MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Sunday Estimates By klady

3-Day Estimates / Weekend / % Change / Cume
When a Stranger Calls / 22.2 / – / 22.2
Big Momma’s House / 13.1 / -53% / 45.2
Nanny McPhee / 9.9 / -32% / 26.6
Brokeback Mountain / 6.3 / -3% / 60.4
Hoodwinked / 5.2 / -30% / 44
Underworld: Evolution / 5.1 / -55% / 52.7
Something New / 4.9 / – / 4.9
Annapolis / 3.5 / -55% / 12.9
Walk the Line / 3.4 / 11% / 110.7
Glory Road / 3.0 / -43% / 39

Be Sociable, Share!

184 Responses to “Sunday Estimates By klady”

  1. waterbucket says:

    I love BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN so much!!!
    Nice rebound on Saturday.
    PS. My roommate and I are betting when I’ll be banned from here for my continued inclination to delare how much I love Brokeback. Woohoo. Brokeback got me good!

  2. James Leer says:

    Waterbucket, I liked Brokeback too, but don’t you have any more notes in your repertoire? Intentionally baiting DP does a disservice to the people here that are trying to carry on a discussion.
    Don’t want to dis you, just want to see more out of you.

  3. waterbucket says:

    Fine, if you want me to be serious and all.
    I think Brokeback is the type of movie that people don’t wait until the weekend to see, as we can see from its healthy weekdays number. It’s also the type of movie that I know many people are embarrassed to see in the theater for fear of being identified as gay or a gay supporter.
    If you’re a single, straight guy who goes to see this movie alone, don’t tell me that you’re not a little concious about it.
    Brokeback may or may not get to $100 mil but I can guarantee that it will be huge on DVDs when people finally get to see it in the privacy of their own home.

  4. joefitz84 says:

    I’ll say this. BBM’s box office take is a disappointment. With all the hype, buzz, and awards/nominations it has received and to not break 70 million? Disappointment.

  5. Crow T Robot says:

    Waterbucket? More like cold shower. heh heh.
    (I saw BM alone. I did feel weird. The theater was filled with 60-year-old women!)

  6. James Leer says:

    Uh, Joe, it’ll break $70 million.

  7. EDouglas says:

    Hey…what the hell? Showbizdata/ERC has Stranger Calls making $19.6 million by Saturday… they expect it to only make $2.5 million today cause of the Super Bowl?

  8. Spacesheik says:

    WALK THE LINE…$110 million. Not bad for a movie that got dicked awards time.
    People spent $3.5 million worth of tickets to see ANNAPOLIS? What in the hell were they smoking?
    For a CGI flick that looks like something out of DIRE STRAITS “Money for Nothing” video, HOODWINK’S $44 million ain’t bad.
    WHEN A STRANGER CALLS making $22 million if not less, the movie is bound to top out at $50 million. It is doubtful Simon West (CON AIR) will graduate again to the Big Leagues and direct the next Bruckheimer “running away from a fireball” stupid action epic.

  9. Tcolors says:

    If Crash were to win best pic at the Oscars? It would be a little ironic that a movie whose message is for racial tolerance and an end to prejudices, my have won due to those things. Now it’s only an article but it’s food for thought on the Oscar race. LA Weekly article by Nikki Finke;

  10. Lota says:

    Nikki Finke doesn’t write food for thought, she writes bile for thought. I usually need an anti-hate-imine after reading her stuff.

  11. Rufus Masters says:

    Glory Road only at 40 million. Josh Lucas might not be a star.

  12. waterbucket says:

    Wow, different sites have really different estimates.

  13. Tcolors says:

    lol with Lota! I don’t know who this woman (Nikki)is, but her article came up on my email and I read it. The first thought that crossed my mind was Who is she, and how does she get this info? Oh, and if it’s true, why would people tell her?
    Instead of “Food for thought” maybe I should have said “Grain of salt”. That’s how I took her article.

  14. steve4992 says:

    A couple of things about the LA Times article.
    First, AMPAS has over 6,000 members. How could the author possibly know which movies the members have or have not seen? Did she poll them? She’s just like Tom O’Neil and other so-called journalists who say that AMPAS thinks this or that about the Oscar race. They probably just call up the three or four people they know in AMPAS and ask them what they think.
    Second, the author is obviously completely oblivious to the fact the SAG best cast award is not a best picture award. And as we all know, the SAG best cast award has not been an accurate predictor of the BP Oscar–since SAG started giving the best cast award, 60% of the movies that have won the BP Oscar have failed to win the SAG best cast award.

  15. Josh says:

    Finke is a hack who just likes to grab attention to herself. Making up facts. When did the Academy become a conservative bastion? Give me a freakin’ break here.

  16. jeffmcm says:

    Joefitz, did you actually write that comment up there or did someone hijack your ID and write a parody of you? I seem to recall several weeks ago you (or someone agreeing with you) positive that the movie would never hit $40m. Even if it makes $100m, you’ll say that it should have made Forrest Gump numbers.

  17. Stella's Boy says:

    Back at the end of December (Do You Want Fries To Go With That Hype?), a few people around here predicted that it would never make $50 million or that it would be lucky to do half as well as Napoleon Dynamite. I guess the standard for success keeps changing. Certain people just can’t admit that it’s done extremely well and far better than anyone ever expected.

  18. joefitz84 says:

    Depends what your idea of a success is. With all that it had going for it and all the positive press and the BBM fan clubs I expected more after it opened and went wide. You didn’t? BBM fans didn’t? I read here last week from numerous people claiming it was a lock to hit 100 mill$. Now it’ll barely creep to 70 mill$. Big difference, right?? What film that makes 70 are we ever saying is a success? I’d say it was a successful disappointment. If it wins Best picture it may take the shine off its box office numbers.

  19. Stella's Boy says:

    My idea of success? When a $12 million movie about the relationship between two male cowboys makes $70 million (and quite possibly more). There isn’t a doubt in my mind. That is success. joe, what did you honestly expect BBM to make back in October, or even November and December? No way in hell it was anywhere close to $60 million.

  20. jeffmcm says:

    It won’t ‘barely creep’ to $70m. It’s at $60m right now, in the top 5, with a month before the Oscars.
    The phrase ‘take the shine off’ means exactly the opposite of what you think it means.
    Why don’t you just admit you’re never going to be satisfied with this movie and move on…Have you even seen it?

  21. Blackcloud says:

    I thought that if BBM did as much in its lifetime as Sith did on its opening day, that would be a success. It’s topped that.

  22. Tcolors says:

    BBM cost 14 million to make. BBM has made over 59 million so far. BBM has stirred more press, awards, top tens, blogs, and more internet activity than any other movie this year. The last two internet activity and blogs I got from Variety Magazine. What more should it do? It’s beyond money, it’s beyond awards, it has moved a Nation, one way or the other. I think it’s done more than anyone expected but not as much as some may hope. Might I add “Hope Springs Eternal”

  23. Bruce says:

    Now the expectations for Brokeback get a little smaller. From over 100 to whatever it comes to. You can spin it anyway you want I guess. But you have to be worried about its best picture chances now. It’s not lapping the field anymore. A little of the shine is off it. Making it a more interesting race.

  24. steve4992 says:

    “Now the expectations for Brokeback get a little smaller. From over 100 to whatever it comes to. You can spin it anyway you want I guess. But you have to be worried about its best picture chances now. It’s not lapping the field anymore. A little of the shine is off it. Making it a more interesting race.”
    Let’s see. More Oscar noms than any other film, DGA, PGA, WGA, Golden Globes for best pic drama, director and script, plus more critics’ awards for best pic and director than all of the other Oscar BP nominees put together and multiplied by 3, plus more box office grosses than any other BP nominee. I’m sure the BBM producers are really worried about its best picture chances at this point.

  25. Fades To Black says:

    After reading that article, maybe they should be worried. The ball could bounce in funny ways as they say.
    I like my STRANGER call. I like being right on.

  26. martin says:

    BBM may not hit $100 mill., but chances of it NOT winning the Oscar for Picture are about nil. Can’t think of a less exciting race since Titanic. Not sure if BBM is the most “liked” movie of the year, but it is the “best picture”. Acting categories are where any interest will be this awards season. And my guess is that viewership will be very low, despite Jon Stewart.

