MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Friday Estimates by Klady – GI Cobra

friest080809.png
Mwaa ha ha!!!! So you puny film critics and writers thought you could outwit The Cobra Commander of Marketing. Mwah ha ha!!!
I know there is a conversation out there about how “this kind of movie opens to this kind of number,” but that doesn’t really give credit to Paramount’s marketing team. Remember, an established brand with Batman leading the way, Terminator Salvation, still only opened to $42.6m. This number for GI Joe: Rise Of The Cobra is going to be bigger than that. How much bigger no one really knows… because everyone is guessing about today, just as everyone was guessing about yesterday all day.
The new spin, rolled out to Nikki Finke by Rob Moore, that the movie was sure to tank and didn’t and that the likely losses on the movie will be covered by Paramount’s piece of the licensing on movie-branded versions of GI Joe toys… both a load of it. As I have written before, the anger in the media had a lot to do with a real sense that the movie WAS going to open well and the already impotent critics class was taking a hit for no reason while Paramount tried to backdoor raves even beyond the quote whores and junket class, by selecting geeks – most of whom hated Trannys2 – to deliver a very specific media message that the studio wanted. There were a few who would tell you that the movie would outright stiff on opening weekend, but those people were few and far between. $50m million was the presumed weekend for weeks… and it will probably be slightly higher, but not much. There is NO surprise here.
As for the math on the film… assuming the $175 million is true… it may be a bit low… but let’s start there. Though the studio is selling the gossips that this is going to be a mega-DVD title, about the max they can expect to ship on this is 7.5 million units. So let’s go about $140m in post-theatrical. So to cover (a generous) $300 million in production and marketing, the film needs to do about $290 million worldwide to break even.
Iron Man did 10% more here than overseas. The first Transformers did 10% more overseas than here. But either way you cut it, GIJ:ROTC needs to get to a minimum of $135m domestic to have a shot at breakeven. 2.5x opening, regardless of all the drama around this release, is no lock these days… especially in genre… unless you are “a hit with audiences.” With GIJ:ROTC be that? We’ll see.
Friday estimates on Julie & Juila have varied by a not-insignificant amount. Our Len Klady has it at $6.4m. Finke has it at a Sony-friendly $7.5m (though that number dropped out of her headline a couple of rewrites ago). Steve Mason came out with a $7m guess late last night. A million swing on what Friday was could mean a 10% variation (or more) on what the weekend is.
I like Julie & Julia, am sure of a Streep nomination for this performance, and if the film legs out $100 million, I like its odds in getting a Best Picture nomination come January. However, this is not a great opening number for this film. The Hangover, The Proposal, Bruno, and The Ugly Truth have all opened stronger, as comedies, this summer. The opening is right between Funny People, which got eye-rolled last weekend after opening to $22.7m and Year One, which was written off as a disaster with a $19.6 million opening.
That said… Hangover and Proposal have been very, very leggy… around 6x and 5x opening. And The J&J Cooking Factory is much more of the leggy mode than the other 3 films that opened better than J&J will. So, a $20m opening could lead to $80m or $100m without that legged out success being shocking. And that would likely take the film from being the #5 comedy opened to being the #3 comedy of the summer. And, as Nikki noted, the film is relatively cheap… around $50m.
One of the big questions will be how Juila child draws in Europe and the rest of the world. Streep’s comedies have played better overseas than her intimate dramas – Prime did double what it did here over there – and she is blazing hot from Mamma Mia!, which is the only non-effects/non-animation/non-comic book film other than The Da Vinci Code to gross over $400 million overseas (it did $458m). Ratatouille did $65 million in France alone. So the film looks like it could end up breaking even on the US alone and then making some nice profits “over there.”
Funny People… well… I am really sick of the Universal pile-on. It’s a trend story that’s become grossly overstated. As I keep noting, Bruno keeps getting called a disaster when it’s actually a success financially. Public Enemies is slowly moving to $100m domestic and breakeven status. Drag Me To Hell is profitable. But yes, Land of The Lost lost. And State of Play and Duplicity are being overly focused upon as iconic examples of the box office slump of drama and film stars over 40.
All that said, Funny People won its first 5 days in the box office wars and fell off Wednesday to #3, stayed there Thursday, and actually picked up a little by estimatedly passing Potter yesterday for a day. The Friday Drop has become a battering ram for writers, including me at time. I don’t think the 70% drop is the focus. Truth is, the movie opened about as well as it was going to open. And now, we are seeing word of mouth (in spite of Twitter being down for a day… looking forward to Forbes quantifying the loss) play out. This is an Adam Sandler drama with some comedy. Spanglish was off 77%, first Friday to second Friday and ended up off just under 47.4% from the first to the second weekend. Look for the film to top out around $55m here, to do about $25 million overseas, and to lose money. And life will go on.
Meanwhile, The Ugly Truth will land in the $80m range that Robert Luketic pretty much does in the US, but this could easily be his biggest film overseas, with Gerry Butler and a very Euro-ad-friendly premise to work with.

