April 23, 2024
Box Office
http://www.soulduster.com/ on: Friday Estimates by Klady
http://www.rehabsandrentals.com/ on: Friday Estimates by Klady
Joe Leydon on: Weekend Estimates by MacKlady
Abi on: Weekend Estimates by MacKlady
betavaftrar on: 3-Day Estimates By Klady That Made The Clown Cry
Tashie Jackson on: Friday Estimates by Klady
Jeffrey Boam's Doctor on: Weeeknd Estimate Leftovers by Klady
DiggityDawg on: Weeeknd Estimate Leftovers by Klady
David Poland on: Weeeknd Estimate Leftovers by Klady
berg on: Weeeknd Estimate Leftovers by Klady
Weeeknd Estimate Leftovers by Klady
Friday Estimate by MuthaSmurfin’ Klady
4 Day Estimates by Vehicular Klady
Friday Estimates by Green Klady
4 Day Estimates by Wolfpack Klady
Weekend Estimates by Screaming Rio Klady
Friday Estimates by Rio de JaKlady
see all »
[twitter-widget username="DavidPoland" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"][twitter-widget username="MCNTweets" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"]
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
So we’re looking at a $120 million to $170 million finish for MI:3… Wow, that is one big gap hehehe.
It deserves the top spot, unlike that ‘Survival of the Whitest’ boat flick.
I saw “M:I III” yesterday, and I think its real problem is not Tom Cruise, but rather that the movie offers nothing I can’t get out of a decent episode of “24.”
..or from an episode from the first two seasons of “Alias”
I saw M:I:III yesterday and enjoyed it. I found it to be better than the second and almost as good as the first.
However, my female date did not enjoy the movie and she kept taking about how she is tired of Tom Cruise. This echos what I’ve heard from boatloads of other women.
The opening shootout in Germany was Alias-esque, but the Bridge & Skyscraper stunts top anything 24 or Alias have delivered as far as spectacle.
My favorite part was the aircraft carrier scene. Very 24ish.
But David, it’s all about the budget when it comes to movies like that… if anyone thought that Poseidon could have the legs of Titanic, it wouldn’t be a big deal, but this movie was ALL about opening weekend. Making just over $20 million in that many theatres is not good, especially compared to Petersen’s last two movies, and for the media to ignore this fact would be more irresponsible than those who were ready to bury it even before the movie opened. I kind of liked the headline I came up with over the far-too-obvious “Poseidon Sinks”
There is no comparing 24 to MI3 (which I think is the best out of the 3, considering i completely hated the first two films). the problem is that in the last few years, the spy thriller has undergone a facelift of sorts. 24 is the best thing, most riveting non-cable hour of entertainment around. The Jason Bourne films have it all over MI3 as well. They gave back some of the needed depth that things like the MI films and especially the Bond series lacks. That being said, I can’t say anything about Alias. Horse Face is the star and I can’t stand to look at that ugly mug.
I saw MI:3, Loved it and want to go see it again! What’s amazing to me is that Cruise is still pretty damn good at what he does yet that all gets overshadowed by him being a complete moron! The movie’s good though.
I’m not saying to ignore costs, ED. I’m saying that reporting is good when it is complete. And what most of it is right now is smug.
If you asked the people offering up opinions on box office these days about Petersen’s other grosses, they wouldn’t know anything about them. Only what they are told and what their editor’s want spun.
Of course, a huge part of this is premature reporting, before the news is news, and very little perspective reporting, which is to say taking a serious look at what has happened once it’s become news.
And please, dear God, never mention Titanic again in reference to any movie. Someday, it will be relevant for some movie… maybe…. though the system is not structured to ever allow something like that again. The short window and the DVD ended that dream.
Poseidon will have a hard time getting to $70 million in the U.S. There is no doubt about that now. And unless it grosses triple that overseas, it will lose money for Warners.
But the bigger question is why they would spend so much on a movie without having something to sell, like Brad Pitt or Harry Potter. And even if they knew they had a problem, why slot any conventional summer movie with a big budget (Troy was, in its way, counterprogramming) into the second wekend of the summer? Ironically, for as much shit as Troy ate in the American media, if Poseidon did the same business, it would be a big money maker. If it did half the business, it would be in the black, all in. But when you get up to numbers like this, a precarious game.
The joke, of course, is that people are calling for a shorter window when, in fact, the box office is fine. More people are going to the movies in theaters than last year, in spite of DVD and big TVs and iPods and MySpace. What is out of whack is not theatrical releasing… it’s the budgets for all but the very few movies that really need to be over $100 million.
I was never saying that any movie might ever have the legs of TItanic again. I just wanted to use that as an extreme example of legs.
Yeah, Titanic and E.T. were different times…(and before my time). These days, if a movie is #1 for three weeks in a row, it’s something to celebrate.
On the other hand, we are seeing a lot more movies having legs in the last few months than in the years where we were having huge blockbuster openings. RV is a good example of this, since I think a lot of people were expecting another $20 million opening and when it didn’t, it was written off. Just seems like it wasn’t something people rushed out to see but might see with few other choices. (Same could be said for Pink Panther and a few others.)