  27. jeffmcm says:

    What wonderful contortions of logic. True, a week or two ago some very enthusiastic people were talking about Brokeback hitting $100m, which it may or may not do.
    But that’s conveniently forgetting the several people who insisted that it would top out at $20m. Then it would never make it beyond $40. Then only the biggest optimists would claim that a gay cowboy movie could get to $60.
    We can all remember what you said in the past. You’re just making yourself look foolish.

  28. steve4992 says:

    “The ball could bounce in funny ways as they say.”
    Not that funny. Since they began giving the DGA 57 years ago, no movie with this much support in the precursors has EVER lost the BP Oscar. Dream on if you want to, but BBM ain’t gonna lose this.

  29. waterbucket says:

    14-3? Yikes. The Seahawks need to get a grip. If the Seahawks lose, I’m gonna blame it on Dave Poland! =p

  30. DannyBoy says:

    Let’s face it, if

  31. Fades To Black says:

    Danny Boy,
    It seems like you want to have people come out and say they hate the movie for homophobic reasons. Over and over you have said it. But not one person has ever said that here. And no one out in the real world has said it either. Why do you seem to want it that bad? Are you expecting it and you’re disappointed it hasn’t happend yet?

  32. tjfar67 says:

    wow, according to klady the top five is as follows:
    1 The Rundown 18,533,765
    2 Under the Tuscan Sun 9,751,425
    3 Underworld 9,418,606
    4 Secondhand Lions 8,258,330
    5 The Fighting Temptations 6,388,472
    these movies seem to holding up pretty well since they came out about 2 1/2 years ago.
    Take that BBM!!!

  33. joefitz84 says:

    Some people said it wouldn’t hit 50 million while some said it would hit 100 million. Who’s right? Who’s wrong? WHo cares? Predictions are not always exact. You have to live in the now. And the right now for BBM is most are going to look at its domestic box office as a disappointment. With everything in its favor and it not coming thru. I think they should be very enthused about getting to 70 million. But after hearing about the per screen average and how hot it is and how successful its doing in middle america and how many awards its won and how much talk there is about it and how it is changing peoples lives, forgive me if I’m not doing backflips.

  34. waterbucket says:

    The Seahawks lost! Darn you Dave Poland, must you take away all the joy in my life???
    What’s next? No gold for Michelle Kwan? Argh. =O

  35. Tcolors says:

    It’s possible that BBM won’t get the Oscar, but that’s always been the case. It’s possible Munich, Crash, or (insert Movie title here) won’t get the Oscar. It won’t change what any of these movies mean to any of us. Everything else is just conjecture.
    DannyBoy hit the nail on the head with the comment of “the ideology that they’re part of a superior group of people”. I’ve looked at these people (cause I have the internet) and I don’t like what I have seen. Christian groups looking more like hate mongers, Journalist looking like homophobic buffoons, and the readers thinking there…….well words escape me right now, but you get the gist (lol).
    I liked the idea someone had for a sequal to Brokeback Mountain. It went something like Jack didn’t really die. He faked his death (ala Elvis) and is on Brokeback Mountain where Ennis joins him and they live happily ever after. But until that movie comes out, the Oscar will do… well, that and 100 MILLION AT THE BOX OFFICE! I say that with my pinky to the corner of my mouth! (evil)

  36. Tcolors says:

    Your forgiven.

  37. starryeyedcapricorn says:

    Here’s the thing about Brokeback’s weekend performance that no one, even DP, is not keeping in mind. It’s funny how often Poland argues for perspective, but then conveniently forgets perspective when he wants to make a point.
    Yes, BBM appears to be leveling off as it expands, with its lowest per-screen to date in two months of release. But ALL of the Best Picture noms expanded pretty significantly this weekend, and BBM still has a higher per-screen than any of them. In fact, among any of the major nom contenders, only Transamerica has a higher per-screen, but that’s because it’s still playing on a relatively small number of screens. (Match Point too if you consider Original Screenplay a major nomination, but again, way smaller number of overall screens.)
    So the question isn’t “Is BBM underperforming?” It’s clear the movie has far exceeded anyone’s wildest expectations. Seriously, arguing otherwise is just dumb. The real question is did Focus lose an opportunity to capitalize on the window between Golden Globes and Oscar noms–a relevant question that studios should be asking now that the calendar for awards season has changed from years past.

  38. Melquiades says:

    jowfitz… what’s this $70M talk? It will pass $70M next week with 3 weeks until the Oscars.

  39. Joe Straat says:

    I only wish it was a better game. Both teams can play better than that. A win is a win, but the game won’t be legend….

  40. lawnorder says:

    Off topic — but I find it amusing how David gets his feathers ruffled when Variety or the mainstream press bunch MSN in with the Defamers and Drudges. Or when Patrick Goldstein treats him to some negative ink. For all the criticism and shots to the gut he delivers to filmmakers, he seems to have an awfully thin skin when it comes to himself. I liked HOSTEL, I didn’t love it, but I thought David’s personal attack on Eli Roth was uncalled for. I don’t know Eli, but I’m pretty sure someone alerted him to David’s attack piece. It must’ve hurt even a publicity seeking missile like Eli. Nobody lies to be trashed publicly. All I can say is, I sure hope David has no aspirations to ever get behind the camera or have his screenplays produced — I don’t think he could take the heat. Being a media pundit is a real safe place to operate from. It’s all about firing shots at filmmakers and executives, but very little heat personally comes your way. Everyone should be treated to a little taste of humility once in a while. I know David won’t see it from my perspective, but in my opinion, everytime he launches some indignant countermeasure, he comes off as a thin skinned child. Suck it up and keep doing what you do best: linking to interesting entertainment pieces. I find you too snarky as a critic of worth.

  41. Sanchez says:

    The Steelers. Anyone but the damn, terrible, ugly Steelers.
    –Bengal fan

  42. martindale says:

    No, I doubt that three months ago anyone thought this movie would be on track to make over $100 mil. But few also thought that it would be far and away the Best Picture frontrunner, so given that, why are the box office numbers surprising? In the last 10 years or so, Best Picture winners are locks to pass the $100 million mark.

  43. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    “Now it’ll barely creep to 70 mill$.”
    Yeah, as others have mentioned Joe, that is one of the most rediculous things I’ve heard on here. Say what you will about BBM fans being biased, but so are it’s haters such as yourself, if you’re going around making silly comments like that.
    And on the matter of the Oscars, why is it that when the Globe nominations came out everyone said “MUNICH CAN’T WIN BEST PICTURE NOW!!!” (er, because it wasn’t nominated for BP), yet nobody is saying now that Crash can’t win either. If you remember correctly, Crash didn’t receive a Best Picture Drama nomination from the Globes.
    Oh, but of course, BBM haters are too busy claiming it can’t win because it didn’t get a Best Editing nomination or whatever.
    Apparently no film will win Best Picture. BBM, GN&GL and Capote weren’t nominated for Best Editing and the only two that were, Crash and Munich, weren’t nominated for Best Picture at the Globes.
    If that’s not a blatant example of “well, anything can happen” then I don’t know what is.

  44. jeffmcm says:

    “Living in the now” is a convenient excuse for several people (or maybe just one) to justify their constant ramping-up of expectations for Brokeback. Like I said before: a week or two ago, people were laughing off the idea of Brokeback grossing $100m as ridiculous. Now they’re claiming that if it doesn’t reach that point, the film is and always was a disappointment. Fucking ridiculous.

  45. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    But it will always have outgrossed “Stealth”!

  46. Terence D says:

    BBM will go into the ceremony as the highest box office Best Picture nominee. Now that’s not saying much for the rest of the nominees and the box office of good films. But it is something.

  47. Josh says:

    You didn’t hear? Brokeback is the most successful movie of all time.

  48. LesterFreed says:

    Good to see Martin Lawrence back and making some money. Now if he’d only take some better roles and work with some better people I’d be even happier. “Big Momma 2” wasn’t even half bad. But I’m a big pro Martin guy.

