MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Box Office Hell – 10/9/10

bohell070910.png

Be Sociable, Share!

43 Responses to “Box Office Hell – 10/9/10”

  1. EthanG says:

    Wow tracking is all over the place!! Can Universal get its first number 1 since last October? I don’t think so…as good as “Despicable Me” looks, it also has too much of a Euro sensibility to really resonate I think….
    Anyone noticed the big critical gap between Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic on “Predators?” This is one of those movies where the slavering fanboys of the net tend not to work it RT’s favor…
    Toy Story 3 should almost top “Finding Nemo” as top grossing Pixar film domestically this weekend….

  2. chris says:

    “Euro sensibility?” Don’t see it. At all.

  3. Hopscotch says:

    Anyone else listen to Gibson’s rant?
    Not as fun as Christian Bale. Not an unleashed temper. It’s worse. It’s a bitter man, saying ugly bitter things.
    Despicable Me is cute. I think it’ll get #1, but it’ll be a squeaker.

  4. EthanG says:

    “Euro sensibility?” Don’t see it. At all.”
    Really? Even the character design has a very French feel to it. The little girl practically reeks “Madeline,” and the quirky plot does the same…at least to me.

  5. IOv2 says:

    Ethan, Predators is a tremendous action film. Finally, Predator and Predator 2 has a worthy sequel. I am stunned by it’s awesomeness.

  6. Wrecktum says:

    Judging from early Fri. data, Boxoffice Profits is the only prognosticator to get this weekend right. Why, I wonder, do people keep betting against 3D family animated films?

  7. Wrecktum says:

    Sorry….”Prophets.” Profits is what Despicable Me will be raking up this weekend.

  8. IOv2 says:

    Wrec, uh, they do not accept the 3D bump?

  9. chris says:

    I’d say the “quirky” plot is about half swiped from “The Incredibles” and half swiped from “Annie,” neither of which is notably Euro. And I guess the animation is a bit stylized, but I’m not seeing what you’re seeing.

  10. gradystiles says:

    “Wow tracking is all over the place!!”
    None of the numbers here represent real “tracking.” They’re just “guestimates.”

  11. Geoff says:

    Wow, Finke is reporting her “early” numbers for everything and it looks like EVERYTHING is a hit, this weekend:
    Despicable Me did over $20 million on Friday and could easily do over $50 million for the weekend. Damn impressive, Universal has to get some credit for a super-aggressive marketing campaign.
    Despite that, Toy Story looks like it held pretty well and could break $20 million, this weekend.
    Predators apprently opened pretty solidly and did over $10 million, yesterday – meaning that this actually opened a little more than Knight & Day or A Team.
    AND Eclipse held ok and made about $11 million yesterday, as well – it might ONLY drop 50% from last weekend’s gross. Looks like this will probably be the highest domestic grosser now – bigger weekday numbers for out-of-school days seems to help.
    So all of the “slump” talk should be dead, for now…..

  12. movieman says:

    You’re correct about ID-ing a “Euro sensibility” in “Despicable Me,” Ethan.
    I immediately thought of Chomet’s “Triplets of Belleville” (pay particular attention to Gru’s bird legs).
    But the thing I liked most about the film was its relatively subtle, unassuming nature: it doesn’t clobber you over the head like most CGI 3-D ‘toons.
    For me, “Despicable” is a nice midsummer palate cleanser.
    “Predators” is a lot better than I feared going in: it’s easily the best movie with the word “predator” in the title since John McTiernan’s 1987 original. Excellent cast, and I really dug the Topher Grace twist near the end. That said, my biggest problem with the “Predator” franchise are the Predator monsters themselves. They’re just too goofy-looking to be properly scary.
    Loved “Kids Are All Right”! Does anyone else think this has a decent shot of sneaking onto the Oscar list of (10) Best Picture nominees next winter?

  13. leahnz says:

    i’m super-duper looking forward to ‘the kids are alright’

  14. movieman says:

    “Kids,” “Greenberg” and “Please Give” are my favorite American movies so far this year, Leah. But only “Kids” has a legitimate shot at accruing any Oscar gold. (The July versus spring release date is a definite help; plus it’s the most accessible, audience-friendly film of the bunch).

  15. EthanG says:

    Happy to be dead wrong about “Despicable”
    @grady…yeah I know but actual tracking seemed very wild this weekend.
    Glad to see the summer finally producing good films…

  16. Hallick says:

    I don’t know if “Despicable Me” has a distinct Euro thing about it, but the minions are a little bit Jeunet-like. That being said, they’re a lot more the diaper gang in this “Aachi and Ssipak” clip than Euro (if not, well okay, maybe I just like the excuse to post this clip):
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgop-8awFJM
    Am I the only person who was wondering why somebody stupid would play the trailer for “Despicable Me” right up against the trailer for “Megamind”? Every single time I’ve seen DM’s trailer, “Megamind” was right on its heels, and all that did was make them dilute each other.

