MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Friday Estimates by Klady

The first Narnia film opened to $23m on Friday and ended up doing less than triple that for the weekend… and about 12 times the number in the end, dometically. But that was early December, not on the holiday weekend and not in summer. So we don’t really know what the multiple will look like this weekend. I could be anyway between 2,5x to 3.5x really. We’ll have a better sense of that tomorrow, though the final number may be skewed by the Christian question, which is, do families go see the film after church tomorrow?
But let’s also keep perspective on the story. The difference between a Christian push and not is probably 20% – 30%… the difference, say, between a $200 million movie and a $250 million movie. That’s a lot of money in the real world, but in Move World, not as much.
Also keep in mind than the first Narnia did just over 60% of its box office overseas, $290m domestic to $450m foreign.
Iron Man is running about $40 million ahead of X2 and about $60m behind Spider-Man 3. This suggests that $260m doemstic is close to where the number will land.

Be Sociable, Share!

15 Responses to “Friday Estimates by Klady”

  1. Bart Smith says:

    Again, you still seem to be vastly undervaluing IRON MAN. It’ll be at $225 million come Monday. It’ll do around $1.5 million for the next four weekdays, putting it at over $230 million going into Memorial Day weekend. By the end of the 4-day holiday weekend, it’ll already be at or close to $260 million. X2 made another $23 million after Memorial Day with a softer start than IRON MAN. And SPIDER-MAN 3 did another $30 million despite dropping at a much faster rate than IRON MAN is doing (IRON MAN will gross more in its third weekend than SPIDER-MAN 3 did).

  2. Tofu says:

    It’s true, $260 is simply too low of a final tally. The legs on Iron Man will remain through Indiana Jones. Spider-Man weathered Attack of the Clones, and once again a Marvel flick will hold up to Lucasfilm. Speed Racer bombing and Narnia going soft only ensured this.
    Narnia is still the more interesting story this weekend. While Paramount did everything they could to downplay Iron Man, making the opening all the more impressive, Disney was nice at home with a $80 million opening. Now it may not match the first opening, and the legs most certainly won’t be as kind either. King Kong is no Indiana Jones, and January is no June.

  3. They really should have pushed Narnia back another 6 months. Christians are always more Christian at Christmas time.

  4. movieman says:

    I’m actually kind of pleased (for personal reasons not worth going into) by the below-expectations opening day figure for “Prince Caspian.”
    But I think Dave is exaggerating the “Christian Factor” in regards to making the first film a $290-million domestic hit.
    While the Bible thumpers may have played a part opening weekend, it wasn’t nearly as significant a boost as the bumps accorded Mel Gibson’s “Passion” (the greatest Catholic horrorshow since “The Exorcist”!) or even recent turd “Expelled.”
    And speaking of the Almighty: Gawd, I missed Tilda Swinton in “Caspian”!
    Nice hold for “Vegas” (it’s made nearly as much as Patty Cake’s egregious “Made of Honor”….despite opening 7 days later; ha-ha; ho-ho); sad-sad drop for “Speed Racer” (gotta say that I’m in total agreement with Dave on this one: I frigging loved this Creamsicle-colored fanboy wetdream); and for the rest…it just doesn’t matter, does it?
    Go, “Iron Man,” go!
    $210-million seems like kind of a low projected gross for “Wall-E,” Dave; especially when you consider that the kid-unfriendly “Ratatouille” did nearly that much last summer.
    “W-E” looks like Romper Room nirvana.
    Glad to see that “Reprise” open nicely for Miramax: terrific movie.
    If you’re anywhere near it, GO!

  5. IOIOIOI says:

    Iron-Man made enough to ensure the GOD OF THUNDER will have a film in two years. Heat can undersell Iron-Man’s final tally all he wants, but those numbers did what they needed to do. So huzzah for Iron-Man and here’s to Marvel signing Favreau for the next one.
    That aside; Caspian may not be living up to the potential of the first film. While the Christians came out for the JESUS LION with the first film. Aslan is in this film. So this Friday may be very soft but it could have a great Saturday and Sunday.

  6. Narnia should opening to about the same as the first, but it’s legs won’t get it as far. Can it perform ala Cars did and make it to 4x opening?
    “Christians are always more Christian at Christmas time.”
    It’d be funny if it weren’t so true (hell, it’s funny because it’s true).
    I hope The Visitor can remain in the top 10 come Sunday estimates. Would be a nice mini-victory, no?

  7. jeffles says:

    Any buzz on The Strangers, opening on May 30th? Trailer and TV spots make it look downright creepy…I want to see it, and could see it as a surprise hit…
    Also – I think Indy Jones disappoints at the box office this summer and Iron Man does more than Hancock.

  8. Chucky in Jersey says:

    “The Strangers” looks like a programmer, nothing more. Likely to flop as it opens opposite “Sex and the City”.

  9. jeffmcm says:

    The Strangers looks like the same movie as Vacancy from last year. I don’t think its direct competition will make any difference.

  10. I agree it’ll flop, but it looks veeery scary. Which is odd, considering movies aren’t meant to be scary these days, right?

  11. leahnz says:

    i love being scared shitless in a movie, it’s the ultimate for me (i think i’m a bit sick and twisted as the result of my idiot cousin taking me to see ‘the excorsist’ without my mother knowing when i was seven, i had to sleep with my light on for a month).
    i can’t remember the last time i had to watch a movie through the cracks of my fingers…i did that briefly during the pitch-black undergroud subway scene in ’28 weeks later’, but not since that i can remember. i hope ‘the strangers’ is scary as hell, i need a good fright

  12. jeffmcm says:

    Don’t get me wrong, it looks good and scary to me too. I just don’t expect it to make a lot of money, as it looks a little too vicious for a summer horror-movie success – a little too much Hostel 2 and not enough 1408.

  13. Basically we’re all agreeing, so why does it sound like we’re all trying to prove out own point? :/
    BTW, I liked Vacancy. Strange, but true. I thought that was actually quite scary until the silly ending. I was biting my nails throughout Ils too. But The Descent was the last movie to truly frighten me beyond belief. I was jumping outta my seat and was gasping throughout that one. I thought the old couple the row in front of me were going to have heart attacks.

  14. CaptainZahn says:

    The Strangers does look more harsh than 1408, but I hope it doesn’t venture into Hostel territory.
    I’ve read a lot of positive things about it. I wouldn’t be surprised if it made 15 million or more opening weekend.

  15. I don’t think summer was the right time for it (odd that they settled on summer after shifting it around so often), although that trailer has gotten a lot of extremely positive reception. Reminds me of when the Texas Chainsaw Massacre ’03 trailer came out. Whether you like that movie or not, you gotta admit the trailer was amazing and definitely helped boost those opening numbers.

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