  49. BluStealer says:

    Anyone else really disappointed in the commercials during the game last night? That’s the only reason I even watch it and they were nothing special.

  50. DannyBoy says:

    Fades, you write: “It seems like you want… people come out and say they hate the movie for homophobic reasons…. Why do you seem to want it that bad?”
    Well, maybe you’re right. If I do want it, it’s because homophobia is CLEARLY what’s behind so many of the comments being made here. Otherwise, why the hysterical posts trying to crap all over Brokeback Mountain’s success, trying to raise the bar of expectations, etc?
    Obviously, nobody nowadays would write: “I hate CRASH becasue it’s full of minorities, and I’m a big fat bigot!” But one can still tell when that’s pretty clearly fulling what otherwise is a completely unmotivated attack against something. And if you go back a few weeks, you will find posts calling Brokeback Mountain “Fudgpack Mountain” on this blog. True, people have gotten a bit more subtle in their homopohbia since then.
    If ya quack like a duck, I’m going to think you might be a duck, even if you never explicitly actually quack: “I’m a duck.”

  51. palmtree says:

    The truth comes out! Editors have long been the powerhouses in the industry. They can make and break careers with the slightest of jump cuts. Most have heard of the secret editor caucus which determines the outcome of Oscars. In fact, everyone who votes for Best Picture must first consult the editing nominations or else. And now their wrath has fallen on the unsuspecting Brokeback Mountain!
    Gimme a break.

  52. Wayman_Wong says:

    Speaking of ”perspective,” now that ”Brokeback Mountain” has hit $60 million and is playing in about 2,100 theaters, it might be a good time for some. Little more than a month ago, David Poland was writing pieces about ”How Might Brokeback Fall Back?” (Dec. 22) and ”It Ain’t Broke, But You Still Better Fix It.” He was telling Reuters: ”I think ‘Brokeback’ will suffer when it goes into a wider viewing.” On Dec. 25, Poland wrote: ”My Sept. number on ‘Brokeback’ was $20 million max. I am sure the film will get to $40 million now.” On Dec. 30, he added: ”I don’t think that BBM has to have that kind of success [that ‘Crouching Tiger’ had] to be a true phenom. Getting to the $60 million number would be stunning.”
    Not that Poland was the only one to underestimate ”Brokeback” back in September. On Sept. 9, Bicycle Bob wrote: ”I love movies and I’m not marking the calendar for this one. It’ll be lucky to make $20 million.” BluStealer said: ”What’s a decent run at the BO for this $20 million? I’d be very surprised if it got even close to $40 million.”
    More underestimations came in late December. On Dec. 25, Nicol D said: ”When it goes wide, it will not be a huge hit. I still say it will make around $40 million. Maybe more.” Joefitz84: ”If ‘Brokeback Mountain’ fails to hit $40 million, all the ax grinding will be right on. Because what [David Poland’s] axe grinding is just telling it like it is. Not getting the BBM fans hopes up.” And now Joefitz84 (on Feb. 5) says that if ”Brokeback” doesn’t reach $70 million, it’ll be ”a disappointment.” Well, so far, it’s on track to pass $70 million.
    Here are a couple more predictions from Jan. 2-3 on this Hot Blog. Bruce: I’ve seen the film. I thought it would do between $35-$50 million. I never thought that a movie that would probably struggle to get to $50 million would be deemed a huge success before it even opened wide.” Martin: ”I can’t imagine BBM doing over $50 mil. domestic, but even there it would be a nice financial success.” Sanchez: ”Anything less than $60 million at this point would be a failure for BBM.” Terence D: ”Everyone trying to say BBM is a hit and a success is delusional.”
    OK, call me delusional, but BMM has gotten rave reviews, won just about every major film award there is and is considered the front-runner for the Oscar. It’s also done better than anyone (even its fans) could’ve predicted at the box office, and it’s become part of the cultural landscape. If anyone still thinks this gay love story (made for $14 mil) isn’t some sort of ”hit and success,” I’m not the delusional one.

  53. steve4992 says:

    Million Dollar Baby’s production budget was $30 million (more than double the production budget for BBM), and M$B made $100,492,203, or $70,492,203 in excess of its production budget. Because of its lower production budget, BBM only has to make $84,492,203 to equal M$B’s numbers, and its already at $60,000,000–well ahead of where M$B was at this time last year ($34,436,002 as of this day last year). Not bad for a movie about two “gay cowboys”. Who’d ever have thought that BBM would do this well?

  54. Bruce says:

    I was 2 million off on my “When A Stranger Calls” prediction. Darn. People do love seeing horror movies.

  55. Hopscotch says:

    There was an article in The Washington Post last Thursday about the different interpretations of Brokeback Mountain, which are very similar to Million Dollar Baby last year. Essentially the question is: Does this movie have an agenda? Is this movie promoting being gay. And M$B last year prompted the same question: is this movie promoting euthenasia?
    Of course, this argument only makes sense to people who HAVEN’T seen these movies. Which drives me crazy, the media LOOKING for a contraversey.

  56. Terence D says:

    Media looks for a story. Any story. And BBM and homosexuality is a big one right now since the movie is a front runner for films biggest award.
    You would have to consider any film that garners a Best Picture nomination to be a success. Irregardless of box office or anything else.

  57. Bruce says:

    How anyone can sit thru a showing of Nanny McPhee I’ll never know. The pictures of her face and that makeup makes me want to puke. It’s scary to look at.

  58. jeffmcm says:

    Nice research, Wayman.
    Has anybody actually seen any new movies lately? Somebody must have seen When a Stranger Calls…right? Annapolis? McPhee?

  59. Mark Ziegler says:

    The question is who wants to see those. Not who’s seen them. Many people see two new movies every weekend. Doesn’t matter how it is or what it is.

  60. Stella's Boy says:

    I sat through Annapolis, but only because I got paid to do so. It’s terrible. I can see why the Navy said they don’t approve of it and had nothing to do with it.

  61. JBM... says:

    An F-grade horror film, a classic January dump, and…whatever the hell Nanny McPhee is? Not interested
    But I will see Firewall for the Hackers/Swordfish-style computer bullshit. And Running Scared to see what “Wayne Kramer + pure dopamine” really equals.

  62. joefitz84 says:

    I should feel proud my mid Dec prediction on BBM was followed by so many. I guess people aren’t reading what I’m writing so I’ll say it again for the cheap seats. Forget predictions. Some were wrong. Some were right. Doesn’t matter now. In the present many thought BBM would hit 100 million. Doesn’t look like that’s going to happen. That’s not to slight the film in any way. Obviously, its financially successful to a certain degree. But I read a lot of people here say it’s a 100 mill movie. They have to be disappointed it didn’t catch on after it went wide.
    Truth be told they missed their window. I even said they should have went wide right after the Globes. To capitalize on the momentum and the good will. They blew that chance. And there hasn’t even been a backlash against the movie. That seems to be pissing some people off.
    So, relax and accept the box office and hope it does well in a month. But all the stories I’m starting to read about how no Academy member is seeing the movie would scare me a little.

  63. Hopscotch says:

    $100M is very much in play joefitz. It’ll take one of those long, long term releases like a Million Dollar Baby, but it could get there. I write COULD, because it could easily not get there too. It’s the #4 movie in the country and it ain’t going anywhere.

  64. jeffmcm says:

    Joe, can you provide a link to these many multiple stories about “no Academy member is seeing the movie”? Did somebody do a survey?

  65. Angelus21 says:

    Success all depends on perspective. Was it profitable? Was the movie good? DId it receive notoriety? How was the buzz? Did it play across all markets? Will there be sequels? Is it a water cooler type movie? WIll people be talking about it years from now?
    From a lot of perspectives you can argue that Brokeback is more than successful. Which is a credit to Focus and the movie itself.

