MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

By The Box Office Way

Even though Day 12 for Star Wars: Episode Three

Be Sociable, Share!

20 Responses to “By The Box Office Way”

  1. ManWithNoName says:

    Will we see a Superman sequel anytime soon? It seems likely they would have to scale the budget way back, meaning no cool villian but probably Lex Luthor again.
    (Side note — Apropos of nothing, but I never realized how enormous Dave Poland’s calves are.)
    😉 ^^^ All in good fun, I hope, DP.

  2. Eric says:

    I have long loved the Superman character, and had high hopes for the new movie, but my reaction was decidedly mixed. I don’t think Singer was the best choice for this one.
    Would Singer be able to make a better movie if he were hired for a sequel? I doubt it– he had immense resources for the first one, and the result was so-so.
    Would a better director be willing to take over? I kind of doubt it.
    As much as it pains me to say, I suspect that Superman will disappear from the big screen again for another ten or twenty years.

  3. Josh Massey says:

    It seems like a perfect “comeback” of sorts for Shyamalan, doesn’t it? Granted he’ll be able to work with a writer, of course.
    Oddly enough, I don’t think I’m kidding.

  4. Wrecktum says:

    Superman’s supercalves sunk at cinemas.

  5. ManWithNoName says:

    Wrecktum — I laughed. 😉

  6. Hopscotch says:

    The movie was all spectacle and no action. And the leading man was dull as a brick. Honestly, I don’t think it was Singer’s fault.
    Devil Wears Prada was a light meal. I wasn’t crazy about it. I saw it and my girlfriend smiled at me for seeing it with her, that’s all I was after.

  7. Jimmy the Gent says:

    Hopscotch–All you were after was a smile from your girlfriend? I hope you were after more.
    I actually liked DWP quite a bit. I think Streep and Tucci were terrific. Streep seems have a lock on a nomination. The big problem with the movie is the Hathaway character. Hathawy plays well enough, but the writers seem to have no clue about the kind of person that wants to be a successful journalist. I mean, she comes from Northwestern and has never heard of Runway magazine? That’s just impossible. Her friends are idiots. How can they be living in the city and not understand her pressures. Her boyfriend wants to be a major chef but doesn’t understand what she’s going through. He should be just as swamped with work as she is.

  8. Jimmy the Gent says:

    Any predictions for the weekend?
    I predict Lady in the Water and Monster House will battle it out fo the weekend. Clerks 2 and My Super Ex-Girlfriend will be happy to get table scraps. I figure Clerks 2 will get its usual $10 million.

  9. the keoki says:

    Jimmy, I think you’re forgetting that lil’ Pirate movie which did 6.6mil yesterday. Pirates 1, Monster House 2, Super Ex 3, Lady 4, Clerks 5. People love them some Pirates.

  10. Sandy says:

    LITW might take Friday, but Sat/Sun shows will be geared towards families so either POTC or Monster House will be # 1.

  11. Hopscotch says:

    Lady will beat Super Ex. But yeah, the Clerks TV spots aren’t funny, the trailer isn’t funny…it’ll be pulling up the rear.

  12. Hopscotch says:

    It all STARTS with smiles Jimmy, then it goes past that.

  13. martin says:

    not to defend Smith, but I suspect the tv spots and trailers are kind of lame because all the best material is too offensive for tv. Clerks 2 will do over $10, and based on its budget I think they’ll be happy with Jay and Bob final numbers. Again though, this weekend is the definition of car wreck.

  14. Lota says:

    it’s such a train wreck that I perked up when I saw Bond on the front page of IMDB…til I realized it won;t be released til November 🙁
    at least Miami Vice is coming soon.

  15. Jimmy the Gent says:

    Monster House and Pirates will battle it out. Lady in the Water will be next. Is Super Ex-Girlfriend on anybody’s radar? It just looks dull and by-the-numbers. I could be wrong.
    Good to know it all STARTS with smiles, Hopscotch.
    Anyone see my man Crow T. Robot? We need more humor.

  16. martin says:

    super ex may be a disaster as DP suggests but that shot at the end of the trailer where Luke and Uma have dinner, Uma says something about why she didn’t kill him, then he turns to make a face toward camera cracks me up.

  17. the keoki says:

    at this point it looks like Supes will be out of the top ten by next weekend. the only thing that will keep making any money will be IMAX. anyone think that Cars passes X3 this weekend? When it’s all said and done Cars will be at $240-250, talk about legs. Will that last the rest of the year for #2? Doesn’t seem like anything big (BO wise) is coming out for the rest of the year.

  18. Wrecktum says:

    Superman won’t be making any IMAX money after the 27th. Ant Bully opens on IMAX 3D screens the next day and Supes’ # of showtimes will disintergrate.

  19. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    Hmm, I forgot there were 4 movies opening this weekend. People constantly talk about Shyamalan destroying any good faith he had with audiences, but what about Kevin Smith? How many shit movies has he made in a row now? But then I didn’t like the original Clerks so I sorta don’t care. The only Smith movie I did like was Mallrats. Thank god he changed the name from The Passion of the Clerks though.
    Lady in the Water and Monster House i see doing around $30mil each. Super Ex high teens, low 20s (it looks like dumb fun for people who don’t read reviews). Clerks maybe around $10mil. Pirates should battle it out for #1 with the other 2 there.

  20. repeatfather says:

    “not to defend Smith, but I suspect the tv spots and trailers are kind of lame because all the best material is too offensive for tv.”
    Yeah, that was my first inclination too, Martin, but then I remembered why I rented Clerks in the first place back when I was a freshman in high school. I saw a PG-rated trailer on another video that didn’t have a single curse or sexual euphemism. There were a lot of funny bits in Clerks that weren’t ribald.
    I bet Clerks II will be DOA.

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