April 19, 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
early word is that fred claus is getting hammered with a 5 mil third place friday. Ouch.
I have a feeling that Lions for Lambs does, like, $6 million for the whole weekend.
Yeah, looks like Fred Claus will open in 3rd even after weekend matinees. Rough year for Joel Silver.
EXCLUSIVE FANTASY MOGULS EARLY FRIDAY ESTIMATES
1. American Gangster (Universal) – $7.4M – $2,419 PTA – $63.7M cume
2. Bee Movie (Dreamworks/Paramount) – $6.4M – $1,623 PTA – $52.6M cume
3. NEW -Fred Claus (Warner Bros) – $5.5M – $1,527 PTA – $5.5M cume
4. NEW
Those are some extraordinary numbers for the Coens — looking at a nearly $1 million weekend on only 28 screens. (And WOM should be good.)
Speaking of which, did you ever review No Country, Dave?
The Arclight evening shows for No Country (7:40, 8:30, 10:10) were all sold out by 3:30pm yesterday. I’ve never seen that in my 3 years living here. Oh well, tonight it is…
Scott Mendelson
Yeah, the equivalent Union Square showings of No Country (7:40, 8:10, 10) were all gone by mid-afternoon on Friday. I’ve seen that pretty much only with Harry Potter and Borat.
Excellent movie, though I think a little bit of the praise has been overblown — only in the sense that I wouldn’t say “best Coen movie ever” or even “best since Fargo” … but that’s only because I LOVE O Brother and Big Lebowski (and Fargo, which I think is a somewhat better movie than No Country).
Of course, it’s a fairly ridiculous comparison to make, at least in terms of those two comedies (there’s a lot of thematic overlap with Fargo). And I find myself, 12 hours later, wanting to see it again.
The Fantasy Moguls don’t have AfterDark Horrorfest on their list. It pulled in a measely $130,000.
Chris- Yes, “No Country for Old Men” will get great WOM…from Coen Brothers fans. I don’t, however, expect it to be a crossover hit for the Bros.; certainly not with the same mainstream audiences who turned “The Game Plan” into the biggest-grossing fall release.
Unlike it gets showered with beaucoup Oscar nominations, I really wouldn’t expect it to get much further than
$30-$35-million. Of course, anyone who paid to see “GP” (and, shudder, liked it) doesn’t deserve “NCFOM” anyway.
Great legs on “Dan in Real Life,” just as I predicted. Disney should have opened it earlier: maybe even late summer, a la “Little Miss Sunshine.”
It’s going to have a tough time holding onto screens with the barrage of Turkey Day releases descending on November 21st.
“P2”? PU is more like it. I know that Summit wanted to prove they were a major player, but isn’t there a cheaper way to establish street cred in Hollywood these days?
Those are some mighty naughty figures for “Fred Claus:” could the uniformly bad reviews have had some kind of negative financial impact??? That’s a semi-rhetorical question, of course. Everyone knows that critics don’t matter, especially with a heavily-hyped studio blockbuster (and that’s speaking as a professional movie critic).
Is it possible that the reason Tyler Perry still isn’t playing in the big leagues because even notoriously myopic studio chieftains realize there’s a finite ceiling on all of his films (e.g., the $52-million cume for “Why Did I Get Married?)? Perry remains a wildly successful niche player, but studios are only interested in home runs, not singles or even doubles. (Sorry for the overdone baseball metaphors: I’m still suffering from post-playoff Indians heartache.) This ain’t the ’70s, alas.
I’m going to respectfully disagree, movieman. Unlike the last few Coen movies, this one actually works as a genre film — it’s genuinely suspenseful. And it is going to get a ton of Oscar nominations but, even before that, it’ll probably pass your dollar ceiling. I don’t get the comparison to “Game Plan” at all — who said anything about it appealing to that audience?
Chris-
For the Coens to achieve “crossover” status–i.e., appeal to an audience larger than their existing cult (the ones who are selling out opening weekend shows at the Arclight)–they’ll need to satisfy the same mainstream multiplexers who loved, sigh, “The Game Plan,” “Transformers,” “Shrek the Third” and various other “audience”-friendly films. I don’t see that happening. It would be great to see the Bros. have a certified b.o. smash, but “NCFOM” is probably too esoteric, too artful, for the meat-and-potatoes crowd.
I’m keeping my fingers crossed that Miramax platforms it wisely enough–and wins enough Oscar nominations in January–to at least achieve “Queen” numbers.