  66. joefitz84 says:

    February 5, 2006 — NOTE to “Brokeback Mountain” director Ang Lee: Not everyone thinks you’re the hottest thing around. Silver screen legend Tony Curtis told Fox News’ Bill McCuddy he hasn’t seen the heavily Oscar-nominated picture and probably won’t. And he says the same is true for other Academy members. Why? “This picture is not as important as we make it. It’s nothing unique. The only thing unique about it is they put it on the screen. And they make ’em [male gay lovers] cowboys.” Waving his finger cautiously, Curtis added, “Howard Hughes and John Wayne wouldn’t like it.” For the record, his favorite movie of the year? “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.”

  67. jeffmcm says:

    Okay, so your “all the stories I’m starting to read” is one old guy talking to the New York Post. In other words, an insubstantial story in a disreputable newspaper.

  68. Chucky in Jersey says:

    Box Office Mojo has highlighted on its home page today this story:
    Best Picture Blues
    The Academy nominated the least popular crop of Best Picture nominees on record …
    Two typical Oscar Bait movies re-released last week, two others in theaters before then, the fifth already out on DVD. That tells me:
    (1) An indictment of Hollywood’s reliance on franchises, remakes and sequels
    (2) Academy types up to their usual narrow-minded ways
    I look for the two re-releases to wind down their theatrical run quickly. They come out on DVD 9 days after Oscar Night.

  69. Richard Nash says:

    That is one of the problems with Brokeback Mountain. People seeing it and then voting for it. It is not a lock as everyone thinks. Astute analysts are quietly moving Crash up their ballots and into the top slots.

  70. DannyBoy says:

    Joefitz says: “In the present many thought BBM would hit 100 million…” You’re giving me a headache, Joe. How can it be ‘in the present’ if you’re using the past tense of the verb ‘to think’? I think you’re floundering, buddy.
    As for that silly Post piece with Tony Curtis, I can think of a bunch of Academy Members who surely would say how great it is that a gay film is up for best picture and that they would have no problem voting for it:
    James Ivory
    John Waters
    Jeffrey Friedman
    Rob Epstein
    Mike Nichols
    Robert Altman
    Larry Kramer
    Arthur Dong
    Shirley McLane
    Elizabeth Taylor
    Susan Surrandon
    Meryl Streep
    Elton John
    should I go on?

  71. jeffmcm says:

    Tony Curtis will most likely be voting for Crash. It’s the oldest-fashioned, most comfortable and soothing movie of the five nominated, because it says things that exciting to liberals about thirty years ago.
    This is a good quote that I don’t even understand: “That is one of the problems with Brokeback Mountain. People seeing it and then voting for it”. The only problem I see with that idea comes if you don’t like the movie.

  72. DannyBoy says:

    I wonder if they just caught Tony Curtis in a bad mood. After all he was extensively interviewed in the documentary the CELLULOID CLOSET about his roles in iconic gay movies SPARTICUS and SOME LIKE IT HOT, and he seemed as out-there pro-gay as anyone else interviewed in the movie. He got one of the biggest laughs in the film by criticizing the Laurence Olivier character (in SPARTICUS), not for making a pass at HIS character, but for not being a gentleman about it and “buying him dinner” first.

  73. palmtree says:

    Yeah, Crash is moving up the ranks. By the standards of some people here, it was a big box office disappointment as it only did $53 million.

  74. joefitz84 says:

    Here’s another link saying the same thing:
    Or is Nikki Finke too Conservative for you????

  75. joefitz84 says:

    Danny Boy Oh Danny Boy,
    You’re Brokeback shtick has already made me reach for the tylenol a few times. I’m just telling you how it is. You may not believe it but there are some voting members in the Academy that won’t vote for it. And lo and behold there might be a few that just don’t think it’s the best film. Heavens to Betsy! Now mobilize that Gay Rights banner and crew and let it fly and say how persecuted the homosexuals are.

  76. Sanchez says:

    Wait a second here.
    The Academy is liberal leaning? When did this happen?

  77. Bruce says:

    I’ll be happy when the Awards are over and BBM either wins or loses. I gots me a Brokeback hangover.

  78. Fades To Black says:

    Awards time is the best part of the season. So many good films that are out. So many stories. But I’ll admit it does get a little much especially towards the finish line.

  79. Hopscotch says:

    An awards season like this encourages people to see movies they usually would not see, I take that as a good thing.

  80. DannyBoy says:

    Lonesome Joe, nice to see you make it through a short posting without bending time into a pretzel. All we’ve learned from the Post essay is that Tony Curtis, Howard Hughes, and John Wayne don’t like the idea of Brokeback Mountain. Fine. Trouble is two of them are dead, and unless Mayor Daily is in charge of the Oscar voting they won’t be voting. As for Nikki Fine, we still know now what we’ve known for a while. She’s a nutcase.
    There are a few conservative voters out there who may not like Brokeback, but for every Mel Gibson or Charlton Heston voting against it, there’s a Pedro Almodovar and Todd Haynes who may well be voting for it.
    And Jeff, don’t you think folksy old Hollywood Liberals too sexually conservative to vote for Brokeback, like, maybe Curtis, will actually be most inclined to vote for Good Night, and Good Luck? A movie made when they were coming of age, saying noting more radical than that McCarthy was a jerk and needed to be stopped, might be their fav.

  81. steve4992 says:

    AMPAS has over 6,000 members. And one of the few things that PriceWaterhouseCoopers has disclosed about the Ocsar balloting is that there is “very, very high turnout.” Absent a well-conducted poll, there is simply no way to predict how this many people will vote–antecdotal evidence is meaningless.
    We certainly do know that AMPAS has voted for controversial films in the past–Million Dollar Baby last year and Bowling for Columbine in 2002 are two examples. And we also know that BBM received more Oscar noms than any other film and that the Director’s Guild, the Producer’s Guild, and the Writer’s Guild–industry people all–gave BBM their top honors.
    We’ll all just have to wait until March 5 to find out how it turns out, but in the meantime, here’s the latest from tradesports on the Oscar BP race:
    BBM–Bid 75.0
    Crash–Bid 14.5
    Munich–Bid 5.4
    GN&GL–Bid 3.0
    Capote–Bid 1.1

  82. DannyBoy says:

    Thanks for the stats, Steve. Maybe this crowd that simply CAN

  83. jeffmcm says:

    It’s all spin, spin, spin. Find any straw to grasp at to bolster their argument, which isn’t really an argument at all.
    This was especially loathsome because it combines standard-issue homophobic mockery with the sarcastic notion that homophobia doesn’t exist:
    “Heavens to Betsy! Now mobilize that Gay Rights banner and crew and let it fly and say how persecuted the homosexuals are.”

  84. DannyBoy says:

    What’s so pathetic, is that, beneath it all, one senses that some of these guys actually think, at some unconscious level anyway, that THEY got the short end of the stick, being born straight. I get the feeling that they imagine we’re all sitting on yachts with David Geffen, laughing with joy that we’re not stuck having to raise kids. That would explain the rage they feel at the thought of gays demanding any rights, what they call “special rights”. Homophobia is a really twisted dynamic. These homophobes actually seem impotent with rage (manifested by their constant sarcasm masked, supposedly, as “irony”) that for the first time in 75 years, a gay-themed movie is probably going to win Best Picture. They’ll be so angry at the thought of us laughing it up at Elton John’s Oscar Night Party that they won’t be able to sleep.
    Sorry guys, but most of us struggle through life just like you do. The only difference is we’re treated like second class citizens.

  85. steve4992 says:

    Speaking of AMPAS, this is the list of 112 people who were asked to join in 2005; it includes, among others, Steven Jobs and Will Ferrell.

  86. DannyBoy says:

    I’ve heard that if you’ve been nominated, you’re pretty much assured an invite in. Also, if a member nominates you–maybe they need someone to second it or something–you can get invited in. I remember an interview where John Waters mentioned that David Lynch nominated him and got him in. He said something like: “imagine the two of us voting on the Oscars, hee, hee!”

  87. jeffmcm says:

    So we know there’s at least one new voter in there guaranteed to vote for Paul Haggis…but he can’t vote for himself for Director.

  88. jeffmcm says:

    I read somewhere that the first year that Barbra Streisand was an eligibly voting Academy member was the same year that she won Best Actress in a tie with Katharine Hepburn. Timing is important.

  89. DannyBoy says:

    Jeff, why can’t Haggis vote for himself?

