MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

You Have A $150 Million Movie… Now What?

Only eight movies before Twilight have cracked $100 million domestic from distributors that were not studio-affiliated. And the only company in that group that are still seriously in the distribution business is Lionsgate. And they got their one movie in 9-figures from Miramax, a Disney division. Avco, Newmarket, Orion, USA

Be Sociable, Share!

37 Responses to “You Have A $150 Million Movie… Now What?”

  1. brack says:

    It’s a home run for Summit, no question about that, thanks to the die-hard fans of the Twilight saga. Though the budget and quality have to go up for the Twilight sequel New Moon. I thought the movie captured the tone of the book, but it really is just a CliffNotes version, and that left many fans disappointed. Unless the sequel satisfies fans and general audiences alike, there probably won’t be sequels after New Moon.

  2. LexG says:

    I… TOLD… YOU… SO.
    WHO else was calling this MAMMOTH BOX-OFFICE TRIUMPH *over a half a year ago*?????
    Before the endless EW covers, before Finke, before Voynar, ONE MAN stood proud as the TWILIGHT HYPE MAN, a one-person STREET TEAM telling you exactly how it was all gonna go down.
    They should put me on salary for pimping that shit so hard and turning it into a FOREGONE CONCLUSION.
    Get on your knees and BOW. First to LexG, then to the GREATEST ACTRESS OF THE LAST HUNDRED YEARS OF CINEMA.
    Also, NEVER BACK DOWN fucking OWNED; Not its fault you all smugly think you’re too good for it, and that most of you last the will to get your ass handed to you by a movie.

  3. What was the $100 million grosser fro Avco? I know it wasn’t Vice Sqaud.

  4. jeffmcm says:

    That’s funny, I was just watching Vice Squad last night, what are the odds?
    Lex, you’re still hundreds of millions and at least a dozen Oscars short on your Twilight predictions = FAIL.

  5. LexG says:

    Who is going to snap up THE STEW first:
    Bruckheimer, Bay, or Spielberg?
    It seems inevitable.

  6. Blackcloud says:

    No one if she keeps acting like a total idiot in her TV appearances. She’s still a nobody, and will stay one if she keeps that up.

  7. LexG says:

    TOTAL IDIOT???? Explain, please.
    You mean, acting like a perfectly normal, shy, polite young actress who isn’t used to the Hollywood bullshit machine, and doesn’t respond like a trained seal when Dave pulls his “Look at you, you’re like a kid, is your boyfriend’s name Louie?” stale shtick he’s been doing for TWENTY YEARS>?

  8. jeffmcm says:

    No, acting like a stoned, sullen kid who doesn’t realize that they haven’t been invited on the show to hang out, but rather to actually be entertaining and tell funny or interesting stories so as to make their appearance worthwhile on a media platform with millions of viewers, and maybe to actually make her tweenybopper movie look worth seeing to people outside the key demographic.

  9. LexG says:

    I was entertained by every second.
    And it’s well known that K-STEW takes her craft very seriously, and it was obvious Dave was dismissive and condescending to her and about her project from the moment she sat down.
    Which seemed like an arbitrary target, since there are DOZENS, HUNDREDS of similar, and similarly-aged, and similarly-serious, actress over the years where Letterman’s just started fawning and flirting and messing up their hair and being a giant goofball.
    But THE STEW doesn’t roll like that.

  10. EthanG says:

    A limp noodle could out-act Kristen Stewart. She is mind-blowingly terrible in Twilight. No wonder the studios shied away, based on her perf alone. If you REALLY want to check out her acting chops though, see “What Just Happened” a movie in which I wondered if she was sleepwalking in scenes that featured her. The future of cinema??? Two of her last 5 movies couldn’t even find distribution!!! And Twilight isn’t even going to outgross Madagascar: Escape 2 Hell.
    Also, D-PO are any of the films you named franchise films? Summit has a trilogy to work with, and supposedly Twilight is the weakest book. Also, Push, their new sci fi flick dropping in a couple months doesnt look too bad…

  11. LexG says:

    She OWNED in WHAT JUST HAPPENED? and TOTALLY ELEVATED DE NIRO’S GAME. It is no coincidence that his most invested and lived-in performance (except maybe for Good Shepherd) of the last decade is the one where he knew he had to square off against Kristen Stewart.
    She was BRILLIANT in TWILIGHT and will be nominated.
    EthanG, you don’t deserve your last initial after that nonsense. Get on your knees AND BOW AS THOUGH GENERAL ZOD HIMSELF WERE COMMANDING YOUR HATING ASS. BOW.

  12. jeffmcm says:

    Lex, you were ‘entertained by every second’ because your hand was wrapped around your tallywacker. I used a euphemism so as not to offend your delicate sensibilities. Stewart was boring, and on Letterman it’s ‘go strong or go home’ (unless a certain hotel heiress is on, and then he betrays himself).

  13. LexG says:

    Jeff, that first sentence is untrue and offensive, but mostly I wish your JARED-FROM-SUBWAY-LOOKING-ASS would stop imagining me in that manner. You seem to mention it way too much for comfort.
    I always knew you were a fan.

