MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Box Office Hell Says No Shutter Is An Island


Be Sociable, Share!

17 Responses to “Box Office Hell Says No Shutter Is An Island”

  1. Josh Massey says:

    Looks like Shutter Island is being underestimated. Not only is it going to get the typical crowd for a DiCaprio/Scorsese film, the horror folks are going to turn out as well.

  2. EthanG says:

    Totally agree. It looks like Paramount made the right decision made the right decision with this movie by moving it…whether it’s being judged unfairly or not, and has marketed it wonderfully. Ill be stunned if it’s under 40 million…especially since they pulled off a 20 million wide expansion with “Lovely Bones” a month ago.
    I’m surprised “Avatar” is shedding theatres…can’t imagine why unless it’s the last 2D screens. TDK still had 1,900+ theatres at this point in its run and it was well below the Mendoza line at that point ($2,000 per theatre) while Avatar is still above $8,000 per theatre.

  3. christian says:

    The movie has barely opened and the box office reviews are in?

  4. Stella's Boy says:

    This is completely anecdotal and probably means nothing, but I was at a free screening of Shutter Island last night that was nowhere near full. Usually these things are at capacity long before the movie begins. People love their free movies, and I attended a screening in heavily populated suburban area. Others in line before it started said they couldn’t believe how empty it was compared to a normal preview screening. I expected a madhouse and showed up way early and there were rows and rows of empty seats when it started. I agree with others here who think it will do well, but I did think it was odd.

  5. Chucky in Jersey says:

    @Ethan: “Avatar” is indeed losing 2-D screens. It’s now out of the Hamptons, a region where the “Ferngully” ripoff never played in 3-D.

  6. LexG says:

    Shutter Island is gonna do 30 TODAY.
    What about THE GOOD GUY????? I’m all for BLEDEL POWER, and amusing that movie-wise they’re apparently running through the cast of Friday Night Lights to pair her with (Scott Porter in this, that other dude from the show in POST GRAD.)
    But Ryan Greenberg? What did we EVER do to deserve this wishy-washy meathead? Can he and the interchangable Jon Foster just land a nice Oxygen show and stay out of the movies, please?

  7. a_loco says:

    Stella, you didn’t see it in Toronto, did you? At Innis College?

  8. Chucky, could it be that the Hamptons just don’t have the ability to screen movies in 3D and not, as your tone seems to imply, that Avatar wasn’t going to play well there in 3D.
    How strange that people are still saying things like “‘Ferngully’ ripoff” as if it a) is funny b) is STILL funny c) was EVER funny and/or d) smart.

  9. For what it’s worth Kamikaze, I saw Dragon Hunters (which is mentioned in your link) late last year. It’s actually quite good. The visuals are innovative, the voice acting by Whitaker is solid and low-key, and the film actually gets pretty dark and mournful as it goes along (ie – the heroes genuinely believe they are going to die). Plus, the main creature is actually kinda scary when it finally shows up. No masterpiece, but I’d recommend it to anyone who likes slightly offbeat cartoons.

  10. Sorry… wrong thread. Ignore my post as it was intended as a reply in the ‘Why I didn’t interview Kirsten Stewart’ comments section.

  11. Stella's Boy says:

    No a_loco I saw it near Philly.
    A $13.5 million Friday for a projected $35 million weekend for Shutter Island.

  12. Chucky in Jersey says:

    @Kami: “Avatar” played in the UA East Hampton for 9 weeks and the UA Hampton Bays for 8. There’s no 3-D in the Hamptons because Regal wants to keep screens open for arty fare.

  13. EthanG says:

    @LexG….Bledel’s career seems to be on a Brittany Murphy trajectory minus the crazy. Nothing against her…but remember when she was the NEXT BIG THING in Sin City? Now she’s almost 30 and her last chance to hit it is THE CONSPIRATOR…I mean as much as I LOVE “Sleepaway Camp”…seriously Alexis Bledel??
    And SECOND BILLING to ULTRAHOT but no-named KALEY CUOCO??? Really???

  14. EthanG says:

    Heather Graham is probably a better comparison actually career wise.

  15. Cadavra says:

    Cuoco stars on the mega-hit sitcom BIG BANG THEORY. Right now she is indeed bigger than Bledel.

  16. LexG says:

    Bledel is 28? Hmm… I thought she was about 23. Had no idea. HOT. SO HOT. She can still pass for 18.
    And Bledel > Cuoco, let’s be real. K.C. is cute on BBT, but Bledel is a POWERHOUSE.

  17. Cadavra says:

    GILMORE GIRLS debuted in 2000; no way she’d have been 13 or 14 when it began. I do agree that it’s odd her career hasn’t panned out the way one would’ve expected, but it’s possible she hasn’t aggressively pursued it for personal reasons, or maybe she only gets offered the kind of brain-dead rubbish that Katharine Heigl and Kristen Bell are only too happy to accept.

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