MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Friday Estimates by Klady

Not too many surprises here, though estimates of the TNMT flick were pretty high considering that it is an old phenom having to face two, count ’em, two strong pictures right in the same demo.
Blades of Glory at about $32 million is a nice piece of marketing. It

Be Sociable, Share!

28 Responses to “Friday Estimates by Klady”

  1. waterbucket says:

    I saw 300 again last night and after that moment when Gerard Butler stands naked looking at the moon, I died a little. So hotzzzzzz!!!!!!!!!!

  2. jeffmcm says:

    Sin City was a blip? I thought it was a youth-oriented comic book movie and therefore its success was not a big surprise.

  3. martindale says:

    Wow, some horrendous drops for the family films, but there are just too many family films in theaters right now. Based on the makeup of the crowd at Blades of Glory last night, it wouldn’t be a stretch to call that one a “family film” as well. Next week is no better with Are We Done Yet and Firehouse Dog.

  4. jeffmcm says:

    I’m also surprised that Live Free or Die Hard got dumped in such a spectacular way – no way it’s making its money back on 5 screens.

  5. Lota says:

    Blades of Glory might have a solid number so far but it was crap–Bad! The opening scenes were funny but it was so SLOW in places and WIll I think was a bit too worn out looking for that role. Plenty of walkouts. Anchorman was funnier and more fun.
    Meet the Robinsons didn;t have alot of laughs, I did much prefer Ice Age. I did like the gangster scene (frogs) & Dino and his short arms. A bit too convoluted a story maybe for the intended market.
    I loved the 3-D Donald & CHipmunk punks

  6. Lota says:

    Yes Waterbucket, Gerry is pretty ripped in 300, but I preferred his manliness in Dear Frankie.

  7. Noah says:

    300 more than doubled what Sin City made. What are you really arguing against here? That it’s not its own genre? Okay, but it’s still a massive event, a movie that opened in early March and will finish with around 200 million bucks. You don’t think there’s going to be more films made like this and released like this? Open your eyes, Dave.

  8. Scott Mendelson says:

    I hope Meet The Robinsons holds up. I saw it for the second time this morning (saw the critics screening at the El Capitan on Wednesday) and it’s one of my very favorite cartoons in the last several years. The visuals are stunning (best 3D work since Polar Express), the writing is dead-pan hysterical, and the characters are all vivid enough to make you genuinely like and care about them. No pop-culture references, no stunt-casting, just a terrific cartoon written and acted by animation and voiceover professionals.
    It’s actually funnier than The Emperor’s New Groove and it’s rather touching too when it counts (in a weird way, the mustache twirling villain is one of the most sympathetic characters in the film). I don’t know what kind of behind the scene chaos went on between Lassiter and director Stephen J. Anderson (and considering how lousy Cars turned out, I’m glad Anderson stuck to his guns), but they pulled together something truly special.
    Scott Mendelson

  9. LexG says:

    What, no numbers for that bizarro re-release of PEACEFUL WARRIOR??? What’s that all about anyway, what with the free-ticket offers and such? Shouldn’t that thing be well onto its third month on Starz! by now? (Or, for the pay-channel savy among you, well on its way to appearing on Showtime 2.5 years from now?)

  10. Wrecktum says:

    “It’s actually funnier than The Emperor’s New Groove and it’s rather touching too when it counts (in a weird way, the mustache twirling villain is one of the most sympathetic characters in the film).”
    Interesting you shoud say that, Scott. The final shot of Bowler Hat Guy (confused, scared, dejected, standing alone with no future) is damn near haunting. Glad you also picked up on this aspect of the character.

  11. palmtree says:

    “I’m also surprised that Live Free or Die Hard got dumped in such a spectacular way – no way it’s making its money back on 5 screens.”
    LOL, Jeff. Live Free or Die is a whole different movie.
    Kid movies should be moving back up when Spring Break starts.

  12. Palmtree, I think Jess was joking. Or, I at least laughed at it. I saw that it was being released this weekend on IMDb and was all “Really. There’s been NO marketing” and then I realised it was so random indie movie with a similar name.
    Meet the Robinsons should glide towards $100mil though, so that’s pretty good. Seems there’s some good word of mouth.
    Scott, apparently there wasn’t even a villain in the original Robinsons before Lasseter showed up.

