MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Mondays With Borat

Mojo is reporting a $3.3 million Monday for Borat. This once again puts the film in excellent box office company.
The only film since Talladega Night

Be Sociable, Share!

16 Responses to “Mondays With Borat”

  1. jeffmcm says:

    This strikes me as really strange. Who is seeing this movie on a Monday? It seems like most of the business would be coming from people who would have classes etc….?

  2. Direwolf says:

    Speak for yourself, Jeff. My wife and I who are in our mid-40s plan on seeing it tomorrow night. And I know plenty of high school and college age kids who would hit the movies any night of the week. Now, I’ll admit that we all fit into one of the Borat demos, which I would call upper middle class families with HBO.

  3. Richard Nash says:

    I bet they are kicking themselves over not putting it into more than 800 theatres opening weekend.

  4. Alan Cerny says:

    I doubt they’re kicking themselves. Look at all that free buzz they got. This thing’s gonna clear $100 million without them breaking a sweat.
    Also, I know a lot of people who go through the week. It’s less crowded with less kids.

  5. David Poland says:

    There are a few over there who now think they made the wrong call. But many others disagree internally. And I do externally. The last time a movie had this kind of “can’t believe it” media coverage was Pirates II.
    And the big thing is that when the Thanksgiving 5-day comes, Borat will be in the Top 5. That is a major accomplishment.
    Now, if next weekend it goes down 25% while tripling screens, there will be a lot of self-kicking.

  6. mdana says:

    F 9/11 was playing in the Summer. You can’t compare Summer weekdays with weekdays in early November.

  7. palmtree says:

    “Now, if next weekend it goes down 25% while tripling screens, there will be a lot of self-kicking.”
    I seriously doubt Stranger Than Fiction will put up that kind of fight. And I think Borat will have lots of repeat viewers.
    Question: have the expansion numbers been announced yet?

  8. David Poland says:

    They claimed 2200 on Monday, but I assume that will change. And really, the 800 ended being a little misleading as extra screens were added in many theaters

  9. EDouglas says:

    But it was still only 837 theatres, regardless of how many screens.
    I think people–not you–keep forgetting that theatres and screens are two different thing. A movie can play in 4,000 theatres, only get one screen in each, and it has a set limit of how much it can possibly make compared to a movie playing in 2,200 thatres and getting 3-4 screens/prints in each, which will probably be the case here. (Though 2,500 sounds more likely)

  10. T.H. Unfassung says:

    The post says The Departed, so requesting here, that you please post the press release announcing the hook-up between Marty and ParVan.

  11. palmtree says:

    For clarification:
    Screens equals screens
    Theaters equals theaters
    Engagements equals….what?

  12. T.H. Unfassung says:

    That’s easy. Engagements = bookings. Borat was booked in 837 theatres. For the “per” thing to be really meaningful, it would have to be per showing, because that takes into account multiple screens, the length of the movie and how closely packed the shows are. But, since no one has that info readily available, gross divided by engagements is the comparison we live with.

  13. David Poland says:

    Not really Vantage… they were included because they will do output on smaller projects, like docs.
    My take… buy high, sell low… or maybe not so smart…
    But someone choosing to be in business with a master is always okay by me.

  14. Blackcloud says:

    I went to see “Flushed Away” tonight in order to avoid the early part of the election coverage (really, who can watch right from the start?). My show was 7:15. The 7:00 “Borat” was “Full” according to the electronic marquee, which I took to mean “Sold Out.”

  15. Josh Massey says:

    I guess it’s easy to predict who EW will name their “Entertainer of the Year,” with “Borat” and “Talladega Nights” both huge.

  16. wolfgang says:

    “This strikes me as really strange. Who is seeing this movie on a Monday?
    Screenings for Borat were sold out in my neighborhood this past weekend. I can also testify that professions such as retail and hospitality (restaurants, hotels, caterers, etc.) now have their staff loaded up for weekend work (’tis the season) so their schedules leave them free for a weekday or two. Mondays are popular. Helps the worker-bees decompress.

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