  14. jeffmcm says:

    Lex, you have officially piloted The Hot Blog on its’ shark-jumping odyssey.

  15. LexG says:


  16. LexG says:

    (That was a reference to Jeff’s resemblance to a certain sub sandwich pitchman.)

  17. jeffmcm says:

    I’m also staggered by the arrogance that you have in pretending to be offended by the exact same content that you spout regularly (i.e. jerking off to actresses) You are a liar.

  18. jeffmcm says:

    And I don’t have NEARLY as much loose, baggy, extra skin as Mr. Fogle. I warn you, I know lawyers.

  19. brack says:

    Tom Cruise’s lawyers?

  20. David Poland says:

    Uh, boys…

  21. Blackcloud says:

    Did I just cause a pissing contest between Jeff and Lex?

  22. IOIOIOI says:

    Jared from Subway looking ass? BAAAAAAAWHHHHHH!!! That’s a good one.
    Brack: what the fuck ever. Those fans are women and women have a problem when ADAPTATIONS do not follow everything JUST LIKE THE BOOK! This is the differences between men and women: men accept the change more than women ever will.
    So those women — who also read the Harry Potter books and bitch about those films — will have to learn how to deal. That’s how it works. If they want to bitch about, then they can go without Pattinson. It would seem they are incapable of doing so, and as usual the fucking MOVIE WILL WIN.

  23. IOIOIOI says:

    Oh yeah: Warners will figure out one day, that franchises can only go on for so long. Eventually, they will hit upon something, and they will get a clue. If not; the next decade will be really uplifting for them.

  24. EDouglas says:

    I just wish Summit would throw some of that money into promoting Rian Johnson’s The Brothers Bloom. They delayed it two months because they presumably needed more time, essentially losing the momentum of the movie’s premiere at Toronto (and a junket held there with most of the journalists from across the nation who will probably forget all about it by now)… so I have a feeling that Twilight and its sequels will be an anomaly for the company, used to fund the rest of the year’s lackluster releases.

  25. Stewart won’t become the star out of Twilight, it’ll be Robert Pattinson.

  26. LexG says:

    I am not hating on Pattinson and that dude will be huge, and much respect. What I wouldn’t give to look like that dude or have his life at the moment. BUT THE STEW IS THE NEXT KATE WINSLET.

  27. If you had his life you’d throw it away on booze and STD-riddled tarts. And considering your comments about nobody watching Kate Winslet movies twice, I find it hard to imagine many people are clamouring to watch Zathura once, let alone twice.

  28. yancyskancy says:

    I thought Stewart was excellent in Twilight. Her role is a bit thankless compared to Pattinson’s, since she is the core audience’s surrogate, not its love object. But she nailed it.
    As for her Letterman appearance, I can’t bring myself to watch it, because I don’t particularly need to see a cat play with a mouse for 7 minutes. So she’s not a great interview — neither is De Niro or many other noted actors. Sure, if I were a Twilight publicist, I’d be bummed, but I try to judge actors on their acting, not talk show appearances, scripted award show banter, or TMZ ambush footage. Especially teenagers, for God’s sake.

  29. LexG says:

    EASILY up there with the top five cool posters, and ALWAYS recognizing.

  30. Filmsnob says:

    Kristen Stewart was the worst thing about Twilight. Her scenes were painful to watch. The only thing she’s good at is lighting up.

  31. brack says:

    OMG, not weed! Anything but weed! She’s a terrible human being!

  32. EthanG says:

    She’s getting nominated????….for what??? SJP is more likely to get a nom for Sex and the City than Kristen Stewart.

  33. christian says:

    Can you count on one hand the number of guests who have ever called bullshit on Letterman’s condescension? Where have you gone, Harvey Pekar?

  34. yancyskancy says:

    Not sure what folks were expecting from Stewart. She was cast as a sullen, bookish, outsider-type teen girl who’s crushing on a dangerous guy, so that’s what she plays. I don’t expect her to get nominated though, because the Academy usually thinks subtlety equals lack of effort. Hope I’m wrong, Lex.

  35. IOIOIOI says:

    The best part of that interview is David Letterman’s stupidity about modern Europe. Apparently the dumb hick motherfucker NEVER HEARD OF THE CHUNNEL! THE FUCKING CHUNNEL! One of the great achievements of modern engineering, and dipshit has no idea it exist.
    If he did. He would know that you can now drive from LONDON TO THE REST OF FUCKING EUROPE! HELL… YOU CAN TAKE A BOAT! Fucking moron and his audience too!

  36. IOIOIOI says:

    as in you can put your car on a BOAT and it will take you to the rest of Europe. They still refer to it as DRIVING.

  37. christian says:

    I do love Dave, but there are moments when his limitations are manifest. For a guy with that much money and access, he’s often ignorant. At his worst, he’s like Leno interviewing David Lynch: “Gee, you’re kinda weird. Kinda oddball. I don’t get it. Do you?”

The Hot Blog

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