  13. Scott Mendelson says:

    That’s interesting (especially considering that the director voices that villain). Are they any articles that talk about the troubled history? And, on a related note, is there any way to find that alleged documentary about the making of The Emperor’s New Groove (another insanely troubled production that director Anderson was involved with, this time as one of the main story creators)?
    Anyway, considering that Cars seemed to regress into much of what is bad about cartoons (stunt-casting, boring pop culture references, pointlessly frantic activiy, constant jokes about non-humans participating in human activities as if that alone is funny, etc), I assumed that Lassiter may have been the bad guy here. I’d love to know more.
    Scott Mendelson

  14. Wrecktum says:

    Bowler Hat Guy was most assuredly in the original version of Robinsons. Lasseter’s input was to request the character become more villainous and less bumbling. He was apparently more of a comic devise and less of a rounded out character previously.
    The Emperor’s New Groove docu is called The Sweatbox and has sadly never been released outside of a brief Academy run back in ’02.

  15. waterbucket says:

    Lota, there’s no nudity in Dear Frankie right? So 300 is much better since his glorious nudity distracts us from the fact that he can manage only two expressions: growling and growling even harder.

  16. Cadavra says:

    Re PEACEFUL WARRIOR: Perhaps I’m a moron, but if the tickets are free, there wouldn’t be much of a gross, right?

  17. little_miss_moonshine says:

    ummm, flexing a six-pack while growling is the only expression needed.

  18. Tofu says:

    For the record, for most of the movie, Leonidas is sporting an eight-pack.
    Thank you, please continue.

  19. Chicago48 says:

    “Re PEACEFUL WARRIOR: Perhaps I’m a moron, but if the tickets are free, there wouldn’t be much of a gross, right?” Hey! I was someone who took advantage of those free tickets! and walked out 1hr and 15 min., it was THAT bad. Just a bad movie. Please god, no more BAD movies.

  20. Lota says:

    Ugh. I can’t believe Ferrell’s latest did so well, but I am one of the suckers who paid to see it, but I hope as punishment for inflicting so many unfunny homophobe references that the drop is 75% by end of next weekend. I can;t give it good word of mouth. Elf and Anchorman were OK, but many jokes not a peep of laughter was heard by the audience. I think it was even less appetizing than Night at the Museum.
    Waterbucket did you see Dear Frankie? I admit that with me and Gerry, it’s only physical, but he was infinitely more hot in Dear Frankie. He was quiet but dangerous. In ‘300’ he needed to shut the F*ck up and he didn’t seem worth even one night by the end of it. But then, being a Spartan he’d be more interested in you than me anyway, most likely.

  21. waterbucket says:

    Lota, I haven’t seen Dear Frankie and won’t anytime soon since it’s not my type of movie. For me, the only time Gerry can be hot is when he’s buff and naked. Gerry is no Clive Owen in the personality department.

  22. little_miss_moonshine says:

    Brace for really hotz – Clive Owen as Sir Walter Raleigh, opposite Cate Blanchett as QEI, in The Golden Age. That said, Gerry’s got a wry self-deprecating sense of humor in person, buff or notz.

  23. Lota says:

    Clive has no smoldering passion in my opinion, so I was greatly relieved when he was not chosen as Bond. Can you see him in the shower scene? Oh my word no no no NO! I’ll take Gerry or Daniel, shaken or stirred with olives please.

  24. Scott, MCN linked to an article recently about John Lasseter in which he discussed the issues with the original Meet the Robinsons. I guess that because the story was about Lasseter that it made him out to be the good guy.
    Shame The Sweatbox never got a release. Not even on DVD.

  25. Ju-osh says:

    …or even YouTube!

  26. Or Google Video. I watched Todd Haynes’ banned 1987 film Superstar: The Karen Carpenter Story on there last week. Really great. That’s the movie where all the characters are played by Barbie and Ken dolls.

  27. westpilton says:

    Sorry that this question is so far off topic but I was searching for something on IMDB this morning and I came across the page for Guy Ritchie’s REVOLVER. Whatever happened to this movie? I remember reading reviews from the Toronto Film Festival in 2005, but then it just disappeared. Is it still getting a US release? Anyone know?

  28. Weren’t said reviews very very dire?

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