MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Friday Estimates by Klady, 22809

Is there really anything to say?
The Jonas Bros. generated a strong number, which was overhyped going into the weekend.
The last Madea was off 57% in Weekend Two, 67% Friday-to-Friday..
Slumdog is getting a boost – not as all Oscar winners do, but as films that win and directly benefit from the new sense of public familiarity do – and has an outside shot of chasing down Juno ($143.5m domestic) to become Searchlight’s biggest grosser. Slummy is a near-lock to be bigger than pPreggo worldwide,with about $50 million to go and lots of big territories still yet to open.
The skinny former cop (Taken) cracks $100 million and the fat not-a-cop (Paul Blart) will crack $125m this weekend.
Coraline took a Jonas Bros. and 300 screen loss hit this weekend, but I actually expect it to recover and move up a slot or two this weekend as well as to remain in the Top Ten next weekend and perhaps longer.
And finally, a shout out to the Italian neo-realist thriller Gomorrah, which has done great at the IFC Center in NY for a few weekends now. For whatever reasons, it has not been coming up here on Saturdays as a big winner, but it really has been very strong.

Be Sociable, Share!

28 Responses to “Friday Estimates by Klady, 22809”

  1. danielle says:

    I had a feeling without the one-week only stunt, that Jonas would be about half of the Hannah Montana Concert film. Still, you have to hand it to Disney, it made it’s money back in one day and will have the second biggest grossing concert film after Hannah Montana. Who would have thought the Jonas Bros. opening weekend would gross more than the entire run of U2. But you won’t catch me anywhere near this film, I plan on finally seeing The Reader this weekend.

  2. mysteryperfecta says:

    I thought this was interesting:
    Total year-to-date box office is up $200 million over last year (+13.8%, not including this weekend), and an average of $350 million over the totals of the three years prior to 2008 (about +25% on average).
    Jonas Bros might be the first weekend #1 to not crack $20 million this year (it’ll be close).

  3. Joe Leydon says:

    Again: In tough times, people go to the movies to escape.

  4. jeffmcm says:

    ‘Not much to say’ comes up as a default template for blog postings, right?

  5. movieman says:

    Has anyone else seen “Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li”?
    That negligible $1.6-million opening day figure is actually better than it deserves: this is quite possibly one of the worst major studio releases I’ve endured so far this decade.
    When I see “Street Fighter” in a film’s title, I want a remake of Sonny Chiba’s X-rated “Street Fighter” from 1974, not some lameass vidgame knock-off. This sucker is so bad it makes Van Damme’s 1994 “Street Fighter” seem like “Kill Bill” in comparison.
    And to think that ex-cinematographer Andrzej Bartkowiak (“Prince of the City,” “The Verdict,” “Terms of Endearment,”
    “Prizzi’s Honor”) traded in his career as Gordon Willis’ heir-apparent just so he could direct junk like this. Huge bummer.

  6. Cadavra says:

    What the hell is “Cadavres?” I’M SUING!!!!!!!

  7. I have yet to see Street Fighter, but I laughed out loud while reading the various awful reviews that dripped into Rotten Tomatoes yesterday. Still, your blurb (makes the 1994 version look like Kill Bill) is one of the better ones, movieman.
    As it is, I watched said Jean Claude Van Damme vehicle last night, and wow, is it something else. Raul Julia seems to be doing a dead-on parody of the Alan Rickman scenery chewing, hero-upstaging villain bit that was all the rage after Die Hard and Batman. His performance alone makes it worth watching.

  8. Chucky in Jersey says:

    This particular “Street Fighter” went out semi-wide so the PTA will be on the modest side.
    “Gomorrah” is getting noticed as DP said. IFC should get it rated and keep it off PPV — otherwise it’ll be stuck in the arthouse ghetto.

  9. David Poland says:

    J-Mc… could you go a whole day without coming across as an obsessive troll?
    7 people contributed to this conversation so far… and all you did was snipe from the cheap seats. pathetic.

