MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Box Office Hell – May 30


Be Sociable, Share!

18 Responses to “Box Office Hell – May 30”

  1. Filmsnob says:

    SATC will do about 65-70mil this weekend.

  2. Filmsnob says:

    SATC will do about 65-70mil this weekend.

  3. LexG says:

    If it’s indeed already at 8mil as of 4pm EST — meaning barely anyone’s even had a chance on the West Coast and the big groups aren’t going till nighttime shows on either coast — isn’t it looking at 25-30 for today alone? 25-30 tomorrow, maybe 20 Sunday?

  4. Hopscotch says:

    I think it’ll be closer to $50M. My sister lives in NYC and she says that the local news coverage there on this film was just insane. And every female just HAS to see it opening night. Though the movie is already selling out around LA too.
    Which will be the angle of the story if SATC outgrosses Indy IV? Indy IV had that bad word of mouth or girl power is in or older women finally get a chance at something that appeals to them or what?

  5. MDOC says:

    I’m sorry but I have to ask this question. At work I heard two women discussing getting makeovers and dressing up to go see Sex and the City. Is this that far removed from dressing like a Wookie to go see Star Wars?

  6. Hopscotch says:

    That is a bit far removed.
    Let’s say…me and some of my friends want to smoke a bowl before seeing “Pinapple Express”? I’d say that’s more equivalent.

  7. jeffmcm says:

    I’d say dressing up is dressing up, and they’re both removed from illegal substances.

  8. LexG says:

    Hopscotch, just say no.

  9. jeffmcm says:

    Wait – smoking a bowl is the equivalent of the Star Wars dress-up or the SatC dress-up?

  10. Geoff says:

    My wife just went out with her girlfriends, leaving me at home alone to watch Swingers on cable, which I love.
    I have to say, this will be HUGE – from what she was telling me, tickets were tough to get. We live in Oak Park, right outside the city, and apparently, even near the city, it’s tough to get an evening ticket.
    I am predicting easily $70 million – a lot of prognosticators are going to chalk this up to being for an underserved audience, but in the past month, that is just not the case. From the looks of things, Baby Mama, Forgetting Sarah Marshall, and ‘Vegas are going to combine for over $250 million – if the four films weren’t so bunched together, one or two of them migth have had a chance at being a blockbuster.
    No, this is a true singular phenomemon – an event film for women. When is the last time that happened, honestly? Seriously, can any one think of anything along these lines? Does Charlies Angels really count? That show was huge when it was on the air, but the “jiggle” factor was as big a pull as anything.
    I’m trying to think of an actual chick event movie (‘Prada does not count) that had serious pre-release hype. The only ones I can think of are Bridges of Madison County in ’95 (remember how omnipresent that book was?) and Runaway Bride in ’99 (it was the de-factor sequel to Pretty Woman and Julie Roberts was really at the height of her box office powers). Thoughts, any one? Any others?

  11. Geoff says:

    One more thing – as we speak, Disney is working on deals to get production going on a Grey’s Anatomy or Desperate Housewives movie during the next hiatus. Mark my words, one of those movies will come out in the summer of 2010.

  12. polarbear2 says:

    Why doesn’t “Prada” count?

  13. djk813 says:

    Ally McBeal: The Movie with a cameo by Harrison Ford.

  14. Geoff says:

    Polarbear, Prada doesn’t count because it did not have “event movie” hype – the book was popular, but the movie was not, by any means, heavily anticipated.
    Trying to think of some other female “event films,” but it’s kind of a stretch. I guess you could count The First Wives Club in ’96 – the trailer had a huge response and the hype was pretty big for a September release.
    Oh, of course – Waiting for Exhale in ’95. Definitely a female event film, if there ever was one. The book was huge and it was Whitney Huston’s follow-up to The Bodyguard.
    Geez, were there any, this decade? Does Monster-in-Law count? It was Jane Fonda’s comeback.

  15. The Devil Wears Prada wasn’t anticipated? Did you go see that movie on opening weekend? That trailer was genius and definitely got people anticipating it.

  16. ployp says:

    Does the first Bridget Jones count?

  17. Geoff says:

    According to Fantasy Moguls, it did $28 million on opening day – there you go, I actually think the best comparison is The Simpsons, at this point. I can imagine the opening and final numbers being almost identical, which means $200 million is probably out of the question.
    Indy held OK at about $14 million and is probably going to eke its way to $300 million. Iron Man is holding amazingly well and actually has an outside shot of passing Indy, at this point.
    The Strangers was a shocker and could do about $17 million, this weekend.
    Ployp, Bridget Jones is actually a perfect example – however, from what I remember, they did not immediately open it wide and I am not sure why.
    Kamikaze, sorry, but ‘Prada just does not count – NOBODY, I mean nobody expected anything from that movie, maybe a middling gross. Yes, the trailer was well-received, but I doubt that Fox even spent $20 million marketing it – it came out the same weekend of the Superman juggernaut, which was no juggernaut. It was a surprise hit, but not an event film, upfront.

  18. Chucky in Jersey says:

    The trio Geoff refers to should be “Baby Mama”, “Made of Honor” and “Vegas”. All 3 had their release dates locked in.
    “Forgetting Sarah Marshall” is (1) NOT a chick flick and (2) was to have opened opposite “S&TC” but got moved up.
    Miramax did open “Bridget Jones’ Diary” wide (1600+) and added 600+ more for the 2nd week.

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