow for the majority of tastes.

  106. waterbucket says:

    Oh no Kambei, you just di’n’t.

  107. frankbooth says:

    Joe said:
    “Klady says: “Brokeback added about 500 playdates and moved up to fifth position and a gross of more than $41 million. As with last year’s Million Dollar Baby, the cowboy yarn is on track to gross $100 million should it wind up with the Academy’s top prize.”
    I can’t begin to tell you how happy it makes me to know how much that news will piss off some of the people on this blog.”
    You know, of course, that if it hits 100 mil they’ll just downplay it by comparing it to blockbusters that cost ten times as much to make, regardless of the actual profit margin. “It didn’t make as much as Narnia. This proves that family values rule!” I remember when the exact same thing happened with Farenheit 9/11. First they said it would fall off the radar after one weekend. When that didn’t happen, they crowed that it didn’t make as much as Spiderman. Slip, slide and squirm. It’s like wrestling with Gollum.

  108. jeffmcm says:

    I can’t consider a movie where a lion eats a woman’s face off to have good, wholesome family values.

  109. DannyBoy says:

    Didn’t Dave actually say something along the lines of: “if you guys think ‘Brokeback Mountain’ is going to gross 100 million, you’re delusional?” (It must sting even more knowing that it will wind up with almost double ‘Munich’s’ take.) Oh, well. I thought there was something wrong with considering a movie a front runner before it was even finished (I remember “Always” and “Empire of the Sun”), or one dead in the water based upon my own personal opinion of it. As I’ve said before, I never would have guessed “Million Dollar Baby” was BP material, and I thought “King Kong” would wind up with a good 350 mil. That’s the trouble with going too much by one’s own reaction to something and ignoring the rest of the world’s reaction…

  110. Hopscotch says:

    $100M for BBM is a very far way to go. I think it could get there, but it’ll be awhile at this pace. The best thing going for it is lack of competition. Anything coming out in February you are dying to see?

  111. DannyBoy says:

    I thing you underestimate the juggernaut that is… “Failure to Launch.”
    And what about the due-any-day “Brokeback Mountain” backlash? Once that backlash hits, it’s all over for the gay cowboys! 😉

  112. Richard Nash says:

    100$ million for Brokeback Mountain? That’s delusional. The film hasn’t even opened wide yet and you’re assuming all these numbers. Why not shoot for 200$ million while you’re at it? Worlwide of 500$. It’s the new Lord of the Rings.

  113. jeffmcm says:

    As if on cue, Dannyboy.

  114. waterbucket says:

    Let’s not get ahead of ourselves, guys. BBM will do fine but I’m not sure aobut the $100 mil number.
    Anyway, just want to let all my fellow Brokeback fans, including Dave Poland, that the cast will be on Oprah this Friday. Watch it or DIE!!!

  115. frankbooth says:

    “I can’t consider a movie where a lion eats a woman’s face off to have good, wholesome family values.”
    If her nipples aren’t showing and she doesn’t say any dirty words before getting munched, no problem.

  116. Fades To Black says:

    Who watches Oprah besides middle aged women? The only thing of Oprah I have ever seen is the Tom Cruise video. If it’s like that maybe I’ll tune in.

  117. Hopscotch says:

    Well Fades-to-Black, it’s middle aged women who Brokeback Mountain is gunning for. That’s the demographic I’m sure this movie appeals to.
    Good Will Hunting did this brilliantly in 1997, and I know public awareness of it spiked dramatically after young-Ben and young-Matt talked with Lady O.

  118. jeffmcm says:

    And then Ben and Matt won an Oscar because they were so cute together, which I’m sure the PR people are still hoping for with Heath and Michelle (takes the gay out of the movie a little, too, to have a nice hetero couple promoting the movie).
    Frankbooth: actually, if her nipples show and she says dirty words, it’s actually better, because then she’s being punished and we can all feel better about ourselves. Right?

  119. Rufus Masters says:

    They didn’t win an Oscar for Good Will Hunting because they were cute together. They won it because it was the best written movie that year.