Be Sociable, Share!

27 Responses to “Friday Estimates by Klady – GI Cobra”

  1. EthanG says:

    Well Joe is headed for a 60 million weekend, though how in the world a probably maximum 140 million domestic gross justifies a sequel with probably a quarter billion spent on budget and P&A baffles me…it does, however, likely cement Paramount’s status as the studio of this summer.
    Off topic…but who deserves a Honeybaked Ham for their over the top performance in this movie? Quaid or Gordon-Levitt? I’ve got to go with Gordon because he seems to attack his part with relish…his laughing is the most campy/maniacal of any villian in a long time. Quaid also knew he was in a bad flick but I just picture him gnashing his teeth in annoyance before each take. Anywho…
    When’s the last time a live-action foodie flick opened to $20 million? Never…this is possibly a bigger relative coup for Meryl than Mamma Mia or Prada. If only people embraced GOOD foodie flicks like “Babbette’s Feast…”=(
    Man oh MAN it’s a bad cap-off for Universal this weekend…the only perfect getaway they’re having is the knowledge their summer slate is done…good this they signed Apatow to 3 picutures before this horrendous dropoff/horror debut.
    500 Days of Summer=FAIL. Sad=(

  2. movieman says:

    That 2,757 screen count for “500 Days” is way off, Ethan: it’s
    actually a lot closer to 800.
    So F-S still has bragging rights for smartest marketing-of-a-merely-okay-movie-without-stars this summer.
    I’m just wondering how long before “500” finally hits my neck of the woods. (I’ve already given up on “Hurt Locker” ever going wide enough to reach the Youngstown, OH market.)

  3. SJRubinstein says:

    I really enjoyed “Julie & Julia,” but wonder if I would’ve liked it as much if I had gotten my wish every time Amy Adams was on screen when I thought, “Man, when are they getting back to the Child plotline?”
    But maybe that’s because I’d read “Julie & Julia” and knew where the Julie Powell plotline was headed.
    Or maybe it’s because Meryl Streep was just so amazing as Julia Child that I was left wanting more – which is precisely the mark of good entertainment, no?
    And I have to say, bad press or no, the trailer for “The Princess and the Frog” gets me every time. By lining up “Aladdin,” “The Lion King,” “Beauty and the Beast” and “Little Mermaid” in front – sure – they’re making some pretty hefty comparisons (what, no “Treasure Planet?!”), but it just looks like a really solid, traditional non-Pixar Disney film.

  4. Ha! When I was a senior in high school, I closed out the end-of-year banquet for the drama club by picking a freshman who I could ‘trust’ to keep my personal tradition of over-the-top performances alive. Yes, I gave that young man a Honeybaked Ham gift certificate. He actually seemed touched.
    As for the question, I gotta second the vote for Levitt. Quaid wasn’t nearly as hammy as he was in The Alamo.

