MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Box Office Hell – November 14


Be Sociable, Share!

16 Responses to “Box Office Hell – November 14”

  1. palmtree says:

    Mr. Poland, I think you’ve switched Happy Feet and Casino Royale’s grosses in the Mojo camp. It’s HF at 42.8 and CR at 47.2.

  2. David Poland says:

    Thnaks, Palmy… was rushing to a meeting… fixing now

  3. Direwolf says:

    I think FA will beat SC3.
    $51M for Bond would be excellent. The reviews are awfully good so maybe it could get that high. Not much else has been around for action fans lately. MI3 opened at $47M and this seems to have better buzz. Die Another Day also at $47M and I think that was the last Bond film.
    Happy Feet will play very strongly the next 10 days. It seems like I have seen lots of ads and I think they all look great. In the $40s seems plausible to me.
    Key is that both these films should legs. Borat has legs. Departed has legs. Prestige has legs. Depth of decent product has been the story this year. Most weekend comps are up because the product is decent and there has been something for everyone to see. A good lesson for the studio execs and a good lesson for those who think the exhibition business is doomed.

  4. David Poland says:

    It’s amazing how excited pople get.
    History tells us that there have only been 10 $40 million-plus November openings ever. As big as Die Another Day was, I don’t think this really qualifies as a straight sequel. But who knows?
    1 | Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire | $102,685,961 | 11/18/2005
    2 | Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone | $90,294,621 | 11/16/2001
    3 | Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets | $88,357,488 | 11/15/2002
    4 | The Incredibles | $70,467,623 | 11/5/2004
    5 | Monsters, Inc. | $62,577,067 | 11/2/2001
    6 | Toy Story 2 | $57,388,839 | 11/24/1999
    7 | How the Grinch Stole Christmas | $55,082,330 | 11/17/2000
    8 | 8 Mile | $51,240,555 | 11/8/2002
    9 | The Matrix Revolutions | $48,475,154 | 11/5/2003
    10 | Die Another Day | $47,072,040 | 11/22/2002

  5. EDouglas says:

    David, let alone 2 $40 million openers in the same weekend.
    BTW, my predictions are reversed. I had Happy Feet on top with $41.6 million…but chances are that the incorrect posting will probably be right, so may as well leave it 🙂

  6. Direwolf says:

    I’m not saying we will have two $40 million openers but these films play to different audiences, are well reveiewed, and have been heavily advertised for weeks.
    The last three Harry films show that there is $80 million plus in business out there this weekend.
    We shall see.

  7. Blackcloud says:

    I wouldn’t be surprised if Bond beats the penguins, as I think “Happy Feet” as the family movie has the advantage for the holiday weekend.

  8. Martin S says:

    What fucking reality do these bookies live in?
    This is the largest regular-season weekend for football, (high school & college), + the week before mid-terms, + the release of the PS3, + the NBA is in full swing and NFL is at mid-season…
    -and someone thinks a no-name Bond is going to pull in 40M? If this breaks 30, Sony should cut off those Happy Feet and wear ’em.
    And EW leaves in an Arrested Development pipedream if they think Let’s Go To Prison is going to see the ass-end of 5M, let alone 7. I’m a *huge* Arnett fan, and I can’t make the time to see Bond, let alone his flick.

  9. Blackcloud says:

    Given that there were at most 400K PS3s sold today, the PS3 will have only a minimal effect on the box office, and it’ll probably be negligible. Unless you think all those people standing in line will have an effect because they won’t be at the movies.
    And who on Earth is giving mid-terms in November, let alone the week of Thanksgiving?

  10. jeffmcm says:

    I’m not sure what a ‘no-name Bond’ movie means. Bond is the name, regardless of who happens to be playing the part.

  11. Me says:

    Besides, those people with PS3s aren’t playing them, they’re just posting them on eBay. Plenty of time to slip out and see Bond.

  12. Martin S says:

    Anyone who gets a PS3 is going to showboat it, regardless of age. That will kill an entire afternoon or evening easily. All you need is one pre-teen/teen in one cluster community to get one, and he’ll pull the majority of his friends over and they are out of the loop. As for the Ebay factor, if you really want one and are willing to pay anywhere near a K, you’re not going to waltz off to the theatre on the weekend of release since now is your best bet to win it. And not all 400K are going on-line. John-boy Edwards didn’t send an assistant to Wal-Mart for one so he could pimp it. The parent factor is as strong as the quick-change artist.
    As for a no-name Bond – I like Craig. He’s a great actor and a great choice. But he’s no one. That will make people wait for word-of-mouth. The expectations are overblown and I cannot believe Sony is expecting 40M. Look at Batman and SR – reboots that didn’t open to anticipated numbers, and those were summer films when *everyone* supposedly goes to the moooveezz.
    I’d bet Pascal hopes it doesn’t open to anything larger than 35M, because than she’ll be in a war for the property when Sony can least afford to pay heavy to keep it or lose the name brand. Anything over 40 and it will be a bloodbath with FOX probably coming out on top.

  13. Blackcloud says:

    400,000 PS3s vs. 300,000,000 million Americans. Do the math.

  14. Cadavra says:

    Sorry, Martin, with nearly 15 in the till on Friday, no way CASINO doesn’t break 40.
    (does happy dance with penguin feet)

  15. jeffmcm says:

    To be fair, Blackcloud, a huge number of those 300 million never go to see movies at all, while those 400,000 PS3 owners are the prime demographic for a Bond movie.
    But yeah, this was always going to gross at least $40m. A Bond audience doesn’t need a ‘name actor’ in the part, as long as the movie appears to offer what people expect from a Bond movie. If the part was given to Carrot Top, then you might see a drop-off.

  16. Blackcloud says:

    I agree that the PS3 and Bond crowds overlap, and that the majority of those 300M Americans don’t go to the movies. But there’s only so much the PS3 can eat into the Bond crowd given how few of them were available. And getting a PS3 and going to see Bond aren’t mutuall exclusive. The math just doesn’t add up, even if you posit some effect.
    As for Carrot Top, don’t encourage ’em, Jeff, they may do another spoof.

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