  10. Roman says:

    I have it on full authority that the original ‘Street Fighter’ movie was not only a ton of fun but represents exactly how video game adaptations of fighting games should be done.
    People who ridicule the movie are simply missing the point (and it goes without saying that they never played the games). Of course it’s silly and broad but it’s got good production values, does characters justice (Chun Li has Chun Li thighs 😉 ) and Raul Julia does kick a lot of ass.
    This, second movie, does look really dismal though I’m heartbroken since I didn’t really expect much from it or other Capcom adaptations in the firts place.
    As far as I’m concerned only the original Mortal Kombat was a better videogame adaptation.

  11. movieman says:

    …since I brought the Van Damme “Street Fighter” up, does anyone else think it’s peculiar that Jean-Claude got absolutely no career bounce/traction off “JCVD” despite a Cannes premiere and almost unanimous critical praise?
    While his performance is hardly in the same league as Mickey Rourke’s bravura, return from the ashes (if you somehow managed to miss “Domino” and “Sin City” that is) turn in “The Wrestler,” Van Damme IS pretty darn terrific–albeit playing “himself”–in “JCVD.”
    You might have thought Hollywood brokers would be looking at him a tad differently these days…but I haven’t seen any evidence to that effect.
    Was this guy really such an asshole in his coke-addled, party-hearty days that absolutely no one is willing to give him a second chance??

  12. movieman says:

    ..or could it be that no one in H’wood has seen “JCVD” because it’s, eek!!!!, subtitled?

  13. Roman says:

    “You might have thought Hollywood brokers would be looking at him a tad differently these days…but I haven’t seen any evidence to that effect.”
    Compare the grosses for JCVD and The Wrestler and you’ll have your answer. There’s no reason why brokers should care. That’s reason number one.
    Reason numbert two isn’t there isn’t much market for the kinds of movies Van Damme is making and nobody really sees him continue making self-referential movies like that for the rest of his career. Maybe if he wasn’t so stiff he’d have a good career in comedies.
    Stallone is pretty much the last one with a core base who continues making “old school” action movies with any kind of degree of visibility.
    Reason number #3 is apparantly Stallone wanted Jean Claude in his “Expandables” but apparently JCVD wouldn’t “lower himself to accepting a role without reading the script first”.

  14. movieman says:

    …comparing the grosses between “JCVD” and “The Wrestler” isn’t really fair since the former got an arthouse release by a teensy-tiny distributer while the other got the kid gloves treatment from the most powerful mini-major in the biz.
    I still think Van Damme’s witty, self-effacing performance in “JCVD” merits a better quality of material than he’s currently receiving.
    And why does he necessarily have to limit himself to the kind of action schlock that was his late ’80s/early ’90s bread and butter? Paging Quentin Tarantino…
    For the record, I happen to love “Hard Target” and “Double Team” (speaking of Monsieur Rourke), and have considerable affection for “Timecop,” “Knock Off” and “Maximum Risk.”

  15. Roman says:

    Well you brought up the Wrestler yourself so it felt right bring up it’s gross because no matter how unfair you claim it to be the fact that it wasn’t given a wider release does say something about the confidence levels in the movie’s appeal and also because I don’t really think that the audience for it was as big as you think (maybe I’m wrong here but do action fans really want to see that kind of role from him (perhaps!) and do the rest really care?).
    And listen, when I was really young JCVD was my favorite action star (thought I prefered the likes of Cyborg, Blood Sport and Double Impact) and I seeing his movies was a big deal for me. I grew out of that very quickly. These days I don’t even have much affection remeaning because seeing some of his interviews convinced me that he was a bit of jerk and not very bright (this is something JCVD didn’t change). Still, I would have very liked to see him re-invent himself and maybe a chance was just what he needed.
    I remember hearing how much he wanted to play Tintin. Maybe if he was given a more fitting and public role he would have done him good.