  5. EthanG says:

    Universal is a trend story? Whether or not they were just the distributor, they have another bomb on their hands this weekend in “Getaway,” a film that’s been advertised heavily, at least in my market. “Public Enemies” is not going to be profitable. It isn’t going to hit $100 million here, and has fared pretty poorly overseas up until this point.
    People pointed out recently that “Land of the Lost” hasn’t opened in many places worldwide..now that it’s flamed out big time in those places…ummm..???
    As for Funny People, dramedy or not dramedy, it’s by far the worst Friday over Friday drop of any Apatow flick, directed or produced.
    Their slate for rest of the year, looks to me, like a Studio du Freak. But we’ll see…

  6. I too respond to the Princess and the Frog trailer will a massive wave of nostalgia. My wife is just psyched that it’s the first major kids flick in ages that isn’t in 3D (we want to take our then 2.5 year old, but she won’t wear 3D glasses).
    It’s funny… maybe it’s because Disney movies were generally mediocre when I was young, but I grew up never wanting to be caught dead in a Disney cartoon. But, come my preteens through college, I was there for every one (Aladdin, Lion King, Hunchback, etc) on opening weekend if not opening day.

  7. Dr Wally says:

    “Public Enemies” is not going to be profitable. It isn’t going to hit $100 million here, and has fared pretty poorly overseas up until this point”
    Yeah, but PE is also an asset in perpetuity. The Mann has only ever had one nine-figure domestic grosser (and that starred Tom Cruise), but Heat, Vice, Mohicans and The Insider still get attention years after the event. With Public Enemies, again he plays the long game and will win.

  8. frankbooth says:

    Hey Lex, what do you think of that movie with Milla Jovovich and Steve Zahn as a couple ? Does it make you shake with rage?
    I’m ready to dismiss the movie based on casting alone, unless his character is very rich.

  9. jeffmcm says:

    Under Lex’s rules, Milla Jovovich, currently age 33, is a washed-up hag.

  10. filmfan says:

    Saw “Juli& Julia” last night and loved every second of it. I really liked both stories and being a fan of Julie’s book I really appreciated the way the two stories mirrored each other at times in nice little ways.
    Thought the whole cast was great.
    Saw ‘”GI Joe” this afternoon at the Ziegfeld in NYC (which is enormous and the best place in town to see movies) and I would say there were about thirty people in the audience. Thirty!!! At most! I was shocked. I also left twenty minutes before the end because I just didn’t care at all how things wrapped up. I think the final figures for this weekend will be lower for than expected for “Joe”.

  11. IOIOIOI says:

    Jeff: if that is indeed true. LEX WILL GO DOWN… TONIGHT!

  12. frankbooth says:

    But not on Milla, or anyone else — with or without barbeque sauce.

  13. leahnz says:

    wow, filmfan, you mustn’t have any scottish heritage — once i’ve paid my $37 dollars for a ticket, i don’t care how crap the movie is i’m staying until the final credits roll come hell or high water, regardless of how much i’d like to nod off or gouge my own eyes out or fire a rocket-launcher into the projection booth, i’m getting my money’s worth even if it kills me
    (i adore milla for some reason; i was channel surfing in the middle of the night and happened to catch milla on some E! show promoting ‘getaway’, she came out all statuesque in a short flouncy, gauzy white dress and a long fucking sword, what a hoot she is)
    and steve zahn make EVERYTHING better by virtue of his sheer bonza zahnitude

  14. movieman says:

    “Zahnitude”! You should copyright that, Leah: it’s priceless!
    You’re definitely going to enjoy “Perfect Getaway” when it hits NZ screens, or dvd emporiums (whichever comes first). American “B” movies don’t get much tastier these days.
    I’m curious to know your thoughts on the “Lovely Bones” trailer.
    I posted my reaction on a separate thread earlier this week. Let’s just say that, I’m afraid; I’m very afraid.

  15. movieman says:

    P.S. to Leah: have you seen “Management” with Zahn and Jennifer Aniston?
    It’s a first-rate sleeper that, alas, never really woke up at the U.S.box-office.