  90. DannyBoy says:

    …I mean in the nominating rounds, a screenwriting member can only vote in the screenplay catagory, but in the final vote the can all vote in all catagories, right?

  91. jeffmcm says:

    I believe that in the final rounds, only screenwriters can vote for Best Screenplay (either category) and only directors can vote for Best Director, but everybody can vote for Best Picture, which is why the Director/Picture split happens from time to time.

  92. steve4992 says:

    Under the AMPAS rules, while the branches vote on nominations (e.g., directors vote on nominations for directors), the entire academy votes to determine the winner in all but a few of the technical categories. (Thus I assume that George Clooney–who surely must be a member by now–could vote for himself three times if he wanted to.) The entire membership also votes to determine the nominees for best picture.
    The AMPAS rules are here:

  93. Sanchez says:

    Danny you’re an angry gay guy, huh? What;s so bad about being homosexual? I envy you guys. Sharing clothes. Sports all the time. Same movies. Bachelor pads. Living the single free wheelin’ lifestyle. It’s like paradise. Or college all over again.
    Try living with a women. The party ends real quick.

  94. Josh says:

    Steve is right on. The nominations are all about the category in question. Actors vote for actors. Editors for editing. And so on and so forth. Except Best Picture. Best Picture is voted on and nominated by everyone. Foreign Film too.
    If I was nominated I’d vote for myself. If you don’t think you can win why should anyone else?

  95. DannyBoy says:

    You see. You prove my point Sanchez, about straights oddly envying gays. Trouble is, despite being able to share clothes, etc., we sometimes get beaten up for who we are–I have. We sometimes get denied access to apartments–when my boyfriend and I were looking for one in ’94, once the landload figured we were a gay couple instead of two straight guys wanting to be roommates, he refused to show us the pad, stopping in mid tour, saying “I don’t want guys like you in my building!” Legally, there was nothing we could do but move on, hoping another landlord would be more progressive. Things like that do get me angry here and there, but do you really think I seem more angry than Joe or Josh? I hope not.

  96. jeffmcm says:

    Sanchez, you did a real good job of repeating Danny’s earlier post except without a shred of irony…as if you didn’t bother to read it.
    Steve is right about the voting rules. So Haggis couldn’t vote to nominate himself for Best Director but can for the win.

  97. jeffmcm says:

    (Whoops, Danny beat me to the post)

  98. steve4992 says:

    “Bachelor pads?
    Sounds like something from one of those movies with Rock Hudson and Tony Randall, doesn’t it?

  99. DannyBoy says:

    Yikes! I’m really dating myself with that term, huh?

  100. DannyBoy says:

    …and if I keep it up, I’ll have to continue dating myself, cuz nobody in the gay community will go out with someone who remembers the ’60s.
    “Thank you. I do three shows nightly!”

  101. Wayman_Wong says:

    Joefitz84, this is puzzling. You make predictions. And then when they come out wrong, you conveniently say, ”Forget predictions.” So why make them in the first place? At one point you questioned whether ”BBM” could even get to $40 mil, and now you say it would be a ”disappointment” at $70 million. Funny that you read ”a lot of people” on this board predicting $100 million for ”Brokeback”; frankly, as you can see from my earlier post, I found more people lowballing the film, questioning whether it’d reach $20 million, then $40 million, $50 million and $60 million.
    We’re still a MONTH away from the Oscars, and ”Brokeback” is the highest-grossing film among the Best Picture nominees. It’s also the only one still in the top 10. Somehow, I’m not gonna lose a lotta sleep over Tony Curtis not voting for ”Brokeback,” although I can’t imagine the Academy will be thrilled to read that some of its voters are bragging about skipping the most Oscar-nominated movie of 2006. (I don’t know if the Oscars have the same rule, but the Tony ballot asks voters not to vote in categories in which they have not seen ALL the nominees.)
    Any speculation about how many people won’t vote for ”Brokeback” because it’s a ”gay cowboy movie” is just that: speculation. If we stick to facts, we know this: The Academy members have voted it the most nominations of any 2005 film. As for how many of those can be converted into wins, we’ll find out on March 5. (Funny how no one speculates on the box office of ”Capote” or ”Good Night, and Good Luck,” huh?)
    Finally, I agree with DannyBoy on this: If Curtis were gonna vote for any Best Picture, it’d be ”Good Night, and Good Luck.” It’s a good ol’-fashioned liberal-leaning picture, and it’s set in the 1950s and shot in black and white (just like one of his ”Sweet Smell of Success”).

  102. DannyBoy says:

    Maybe Curtis will try to write in “Harry Potter.” 😉

  103. Wayman_Wong says:

    One more thing: Tony Curtis’ daughter, Jamie Lee Curtis, happens to be Jake Gyllenhaal’s godmother.
    Small world, isn’t it? 🙂

  104. DannyBoy says:

    Maybe jamie Lee, the coolest chick in all of Hollywood if you ask me, will read her father’s interview and go over to his place and force him to watch “Brokeback Mountain” with her. If Dad made it through the “Snails or Oysters” scene for Kubrick, he can darn well make it through “Brokeback.”

  105. jeffmcm says:

    Interesting tidbit: the lowest-grossing Best Picture Winner of the last 15 years was Braveheart, with only $76m. I remember they re-released it at awards time but I guess they didn’t get much out of it.
    Here are my predictions for the final box-office takes of the nominees:
    Crash: has finished with its run at $54m
    Good Night and Good Luck: $40
    Capote: $38
    Munich: $65 (more than Amistad, less than The Terminal)
    Brokeback Mountain: $90
    Each film will therefore be a solid hit except for Munich, which will certainly have to be considered a financial disappointment unless it magically grosses at least $100m.

  106. James Leer says:

    Jeff, those estimates seem awfully generous to Capote, GNAGL, and Munich. Munich will limp to make even $50 mil at this point — it was in 16th place on Sunday and is not presumed to get any more Oscar boosts to pad its current total of $42 mil. It’s also about to lose many screens.
    I would be surprised if any of the Best Pic nominess besides Brokeback manage to add more than $10 mil to their current totals.

  107. jeffmcm says:

    You’re probably right, but only by a few million each. Last year post-nominations Sideways made another $39m and Finding Neverland made another $19m. Therefore, I think GN&GL will certainly gross another 10-12m. Capote is the least crowd-pleasing but it’s certainly got another 12-15 in it as well. And I’m not talking about between now and the Oscars, I’m talking about their entire remaining theatrical runs. As for Munich, it seems like it’s gotta make it to at least $55 but what do I know? I like it much better than most of America.

  108. jeffmcm says:

    Munich made $2m in the past week since the nominations came out. There’s no way it won’t make less than $50 as you suggest.

  109. Tcolors says:

    Speaking on hate and what not. Did you all see the article where an organization is protesting Mrs.Kings funeral due to the fact she also worked for gay rights issues? She felt that Homosexuals were wrongfully discriminated against.

  110. bicycle bob says:

    when all those estimates fall those millions off will u come back here and apologize for ur wrong estimates?

  111. Josh says:

    God forbid if “Brokeback Mountain” doesn’t win 8 Academy Awards. Danny may beat up some straight guys to exact some justice on it. That’s discrimination, Daniel.

  112. Bruce says:

    Being a homosexual is tough. Boo Hoo. Being human is tough. Not everything is about you and your sexuality. Most of the world, including me, doesn’t care about who you sleep with and how you sleep with them. So cut out the cry me a river crap.
    Saying those Oscar nominated films have another 10 million in them is being very generous. Munich only had 1.9 mill this week. GNGL only had an increase of 1.7 mill. Capote added 2.2 mill but can any of these films keep it up for a few more weeks? The only film to really use the nominations to its advantage was Walk the Line. And it wasn’t even nominated for a Best Picture.