OK, but you’re already changing your tune, since “Queen” numbers are more than $20 million more than the $30-35 figure you tossed around earlier. And those other movies you cite have a b.o. range of about $300 million, so I’m not sure what that’s supposed to prove. I wasn’t predicting a specific b.o. for “No Country,” just noting the “extraordinary” numbers but, OK, I’ll bite. It’s going to appeal to an audience larger than what you call the Coen “cult” — not the “Game Plan” audience, a comparison that makes no sense to me, but closer to the “Brokeback” audience (although I don’t think it’ll earn “Brokeback” numbers) or, for that matter, the “Fargo” audience. You know, adults who like good movies. I bet at least $50 million worth of them.
$50-million would be great for the Coens, but that hardly qualifies as a commercial “bnreakthrough:” not when “American Gangster” does nearly that amount in its opening weekend.
What I’m saying, Chris, is that it’s going to need “intelligent” platforming by Miramax (and a shitload of Oscar nominations) to ever get seen by “regular” moviegoers…and I’m not really sure whether they’ll “like” or even “get” it. I was only using “Game Plan” as the barometer for what (apparently) qualifies as a mass-appeal film these days.
And what constitutes a “good” movie for adult audiences these days is usually the same lowest common denominator crap topping the b.o. charts every weekend–not stuff like “Into the Wild,” “NCFOM” and “Jesse James.” Sure, every once in awhile something genuinely terrific “hits” (e.g., “The Bourne Ultimatum”), but that’s a pre-sold franchise picture. “3:10 to Yuma” was a “good,” satisfying “adult” movie, and it only sold $53-million worth of tickets. Again, hardly a “breakthrough” performance, or a statement about how quality-starved adult audiences will automatically flock to something that’s better-than-the-mediocre-norm. You’d be surprised at the number of adult moviegoers who actually think that crap tastes “good.”
What constitutes a “good” movie for adult audiences these days is generally the same recycled, lowest common denominator crap that routinely tops the box-office charts every weekend. I don’t think those “adults” will particularly like (or even “get”) “NCFOM,” let alone bother seeing it; not when it’s sharing multiplex real estate with Will Smith battling zombies in “I am Legend” or Nic Cage on another scavenger hunt in “Nat’l Treasure 2.”
If you took an average American adult moviegoer and showed them “The Game Plan” and “NCFOM” back-to-back, chances are that most of them would say “GP” was better because it’s safe, familiar, doesn’t “confuse” them and tastes better with their overpriced satchel of popcorn.
And a $50-million gross hardly qualifies as a “breakthrough” these days: not when “American Gangster” rakes in nearly that amount in its opening weekend. I would love, love, love to see “NCFOM” do $200-million in northern America, but it just ain’t gonna happen.
Audiences will choose–and prefer–the tried-and-true every time. Sure, occasionally something terrific will break through (e.g., “Bourne Ultimatum”), but that’s a pre-sold franchise picture that just happens to be a great movie. Not even a “good,” satisfying, old-fashioned cowboy picture like “3:10 to Yuma” could do much better than $50-million this fall. And that’s a movie that “adult” audiences would have probably enjoyed if they’d actually gone in sizable numbers.
And the reason I’m using “Game Plan” as a comparison point is because it qualifies as a typical, audience-pandering mainstream hit these days…the kind of junk audiences (adults, teens and kiddies) confuse with “good” because studio marketing convinced them that it was.
One thing I like about this site’s terrible commenting system is the way it allows us to observe other commenters’ editing processes.
Movieman won’t have to wait long. “No Country for Old Men” goes national on 11/16 and at least semi-wide on 11/21.
Don’t worry, this latest overpraised pic will get killed. Why? At least 1 trailer ID’s the Coen brothers with the all-too-telling phrase “Academy Award Winner”. The kiss of death!
I’ve already seen (and loved) “No Country,” Chucky.
(The Toronto Film Festival is a fantastic one-stop-shopping location!)
It hits Cleveland this Friday, and Miramax is adding screens throughout northeastern Ohio on the 21st (the same day twenty other movies hit the ‘plexes in a blitzkrieg attack: good luck!)
I wish “NCFOM” only the best, but how can a movie that’s merely “great” compete opposite blockbuster megaliths “I am Legend” or “Nat’l Treasure 2”? It’s best shot is a re-release when the Oscar nominations are announced. Until then, it’ll do terrific repeat biz among Coen buffs in major urban hubs.
Chucky, you’re wrong on this thread too. How can you say the movie is ‘overpraised’ since you refuse to see movies made by Academy-Award-winning writer/directors?
Care to revisit this topic, movieman? “No Country” is now the Coens’ top-grossing movie, it’s going to hit $50 million around the time the Oscar nominations are announced and that should add, what, at least another $15-20 million?