  120. DannyBoy says:

    I personally have doubted that BM will make $100 as I’ve said here many times, but now that “Time” (or was it “Newsweek”?) is claiming it has a real chance–sorry Nash, I consider them better authorities than you–I’m thinking it’s possible. After all, it will be more than halfway there before the Oscar nominations come out, and if YOU don’t think it’s going to be up for a s***load of nominations next week, followed by some major wins in March, which will really boost its numbers, then YOUR delusional.
    Just saw “The New World” last night–along with three other people in the huge auditorium. Magnificent. Some people should be fired for botching that release, as far as I’m concerned. The poster makes the film look like a cheap Harlequen romance novel, no one seems to have taken advantage of the large Native American cast in terms of promotion. THEY could have all gone on Oprah… In a somewhat weak year for Oscar-bait movies, it could have been the other big contender next to BM–there’s no reason that film should be so sidelined. I hope it at least gets nods for cinematography, sound, editing, costumes, actress (still a slight chance to pull a “Whale Rider” there.)

  121. DannyBoy says:

    That should have been: “YOU’RE delusional.”

  122. Hopscotch says:

    Good Will Hunting is better written than Boogie Nights? Wag the Dog? LA Confidential?
    It’s cool if you think this is true, but remember:
    “It’s not your fault”
    “it’s not your fault”

  123. jeffmcm says:

    To be fair, GWH was competing in Original Screenplay, not against LA Confidential which was adapted. The movies it beat were The Full Monty, Deconstructing Harry, As Good As It Gets, and Boogie Nights.
    Still: yes, Damon and Affleck won because they had a cute rags-to-riches-childhood-friends narrative to them. Oscar voters are sentimental.

  124. Angelus21 says:

    Let’s not compare anything to LA Confidential. A fabulous novel by one of the best writers out there. James Ellroy. Hegeland did some job getting that into a movie. I didn’t think it could be done. He’s just as talented.
    “I gotta see about a girl.”

  125. Hopscotch says:

    I liked when I saw Good Will Hunting the first time… when it was called “Ordinary People”.

  126. waterbucket says:

    “The greatest love story since Gone with the Wind and Titanic. This movie changed my life.”–Oprah
    Guess which movie she’s talking about! That’s right, Brokeback Mountain. Woohoo.

  127. jeffmcm says:

    Changed her life? Does this mean Steadman’s getting outed?

  128. steve4992 says:

    I’m curios. Where did you get the Oprah quote? Her show on BBM is being broadcast tomorrow–that is, Friday.
    Can you say “$100 million plus” at the box office? Whatever else that woman can do, she can deliver an audience.

  129. waterbucket says:

    Dear-o, my stevie-o, sorry for getting excited but the source of the quote might not be very credible to you. Apparently, someone who attended the taping posted it on web. Shady, huh? I’ll watch it tomorrow and let you know, unless you’ll also watch it too.
    That said, I can completely imagine Oprah saying it. She tends to make things, say, a little more dramatic than usual. But she did have a gay half-brother, Jeffrey Lee, who died of AIDS. Can’t believe I know that. I might as well go eat bon-bons and complain about my sex life. Al!!!

  130. steve4992 says:

    Al: Thanks for the info. It does sound like something Oprah would say. I’ll be at work tomorrow when her show is on, but I’m TIVOing it. Take care.

  131. waterbucket says:

    hehe, my name is not Al. I was channelling Peggy Bundy by calling out Al Bundy. Ill-fated attempt at humor there.

  132. bicycle bob says:

    good will hunting is much better than ordinary people. i can rewatch good will. i can’t do that with ordinary people. even though watching mary tyler moore go against type is great.

  133. Hopscotch says:

    Good Will Hunting is funnier, and more enjoyable. But the psychiatrist-patient relationship from that movie works so much better than Robin Williams throwing zingers and Matt Damon.

  134. Rufus Masters says:

    Judd Hirsch was born to play those roles. With Williams you saw something new. He brought something else to it. And Damon was a find. He has some chops as he’s proven. I like it better.

  135. Tcolors says:

    I saw the cast of Brokeback Mountain on Oprah (I’m embarassed to say). I really wanted to know what they would talk about. You know, the movie, the kissing scene, Heath and Michelle, all that stuff. Well, they did!?!?
    Anyhow, I just wonder what this will do for the movie, if anything. I went to Oprah’s web site and people are saying some wonderful things about the movie. Seems most comments are on the story itself. A few comments have been made on the film and director. Just wondering what’s next. It was a cool show though. Oprah and the audience seemed to love everything and everyone! Oprah at the end of the interview asked her viewers to go see the movie.
    Mathew Perry was on the show also. He has another movie coming out with “Media” as the lead character. Wonder how this one will do?

  136. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    Good Will Hunting was pleasant if not particularly spellbinding. Same as Ordinary People – at least that one had some knock-out performances from Mary Tyler Moore and Timothy Hutton.
    BBM still has over $50mil to make to get to $100. Let’s see how it goes next weekend.

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