I’m not one of those people calling for a shorter window. I love seeing movies in theatres… and I hate watching DVDs/movies at home, cause I just don’t have a good system here. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve ended up chasing down the last theatre in NYC showing a movie just so I could see it in the theatre. (I think I caught the very last screening of Slither before it was pulled.)
Do you really think that Warner Bros saw any problems with Poseidon in time to do anything about it? It would seem that they wouldn’t have burned that many prints (3550 theatres, and I heard that there were 3 to 4 screens in many of them) if they didn’t think there was an audience. Then again, the 4,000 theatres for MI3 may have been a bit over-exuberant, too.
Next week should be interesting…
Poseidon ain’t just gonna have trouble getting to 70M domestic–it’s gonna have trouble getting to 60M domestic. I expect word of mouth to be awful, and next weekend, Da Vinci sucks all the air out of the room.
I’m not real big in hypotheticals, but what if Da Vinci Code doesn’t live up to the hype? What would be considered a good opening? Is $40 mil acceptable? whot wants start placing bets?
Im just laughing about Poseidon, mainly because i balk every time i hear another pointless remake being announced in the press. I would love to see a complete breakdown of remakes and tv show to movie adaptations to see how they fare from budget to box office. It’s probably on box office mojo, maybe ill do some digging.
I think one day, far into the future, we’ll look back at that day in variety they announced the movie version of Welcome Back Kotter and the remake of Sharkey’s Machine as the day Hollywood ran out ideas.
Why were my comments deleted, DP? There was nothing malicious about them, unless you count the thing about Horse Face on Alias. It’s true. She does have a horse’s face. Oh well…
Just think in 20-30 years we will be treated to the likes of “The King of Queens: The Motion Picture”, and a remake of “The 40-year old Virgin”.
Hey EDouglas, where do you write for?
I write for another movie/entertainment site, but I won’t post a link or mention its name because it’s disrespectful to David, who allows me to hang and kibbitz on his MCN blog. Google my nick and it’s pretty easy to figure out.
I agree that the remake issue could have hurt Poseidon… people were already getting sick of remakes last year, so the ones coming out this year are already coming out after the trend reached its height. Will be interesting to see how The Omen and Miami Vice fare.
“many went back for the personal drama.”
UGH, The one box-office myth I just don’t have any ounce of believing is that SO MANY people go see movies twice or thrice or whatever. Nobody I know (that includes here in Australia and friends from overseas) sees movies twice in a cinema unless they are really really passionate movies like Brokeback or Titanic. I’ve only seen a few movies twice – Crouching Tiger, the LOTR movies (i saw each the individual year + all three in a movie marathon), Mulholland Drive and Moulin Rouge! (6 times). I honestly cannot understand why anyone would see The Perfect Storm twice in the cinema – personal drama and waves or not.
That whole thing don’t wash with me.
And what EDouglas mentioned about movies just flat out not making as much as they would’ve in years past is true. I’ve been saying it about Oscar movies for ages.
“This could have been Das Cruise Boot…”
It’s official. David is obsessed with Tom Cruise. The mega star’s persona colors every sentence Poland pens.
That is a terrific point, KC — I wondered the exact same thing when I read about people “going back” to The Perfect Storm for the human drama. The human drama probably played a part in decent (if seemingly unspectacular) word-of-mouth, but I The Perfect Storm is not the kind of movie I imagine much of anyone saw a second time… and even if you are going to assume that repeat viewing happens, $180 million is not the kind of money that should inspire such an assumption.
I think most movies that go over $250 mil or so, especially live-action ones, have some kind of repeat-viewing factor, though it is surely overstated in the press. Star Wars, LOTR, Pirates of the Caribbean, Jurassic Park, and Independence Day probably all had people going back.
Personally, I used to see movies twice pretty regularly, for several reasons:
1. I grew up in upstate NY, so I didn’t always have a great selection of movies to choose from.
2. There are still drive-ins where I grew up, so if a summer movie I liked but didn’t love (like Independence Day or Men in Black) was playing at the drive-in with something I hadn’t seen, I’d go again.
3. When I was in college, sometimes I’d see something with my “school friends,” and come home for Christmas or summer break, and see it again with “home friends” who hadn’t seen it, or vice versa.
But since moving to NYC, I’ve found I’m much less likely to go for the repeat viewing (even though I’m not opposed to it). However, I did recently see BRICK three times, and if something is ten-best-list quality, it’s likely I’ll send up seeing it twice.
Mild spoilers about “Poseidon” to follow, though I don’t name names about who lives and who dies (well, you’ll probably figure out from this whether Dreyfuss makes it)…
The original “Poseidon” had all those current and past Hollywood icons, bringing about a kind of aura of showmanship that went a long way to blunt all the unpleasant deaths in the story. This one for the most part had lesser stars and more realistic acting, making all the deaths stand out more, and feel more real. I guess that’s supposed to be good in a movie, but in this case the gritty realism of all the drownings, electrocutions, and burnings was quite unpleasant. One character, toward the end, seems to die via a wince-inducing heart attack/drowning combination. Do we really want to see this in a summer popcorn movie?