  16. lawnorder says:

    Crossing Over, despite mainly negative reviews and almost no support from Weinstein Company, is actually looking to have the second best per screen average after Jonas Bros. It’s only in 9 theaters, but Harrison Ford still is still drawing some attention. It looks to do about 8 grand per theater.

  17. movieman says:

    I brought up “The Wrestler” as a logical comparison/contrast because it was another film film festival darling that gave a heretofore washed-up ’80s icon a juicy “comeback” role.
    You have a very interesting accent, Roman (it comes across in your postings).
    I’m curious: where are you from?

  18. LexG says:

    VAN DAMME RULES, but “JCVD” was erratic, drab, and sluggish — nowhere near as fun as its boisterous, freewheeling trailer led me to expect. His monologue was great, though.
    Kickboxer, Cyborg, Nowhere to Run, Timecop, Sudden Death, Hard Target, Universal Soldier, Double Team, Maximum Risk, KnockOff = FUCK YEAH.
    His comeback should be my TOTAL OWNAGE script.

  19. Scott, you forgot to mention Kylie Minogue. Lord knows I love that woman’s music, but gawd she’s a worse actress than Madonna at her worst (especially since Madonna actually had a few great performances/movies).
    Speaking of these ’80s relics, am I the only really big fan of Stallone’s Cop Land? Wasn’t that meant to be a big comeback for him into serious territory and then nothing came of it (anyone who has seen the dire D-Tox – or Eye See You or whatever it goes by in the country you’re from – will attest to) and that’s a shame. I really liked Cop Land. I distinctly remember thinking the final shootout of “badass”.
    Although I do admit to getting a bit of a kick out of the final act of Rambo (on an) IV (drip).

  20. Eric says:

    I’m with you, Camel. I liked CopLand. Stallone is at his best when there’s a degree of vulnerability in the performance.

  21. The Big Perm says:

    Stallone’s problem wih Copland is that he didn’t commit enough ti being a serious actor. It seemed like a one-off. He made Copland (which I really liked) and then RIGHT back to making shit.
    I think Cyborg is scientifically proven to be the most boring movie ever made.

  22. Believe it or not, Cyborg was actually a restructured film that was originally intended to be the sequel to Masters Of The Universe. And yes, even at ten years old, I was bored to tears and thought Cyborg was the worst movie ever made.

  23. Believe it or not, Cyborg was actually a restructured film that was originally intended to be the sequel to Masters Of The Universe. And yes, even at ten years old, I was bored to tears and thought Cyborg was the worst movie ever made.
    As for Kylie Minogue… with the exception of Raul Julia, Wes Studi and maybe Roshan Seth, everyone is completely terrible in Street Fighter. No need to kick them while they’re down. But yes, the film is still campy, stupid fun (certainly, if only by default, it’s one of the best video game movies ever).

  24. Cadavra says:

    Anyone here see Landis’ OSCAR? Stallone proved in that that with a good script and director, he can turn in a whale of a comic performance.

  25. LexG says:


  26. christian says:

    And I thought Stallone was a lot of fun in SPY KIDS 3-D. He does a mean Kirk Douglas.

  27. leahnz says:

    i happened to catch ‘F.I.S.T’ the other night on cable during a bout of insomnia after not having seen it in like, forever, and i was surprised at how decent stallone’s turn as kovak was (but it was the middle of the night so i might have been a bit doolally)

  28. Believe it or not (if I recall), before Staying Alive (which he directed), Sly Stallone had a decent reputation as a filmmaker and actor. It wasn’t until the Rhinestone, Over The Top, Rocky III stuff that he started to become a self-parody. The problem is that, for most of the 70s and 80s, most of his non Rocky and non Rambo stuff didn’t do all that well box office wise, so he kinda started recycling those characters and trying new versions of said characters (think Over The Top).
    And, yes, Oscar is a terrifically funny film. And although it hasn’t aged all that well, Demolition Man is still pretty funny (Wesley Snipes’ Simon Phoenix is still one of my favorite whacked-out screen villains). As it is, I’d love a decent DVD or Blu Ray version of Nighthawks.

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