  113. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    “An awards season like this encourages people to see movies they usually would not see, I take that as a good thing.”
    THANK YOU! Like people who are complaining that BBM is making too much money. You’d think that a movie such as BBM making anything like it is is good for cinema in general.
    GN&GL, Capote and Munich ain’t looking to gross that much this weekend. But, we’ll see. One simple win for a movie like “Monster” helped it gross an extra $10mil or so.
    And, yeah, I found it hard to believe Tony Curtis would be against homosexuality.
    I always thought each branch of the Academy nominated for their own category and everyone nominated their top five for Best Picture. However, when it came to voting for the winners, everyone voted for every category (except the foreign category and some technical ones like the sound editing or whatever). Like, it seems unfair that a cinematographer cannot vote for Best Actress or whatever.

  114. LesterFreed says:

    Everyone can vote for everyone in the final voting. It’s a regular free for all among the 6,000 voters.

  115. DannyBoy says:

    Bruce, Josh, I AM prepared to say that you two probably have sadder, more pathetic lives than do I, even though you’re straight. It’s clear from your bitterness and anger on these posts. So, in a round about way, you kind of make a point: One can be gay and happy, and, on the other hand, one can straight and deeply miserable.
    Of course, those posting on here who actually are half-way decent human beings know that there’s a difference between unhappiness caused by “the human condition” and that caused by social injustice, and that society IS, in fact, responsible for ethically responding to the latter.

  116. Wayman_Wong says:

    Bicycle Bob: ”When all those estimates fall those millions off, will u come back and apologize for ur (sic) wrong estimates?”
    Good question. You once made this ”Brokeback” estimate: ”It’ll be lucky to make $20 million.”
    It’s now made $60 million – 3 times that figure.
    On Jan. 3, you added: ”I’m worried about the Brokeback defenders when the film fails at the box office.”
    For a $14 million-dollar movie & an Oscar front-runner, it hasn’t ”failed” at the box office.
    Wanna start the ball of apologies rolling? 😉

  117. Lynn says:

    “If anyone still thinks this gay love story (made for $14 mil) isn’t some sort of ”hit and success,” I’m not the delusional one.”
    Wayman_wong, this was a words-back-in-their-face that Jon Stewart would envy. Nice job!
    Oh, and about Super Bowl ads? I loved the MacGyver commercial and the streaker 🙂 V for Vendetta also looks pretty awesome, and OMG, who thought that mustache on Bruce Willis was a good idea?

  118. martindale says:

    I am also surprised by Walk the Line’s gains this weekend. This despite a Best Pic snub and the fact that it’s been out in wide release for nearly three months. I caught a matinee of it yesterday (Monday) and there were at least 50 people in attendance. Not bad at all for a town of 30,000 and for a movie that’s been out so long.

  119. Cadavra says:

    Has anyone considered the possibility that one can be pro-gay and NOT like BROKEBACK? Were I an Academy member, I’d be voting for GN&GL. Does that make me a homophobe?

  120. Josh says:

    From the sounds of it, if you’re gay and you vote against or say anything bad about Brokeback, you’re an Uncle Tom type homosexual.

  121. palmtree says:

    Liking or not liking BM may have little to do with whether you are a homophobe or not. But if you are making wildly incorrect assumptions and predictions regarding it, clearly you have an axe to grind.
    I did not like Crash as a film, but I would not dare call it unsuccessful. I wouldn’t dare say it needs to hit $100 million otherwise no one saw it or liked it. Same with the other fine nominees this year. You can dislike a film, but to even deny that it has been and will be considered a success is just willful ignorance and frankly disrespectful.

  122. jeffmcm says:

    Plenty of people have legitimate, well-thought-out reasons for disliking Brokeback. The only reason to be called a homophobe is if you constantly harp on Brokeback as something to be mocked and scorned without (apparently) seeing it. But isn’t it enough to just call those people (or that person) total a-hole losers?

  123. Mark Ziegler says:

    You just knew some of the pro BBM folks were going to start branding people who didn’t rave about the film “homophobic”. I’m surprised it lasted as long as it did.

  124. Bruce says:

    Danny Boy Ohhh Danny Boy,
    You’re just a very angry and bitter guy. No offense. You make me laugh though. How someone who hates himself so much for being who he is can try and tell others they’re bitter? And why? Because they don’t agree with him?
    Give it a rest, pal. I didn’t make you who you are. No one but you did. No need to accuse others of something thats inside you. You make it seem like you’re the only person who has a tough life. And why? Because you’re gay??? It’s 2006. Move to Frisco and get over it.

  125. jeffmcm says:

    God you’re a horrible person, Bruce.

  126. jeffmcm says:

    If Danny bothers you so much, leave him alone. Ignore him. Stop being offensive. Stop pretending that you’re not bashing and then follow that mere words later with something incredibly stereotypically homophobic. Just stop.

  127. palmtree says:

    “Move to Frisco and get over it.”
    Classy…you guys need to find a better way of disliking a gay cowboy movie. By that I mean one that might actually persuade people.

  128. Bruce says:

    He doesn’t bother me. His accusations and name calling and his attitude do. I usually try to ignore people like him. People who don’t want to listen and hear from others.
    How am I “bashing”, Jeffrey? I just got a problem with him and how everything is “woe is me because I’m gay”. Now I can’t call that out because I should be afraid someones feelings are going to get hurt or I’m going to be called a gay basher???
    Sorry. Not going to happen. You’re not down with free speech? How low of me.

  129. joefitz84 says:

    It’s not worth it. You can’t say a bad word about BBM. They won’t hear it. It’s not worth getting upset about.

  130. jeffmcm says:

    You’re a liar.
    You have never been a proponent of free speech, you merely use that as an excuse when other people ‘call you out’ on something you say that’s either untrue or offensive.
    Danny has not called you any names. If you can find one example of someplace he called you a name, you’ll win a valuable prize.
    In conclusion, you are full of crap.

  131. Bruce says:

    “Bruce, Josh, I AM prepared to say that you two probably have sadder, more pathetic lives than do I, even though you’re straight. It’s clear from your bitterness and anger on these posts. So, in a round about way, you kind of make a point: One can be gay and happy, and, on the other hand, one can straight and deeply miserable.”
    By Danny Oh Danny Boy Posted by: DannyBoy [TypeKey Profile Page] at February 7, 2006 08:18 AM
    So, don’t call me a liar Jeffrey. There you go with that name calling again, Jeffrey. Get your facts straight before you run your mouth off. Like you usually do.

  132. jeffmcm says:

    Joe, nobody has talked about Brokeback Mountain the movie itself on this entire thread. There has been plenty of talk about its box office, where Bruce and you were proven wrong long ago about how much it would have made by now. If you would like to say something about something you disliked about the movie itself, feel free.
    (If you’ve seen it.)

  133. Mark Ziegler says:

    Jeffmcm and truth telling???
    Are we on the same site for the past year???
    Better chance of “Hoodwinked” winning the 2007 Oscar.

  134. Bruce says:

    I know. I know. I should know better than get into it with Jeffrey. It’s funny for a while but then quickly becomes a chore. I appreciate it for a little bit. Adds some comedy to my day.

  135. jeffmcm says:

    You’re a liar, Bruce, and you’re a toady, Mark. Unless you’re the same person. You know as well as I that Danny’s words are not name-calling but a simple response to your constant gay-baiting.
    I don’t think anyone here would mind if you just admitted what you really thought about gays and their gay movies, instead of dancing around it with innuendo and sly jabs.

  136. joefitz84 says:

    I forgot that CarnacMCM always hits 100% on his predictions. Didn’t you say “When a Stranger Calls” wouldn’t hit 20 mill and made fun of people who said it would?
    Should I bring that up CarnacJeff or is that a sore point?
    I didn’t think Brokeback would hit 50 mill. It did. I was wrong. But I gave it credit. Probably more than I should. ut it deserved it. If you want me to kneel at the shrine of Heath Ledger point the way. Right after you kneel at the altar of Simon West.

  137. jeffmcm says:

    And don’t think it hasn’t been noticed that you ramp up your rhetoric when Poland goes away, like clockwork.

  138. jeffmcm says:

    Bruce/Panda/Joe was right about Stranger grossing over $20, that is correct, but I never made fun of people who said it would because (A) I knew it was possible, and (B) I didn’t think it was very important.
    So a point to you, but minue one for lying again.

  139. joefitz84 says:

    There you go jeffmcm. I’m proud of you. The first time you have ever given credit to someone else.
    Now how would you feel if I berated you for two days about your lousy prediction?