Also, I was annoyed that during the last fifteen or twenty minutes, they gave Richard Dreyfuss absolutely nothing to do. At least give the guy a few character beats, quick asides, anything, to tell us whether- following all the stuff he went through in the movie- he was still glad he didn’t commit suicide in the movie’s opening moments. Hell, Petersen didn’t even give him a close-up showing a facial expression during the closing shots!
Finally, it first seemed like a good thing that we get a few extra minutes of story and big effects once the characters we’ve been following make it out of the ship (something the original film didn’t give us). But the basic result of those few minutes was to make it clear that absolutely no one besides the five or six characters we’ve been following has made it out of the cruise ship alive. So here we have a movie that realistically envisions- with its 4000 or so deaths and 6 survivors- what the ultimate tragic disaster at sea might look like. Again, do we really want this in a big summer adventure movie?
Heck, maybe they should be happy that they at least MADE it to $20 million this weekend.
Is is just me, or does “Poseidon” sound lamer than “The Poseidon Adventure?”
Remember back when Starship Troopers opened and didn’t exactly set the B.O. on fire in the U.S.? It still broke even internationally and did well on video. I’m not sure how much Poseidon’s opening weekend numbers really matter.
I just wonder how many people were confused when they went to the theatres and couldn’t find a movie playing called “Nopiesod”
Wow, No Pie Sod. Grammatically incorrect (sod pie?), but still, is that bad subliminal advertising or what?
EDouglas writes for ComingSoon.net and is a respected online critic and box office analyst.
Perfect Storm went 10 weeks over $1 million. Someone was going back to the cinema. It and Gladiator were the two leggiest movies of that summer.
Repeat business is a major thing in kids films, where there are limted titles and a weekly demand to go to the movies. And movies play repeatedly to older audiences, who are also looking for something they actually like to see again and again. Less so for audiences that look for more variety and are more interested in what’s new.
It’s not a myth, Kami. The myth is that everyone goes to the movies. Less than 10% of the public is the everyone the film business has been dealing with for decades now. So it is a percentage of a percentage. But you have to see that Lord of The Rings and Harry Potter and Finding Nemo were massively driven by repeat viewers, much less the obvious king of repeat biz, Titanic.
Jesse, I only saw Brick once, but it is the PERFECT example of a movie that I’d want to see again in a theater. Some of it is a younger thing. I used to see movies two or three times all the time, but thats changed since I’ve gotten older. It’s funny how gaining a significant other alters your viewing habits.
ah yes, July 4th 2000. The Perfect Storm vs. The Patriot. Know who lost that battle? THE AUDIENCE.
Yes, kids films would get repeats. And I mentioned even I saw LOTR twice so I’d believe that. Harry Potter, yes. But your average movie like The Perfect Storm? No way. I’d put it’s 10 weeks over $1 to word of mouth and a different box-office climate.
I just can’t imagine people saying “Let’s see The Perfect Storm again!” And in today’s climate second-viewings would be rarer still. Do you KNOW how much a movie ticket costs? Teenagers are not going to see movies twice at the cinema if they have to pay the amounts that they do. Especially when they will be a) able to download the movie from the internet when they get home and b) be able to own it in a few months on DVD.
And considering adults apparently don’t go to the movies that much anymore, I’d find it hard to believe they’d be going to see movies twice when they, again, will be able to buy the movie on DVD in a few months.
I wish Mr. Poland wouldn’t compare THE DA VINCI code to M:I-III (or compare POSEIDON to M:I-III!?). M:I films are popcorn candy fun films, meant to be an fun action ride. THE DA VINCI CODE is a serious drama geared towards adults. Where is the comparison? Plus, M:I-III got WAY better early reviews compared to TDVC has up to now. Furthermore, M:I-III IS a moderately critical success with 70% positive RT. It’s the best reviewed M:I film so far. And I thought M:I-III was a really good film! It was fun. I saw it twice, and it was better the second time, IMO. I could just sit back and analyze the story and the frenetically paced action scenes even while knowing what was coming up.
I also want to point out that the M:I films started 10 years ago, with the last installment being released 6 years ago. And the second film was widely panned, but sailed bigtime on the anticipation from the first film. Plus, a whole generation has grown up since the first film with memories of M:I-II still fresh in their minds as a disappointing film. From your own words, big-boxoffice films have taken a nose-dive lately anyway. I think this film is going really well considering these factors. I can’t believe the negative write ups about this film’s boxoffice. It’s not the disaster that journalists are writing. It’s not asounding boxoffice numbers (i.e. M:I-II) domestically, but it’s far from being a disaster, IMO.
Just wanted to get that off my chest after reading your recent article.
http://moviecitynews.com/columnists/poland/2006/060518.html