  16. Chucky in Jersey says:

    “(500) Days of Summer” is in 817 theaters per Mojo. “A Perfect Getaway” is from Rogue, a B-movie imprint Universal spun off last winter (U is only distributing).
    A post on another thread hinted at a large senior turnout for “Julie and Julia”. That may explain the low estimate as senior admission costs less than a regular matinee or evening ticket.
    @movieman: “The Hurt Locker” and “(500)” are both playing in Akron — only an hour west of Youngstown with no tolls.

  17. leahnz says:

    movieman, i release ‘zahnitude’ unto the world for fans of the zahn everywhere!
    re: ‘management’, believe you me i’ve been keeping an eye out for that one, still no cinema release date here so DVD is sounding quite likely.
    and weirdly, still no release date for ‘perfect getaway’ here either – we are 0 for 2 in terms of getting my required dose of new zahnitude (do these people not UNDERSTAND the sheer need for zahnitude? sheesh)
    re: the ‘bones’ trailer, let’s just say i’m not the most objective person to ask, but you know how trailers can be, rather typically overwrought and melodramatic; here’s hoping you’ll come around to ‘the bones’ in the final rinse (but, i know i’ve said this before: i do feel your pain when the adaptation of a beloved novel feels miscast going from page to screen, i know EXACTLY how stink that feels, the disappointment can be downright aching, so i get you)

  18. LYT says:

    If you leave GI Joe 20 minutes before the ending, you miss the best parts — the way in which the villains’ storylines resolve and they mostly, finally, start to resemble their toy counterparts.
    Also you see Sienna Miller in the most fake-looking movie wig I’ve seen since Wally George cameod in Nightmare on Elm Street 4.

  19. The big number for GI Joe was guaranteed the moment Funny People debuted under, right?

  20. movieman says:

    Yes indeed, Leah. I’m positively gritting my teeth in anticipation (since “dread” is possibly too strong a word, lol) of “Bones.” Right now, the only roles that don’t look disastrously miscast are Weisz and the (unknown to me) teen actress who plays Susie’s kid sister Lindsey.
    Thanks for the Akron shout-out, Chuck, but I’ve already seen (and reviewed) “Hurt” and “500 Days.” I was just wondering aloud when/if those two modest “alternative” hits were ever going to make it to my hometown. 800-print breaks used to be deemed “wide” enough to open here: not anymore. Kind of like the recent (actually not so recent) dearth of “sneak previews.”

  21. leahnz says:

    mm, rose mcIver (lindsey) is a nz tv actress who got scooped up
    re: the subject of miscasting, like i said i totally understand where you’re coming from, but it’s the age old argument re: book to film adaptations, ‘miscasting’ is only relevant when comparing the cast to the book. ultimately, tho, the book doesn’t matter, as harsh as that may sound — it’s merely a jumping off point and the cast only really has to work in the context of the movie (which it does, imho, mark w’s wig not withstanding).

  22. LYT says:

    I would still not call Funny People a drama – the laughs are consistent throughout, and some of the characters clearly exaggerated, comedic types (esp. Bana and Schwartzman).
    Different strokes, I guess. But absolutely a comedy in my book.

  23. Rob says:

    Quick, name an actress who’s more bankable in the right role in 2009 than Meryl Streep? Anyone?

  24. Joe Leydon says:

    I don’t know if she’s more bankable, but I would think Sandra Bullock and Katherine Heigl might be as bankable — in the right role.

  25. Joe Leydon says:

    Of course, that should read: “I don’t know know if THEY’RE…”

  26. frankbooth says:

    Well, he DID do Rescue Dawn. But he’s gonna have to make a few more like that to make up for the Happy, Texases on his resume.

  27. leahnz says:

    frankb, it matters not, for the zahn has been in perhaps more stinkers than any other working actor today and somehow always emerges from the pooh unscathed, undeterred and smelling like a rose by virtue of his teflon awesomeness!!

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