  140. Bruce says:

    I thought I was walking into a movie blog when I made a wrong turn and walked into the Free All Gays From Persecution and Tyranny blog.
    If you have something negative to say about the film Brokeback Mountain, don’t post here. You’ll only be called names and be shotdown as a homophobic redneck.

  141. jeffmcm says:

    Joe, you have to notice that the very first time you pointed out that I was incorrect, I admitted it. Meanwhile, it took you about two months to say “some were right and some were wrong” about Brokeback’s box office.
    Bruce: You have not said anything about Brokeback Mountain, the movie, in a long, long time. You’ve been making fun of Danny for the fact that he’s been beaten up and discriminated against. So go ahead and change the subject and talk about the movie already…I seem to recall you liked it.

  142. Sanchez says:

    I’m not homophobic, all right? Come around, look at my C.D collection. You’ll find Queen, George Michael, Pet Shop Boys. They’re all bummers.

  143. jeffmcm says:

    Bummers? Queen rocks!

  144. Sanchez says:

    I miss Freddie Mercury.
    We are the Champions…… My friend….And we’ll keep on fightin’ ….til the end…

  145. Nicol D says:

    “Interesting tidbit: the lowest-grossing Best Picture Winner of the last 15 years was Braveheart, with only $76m. I remember they re-released it at awards time but I guess they didn’t get much out of it.”
    A friend of mine and I were discussing Oscar winners of the past decade or so the other night. Braveheart is odd in the sense that it has the lowest gross of Oscar winners of the past 15 years but now it is, generally speaking one of the most fondly remembered and has entered into popular culture in a way that most of the others have not.
    Everyone knows and remembers ‘Freedom’ and the film is emminently quotable and iconic.
    Films like Shakspeare in Love and American Beauty have been mostly forgotten by the public at large while others such as The English Patient and a Beautiful Mind while very good are hardly influencial.
    Schindler’s List, Titanic and Silence of the Lambs are perhaps the others that have taken on iconic stature.
    I personally love Clint Eastwood’s Unforgiven and Dances with Wolves but the former is not really remembered in a popular conscience sense and Dances With Wolves is usually just mocked now.
    Gladiator and Chicago are probably too new to truly gage how they will be perceived years from now although I enjoy them too.

  146. palmtree says:

    Forrest Gump felt iconic at the time, but I doubt it will age well. Its reductionist attitude towards history was effective for a particularly generation. And its one-noteness (Forrest is dumb! Get it!) is grating and manipulative at times.

  147. Angelus21 says:

    It’s really a silly argument when you think about it. How many analysts out there had BBM making 75$ million? Very few had it even over 50$ million. But then around Jan 1 you started to hear rumblings of 100$ million. As a box office observer I do find it fascinating. You don’t see too many films with this much disparity and this much back and forth. I wonder how it’ll do on video now.

  148. jeffmcm says:

    I had a discussion back in college about Forrest Gump where the professor (a guy in his 40s) was explaining why he and so many others had been irritated by the movie’s depiction of history as slanted and reductive, and was wondering why the class wasn’t more annoyed by it, and I pointed out the simple fact that none of us were Baby Boomers. In the future once the immediate memories of the 60s and 70s are more faded, Forrest Gump’s appeal will almost certainly fade with them.

  149. Wayman_Wong says:

    Nicol D, like most everything, the Oscars are a time capsule. Other than awards buffs, who really remembers that ”The Greatest Show on Earth” won Best Picture for 1952, while ”Singin’ in the Rain” wasn’t even NOMINATED? But it’s ”Singin’ in the Rain” that’s the more iconic one.
    The Best Picture winner is just a snapshot of what a few thousand people voted on in Hollywood. Sometimes we agree, sometimes we don’t. (I’ll take ”E.T.” over ”Gandhi” anyday.) No matter what wins, a good case could be made for another film that didn’t win or wasn’t even nominated.

  150. steve4992 says:

    I suspect that the Lord of the Rings Trilogy will stand the test of time. The Wizard of Oz was certainly one of the iconic movies of my childhood–before VCRs and DVDs, they used to show it on television once a year on Sunday night, and I was always trying to get out of church on that night so I could stay home and watch it. The LOTR movies’ images of Frodo, Sam and Gandalf will probably join the cowardly lion, the tin man, and the scarecrow as iconic characters for all who see these movies.

  151. Fades To Black says:

    Not many films stand the test of time. Even some greats get forgotten.
    I expect the Rings trilogy will. I can pretty much count on it. People were in love with them before the movies. The movies only added to the experience.

  152. Hopscotch says:

    Some Best Picture winners are just downright annoying ten minutes after they’re released on video/DVD. I remember really liking Erin Brockovich…now it’s nauseating. Even Traffic has some weak spots in it, and I used to think that movie was flawless. But those were the big films five years ago and look at them now. Gladiator – over it. Crouching Tiger – yawn. Best in Show ??? CLASSIC!

  153. DannyBoy says:

    Dare I say it? “Million Dollar Baby” seemed like it should be in the bargin bin the day the DVD came out. I don’t know anyone who saw that twice or would want to see it again.

  154. jeffmcm says:

    I think it’s quite good, actually. I think the depiction of the redneck family is over the top, but as a whole I like it (only saw it once though).

  155. DannyBoy says:

    I wonder how it plays the second time. Anyone who saw it twice out there?

  156. steve4992 says:

    I saw M$B once in the theaters, and I liked it, but it’s not one of those movies I have a desire to see ever again. I will not be the buying the DVD. For me, the ending is is too intense and harrowing to sit through again. I felt the same way about Schindler’s List.

  157. Nicol D says:

    Regarding Forrest Gump,
    I liked it when it first came out and it has aged very well for me. When I first saw it I thought of it as a nostalgic trip through the sixties for the Boomer generation.
    Watch it again and you’ll realize why there is now a bit of a backlash against it. It is not a love letter…it is actually a rather scathing indictment of Boomer/sixties generation.

  158. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    I keep seeing M$B for sale at Blockbuster for $6 but even at that price, as much as I really liked it, I can’t bring myself to buy it. I really don’t know why. I thought it was a great movie.
    Forrest Gump was great when I first saw it when I was 12. Then I watched it again a few years later and hated it. Now I sorta like it. Same with Gladiator. Loved it in the cinema. Hated it on DVD. But now its mellowed into cool moderate like.
    Nobody can tell what movies are going to be loved in 20 years time. If we did the Oscars would be a completely different ball game. However I still love “American Beauty” and “Shakespeare in Love” and “Chicago” so, ‘tev.

  159. jeffmcm says:

    Regarding the timelessness or lack thereof in the Oscars, everybody who doesn’t want Brokeback to win Best Picture can take consolation in that and tell themselves that in twenty years, people will know better.
    Either that, or if Crash wins everybody who loves Brokeback can rub the Academys’ nose in how silly they are.

  160. bicycle bob says:

    u can’t see million dollar baby more than once. the guy punch of that ending is too much. its just too damn depressing. i could probably watch the first 2/3 again but knowing what happens is just too much.

  161. Melquiades says:

    I have no desire to see M$B again, but not because of its subject matter. It’s just not compelling enough to me as a story.
    I’ve seen Schindler’s List many times despite its difficult content.
    Of recent Best Picture losers, I think Pulp Fiction and The Shawshank Redemption (both of which lost to Gump) will be remembered fondly for years to come. And I consider Babe a classic, but I think it remains under the radar in the popular culture (the sequel was even better).

  162. Wayman_Wong says:

    Seeing ”Million Dollar Baby” once was enough for me. Like Melquiades, I didn’t find it all that compelling, and like Jeffmcm, I thought the depiction of the redneck family was over-the-top.
    A couple of my favorite Oscar-losing Best Pictures are ”The Shawshank Redemption” and ”Field of Dreams,” both of which have great stories and perfect ”feel-good” endings.

  163. DannyBoy says:

    Just looking at the 80s–to have some perspective–it seems to me that most of the films that really have a long shelf life in terms of people talking about them, buying the DVDs, having them turn up in revival houses, etc., are films that weren’t even NOMINATED for best picture: BRAZIL, THE UNBEARABLE LIGHTNESS OF BEING, DEAD RINGERS, THE DEAD, FANNY AND ALEXANDER, RAN, THE SHINING.

  164. jeffmcm says:

    Oh, man, did I hate Babe 2. Rarely do I get offended by a movie, hardly ever by a movie with no controversial content, but that innocuous family movie did the job.

  165. PandaBear says:

    “Shawshank” is one of the best of all time. I don’t know why it didn’t do better at the BO. The public doesn’t like prison movies? I got no clue.

  166. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    “Shawshank” is in my top 10. LOVE it. I had to study it in my final year of high school for media studies, which meant watching it 20 times + and even that didn’t ruin it. We also had to study “Murder in the First” (with kevin Bacon and Christian Slater) now THAT was bad. B-A-D.
    Some people talk about Shawshank being overrated, I think “Brazil” is overrated to the max. But I generally don’t ‘get’ Terry Gilliam. I hated “Twelve Monkeys”

  167. jeffmcm says:

    Brazil is one of the best films of the 1980s, and Twelve Monkeys is brilliant as well.

  168. Wayman_Wong says:

    I, too, am puzzled by why ”Shawshank” didn’t do better at the box office. Maybe the odd title put people off. Maybe it’s the ”prison movie” thing. Who knows? But I believe it did really well on DVD, thanks to word of mouth. And it’s constantly playing on some station or other, as I channel-surf; whereas, I rarely ever come across ”Forrest Gump.” In any event, ”Shawshank” wears really well, and Thomas Newman’s score should’ve won the Oscar. In fact, his theme is constantly being used in other movies’ trailers, like ”Brokeback Mountain’s.”

  169. palmtree says:

    Wayman, Thomas Newman was nominated twice that year and may have had an unfortunate split vote. He’s been nominated 7 times but perhaps like his cousin Randy, he’ll have to wait to get it for a subpar score.

  170. Melquiades says:

    Wow, jeffmcm, what offended you in Babe: Pig in the City? Or were you just offended by its innocuousness?
    I found the movie extremely powerful. The scenes of Babe saving the pitbull, the injured dog briefly visiting heaven, the elder chimp getting dressed, the pink poodle offering herself up to her captors… I honestly haven’t seen many “adult” films reach emotional heights like those.

  171. Wayman_Wong says:

    Palmtree, I don’t think Newman lost that year because he split his votes between his scores of ”Shawshank” and ”Little Women.” He lost because he ran into a buzzsaw called ”The Lion King.” During the late ’80s-early ’90s, the Disney animated film scores seemed to dominate this category; ”Little Mermaid,” ”Beauty & the Beast” and ”Aladdin” all won. To give dramatic scores a fair shake, they finally separated them from scores to animated movie musicals.
    I hope Thomas Newman doesn’t have to wait until his 16th nomination, like Randy, to finally win.
    While John Williams just got his 44th and 45th Oscar nods for ”Memoirs of a Geisha” and ”Munich,” I’m still waiting the Academy to give one of the greatest film composers around his due: Ennio Morricone. It’s ridiculous that the man who wrote the music to ”Days of Heaven,” ”The Mission,” ”The Untouchables,” ”Cinema Paradiso” and ”The Good, The Bad and the Ugly” doesn’t have an Oscar.

  172. DannyBoy says:

    Morricone might have won for ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA, but the studio forgot to fill out the paperwork to make it eligable. Can you believe it?

  173. jeffmcm says:

    Maybe offended is the wrong word for Babe: Pig in the City, but it made me very unhappy. I was expecting something light and sweet like the first Babe movie and instead it was ‘edgy’ and ‘dark’ in a way that felt inauthentic and chaotic. Also the aesthetic of the visuals (the city made of every other city) felt forced and phony.
    Personally, I think it’s a movie that is guilty until proven innocent. Why did you like it?

  174. Chucky in Jersey says:

    Check the theater counts today on BOMojo? “Brokeback Mountain” loses theaters this weekend, mostly mainstream, some arthouse.
    Princeton NJ: Garden Theatre (2-screen arthouse) drops BBM for “Why We Fight”, a documentary snubbed by the Oscar types.
    Doylestown PA: BBM moves from County Theater (2-screen arthouse) to a Regal multiplex in the same town.
    Stroudsburg PA: Pocono Cinema (3-screen arthouse) drops BBM for “Match Point”. Want to see BBM? You’ll have to drive an hour to Easton.
    Bethel CT (near Danbury): Bethel Cinema (4-screen upmarket) drops BBM for “Transamerica”.

  175. palmtree says:

    I agree, Wayman, that Lion King was the powerhouse. I just meant that having two nominations didn’t do him any favors even though it must have been pretty flattering. I’ve met the guy and he’s as cool and laid back as you imagine. Now every composer trying to get a gig has to know how to “do Thomas Newman.”

  176. Wayman_Wong says:

    Chucky, that’s not too surprising. ”Brokeback” was No. 2 yesterday, but it’s gonna get bumped down soon because four major releases open this Friday: ”Curious George” (2,565 screens); ”Final Destination 3” (2,880), ”Firewall” (2,840) and ”The Pink Panther” (3,477).

  177. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    It baffles me how The Pink Panther managed to get into 3477 cinemas! That’s massive, right?
    I was really hoping Thomas Newman would win for Road To Perdition – one of my favourite scores of the ’00s. However, my absolute fave wasn’t even in contention. Alexandre Desplat’s “Birth” score was genius. Perfect. My favourite score ever? Ennio Morricone’s “Days of Heaven” score – wow. How come I can’t find it on CD anywhere.
    Randy Newman, btw, didn’t even win for Score. It was for Original SONG for his “Monsters, Inc.” song.

  178. Lota says:

    so sad one of the writers involved with the Reys in writing Curious George books/tv was just brutally murdered.
    Alan Shalleck stabbed to death in home robbery in Florida.
    “Shalleck began his collaboration with “Curious George” co-creator Margaret Rey nearly three decades ago, helping write sequels to the stories Rey originally produced with her late husband H.A. Rey and bringing the monkey to television.’

  179. waterbucket says:

    Woohoo!!! The OLYMPICS is here!
    If the US wins a lot of gold medals (including Michelle Kwan) and Brokeback Mountain wins Best Picture, I’ll be very happy!
    Watch the Olympics OR DIE!

  180. palmtree says:

    Yeah, and it wasn’t even a good Randy Newman song like “You’ve Got a Friend in Me.” Road to Perdition is a great score. And one of my favorties…the theme to Six Feet Under.

  181. waterbucket says:

    After this year’s Oscars, Dave Poland can’t quit me yet since we’ll soon have another movie for him to hate and for me to love.
    “The Dreyfus Affair: A Love Story”
    Paging Ben Affleck and Matt Damon!

  182. DannyBoy says:

    Two-page full color ad for Brokeback Mtn. in the Times today. Looks like Focus is gonna keep pushing it hard, even if the screen number goes down this weekend. (Considering the per-screen average all week has been the highest in the top ten, it’s safe to say that it must be doing VERY well in, at least, SOME theatres.)
    Universal seems to have given up on MUNICH. less than a one page ad, though they finally have some good art work on display: a hunky Eric Banna showing of a big bicep. Maybe they need a new tagline: “Just as homoerotic as ‘Brokeback’, but without the anxiety-producing male-male sex scenes.”

  183. Wayman_Wong says:

    ”Brokeback” is losing 6% of its screens this weekend, but it’s not phenomenal. It’ll still be on 1963 screens. By the way, the movie begins in 1963. (Focus is staying on top of things: Ang Lee gets an Equality Award tomorrow (Sat.) from the Human Rights Campaign in NYC; Heath Ledger is on ”Ellen” on Monday, and there’s also a screening with Lee, Ledger, Gyllenhaal, Williams, etc., at the Arclight in L.A. that same day.)

  184. DannyBoy says:

    1963 set film on 1963 screens. Reminds me of how it was on 69 screens for a couple of weeks at the beginning. Was I the only one to see that and giggle?

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