  17. leahnz says:

    movieman: i’m zero for three with ‘kids’, ‘greenberg’ and ‘please give’ to date, but at least i’ll be seeing ‘please give’ soon at our intn’l film festival, yay

  18. movieman says:

    I know that you’ll catch up with all three of those films eventually, Leah. Just hope that you share my enthusiasm.
    Btw, you might be amused to know that I’ll be directing my first (post-university) play this fall. Yeah, it’s only community theater–albeit the most highly regarded c/t in this part of NE Ohio–but it is Mamet.
    Guess I should change my screen name to “Theaterman” from now on, lol.

  19. LexG says:

    IO: PREDATORS POWER.
    BOW to GOGGINS and to BRAGA POWER.
    Now someone tell me why the hell they were on the island, why the predators only travel in threes… seems like in both AVP powers, as with this one, I never understood why they invented this bogus “travel in threes” rule, other than to skimp on the budget. And did the bad Predators bring the good Predators to hunt? Or were the good Predators what they dropped in the cages? Or did they drop those dog creatures in the cages?
    And why did Fishburne do one thing just to do the other five minutes later, which he could’ve avoided by just doing something else?
    Weird movie in that I had fun, after about the 45 minute mark, the screenplay just goes insane and nothing is particularly sensical or logical.
    Nirmrod’s apparent directorial trademark, especially after this and ARMORED, is to spend 50 straight minutes on more character and backstory than the genre usually allows… only to throw all rhythm and rhyme out the window once the shit hits the fan.
    But again, I still dug it.
    But not as much as PREDATOR 2.

  20. IOv2 says:

    Answering questions for Lex time… to the best of my ABILITY! WOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    “Now someone tell me why the hell they were on the island,”
    If you look at the traps used by they guy that got blown up and if you believe what Fishbourne’s character told the crew. The Predators are using that planet as an R&D center. It’s basically where they improve their tacts and their tech through practical application, which is pretty awesome in my opinion.
    “why the predators only travel in threes…”
    What you need to ask is why the Predators picked a crew that’s very similar to those used in most video games. Seriously, that cracked me up. The travel in threes thing may have to do with the size of their pack.
    “seems like in both AVP powers, as with this one, I never understood why they invented this bogus ‘travel in threes’ rule, other than to skimp on the budget.”
    PACK THING again.
    “And did the bad Predators bring the good Predators to hunt? Or were the good Predators what they dropped in the cages? Or did they drop those dog creatures in the cages?”
    The bigger Predators probably brought the dogs with them on their ship. While the smaller Predator most likely went there to train and they caught his ass. I love the big Predator/small predator thing because they have to… THEY JUST HAVE TO… use this in Predators 2. That’s the only way that ending works is if the Small predators and our heroes team up to kick some big predator ass.

  21. Joe Leydon says:

    IO: To the best of you ability. Hmmmm. Have you been listening to a certain prankish Country music duo? Who perform nightly to the best of their abilities?

  22. IOv2 says:

    No Joe, I have not. Fill a brother in.

  23. Joe Leydon says:

    http://www.doyleanddebbie.com/
    “Performing all their top hits to the very best of their abilities…” And the trick is, the satire isn’t condescending, it’s affectionate… and as close to real thing as possible. Caught them last year during their regular gig at Nashville’s Station Inn.

  24. Cadavra says:

    Leah, if you have an all-region player, pre-order THE LOST SKELETON RETURNS AGAIN and DARK AND STORMY NIGHT from Shout Factory. Three hours-plus of guaranteed socko entertainment you and the family will enjoy again and again. Cadavra has spoken.

  25. leahnz says:

    “Btw, you might be amused to know that I’ll be directing my first (post-university) play this fall. Yeah, it’s only community theater–albeit the most highly regarded c/t in this part of NE Ohio–but it is Mamet.”
    a bit tardy in my response but alright movieman, awesome! (which mamet? i’m a former theatre rat myself so i have great affection for the live medium, and community theatre in particular where i cut my teeth acting as a young pup before swerving off behind the scenes to be artsy fartsy) anyway, break a leg and all that — please let us know how it’s going and how much of your hair you have left after tearing it out, director-style!
    cadavra: thanks for the tip, i’ll certainly look into those (just checking you actually meant that for me…whatever the case i’m not complaining, i can use all the help i can get!)

  26. Cadavra says:

    Yes, in response to your “zero for three” observation–though of course everyone on THB should order them immediately. BTW, I neglected to add that if you do so from Shout Factory’s website, you’ll get an exclusive free bonus DVD containing all 16 TALES FROM THE PUB!
    And with that last shameless bit of promotion, I’m off to bed.

  27. leahnz says:

    16 TALES FROM THE PUB?! i’m all over that shout factory (good luck, cadavra, hope it all kicks ass)

  28. movieman says:

    Leah- I’m doing “Speed the Plow” (the Hollywood theme was just too irresistible) which appeals to me as a first-timer because of the small (three actor) cast. its relative brevity (one act) and minimal fuss and bother over the set design.
    The whole thing came about almost by accident. The first play I pitched was David Rabe’s “Streamers” actually (which is now on the back burner: along with LaBute’s “Reasons to be Pretty” and Didion’s “Year of Magical Thinking”). First, of course, I need to make sure that “Speed” doesn’t suck, lol. I’ve got three very good actors, two of whom already have Mamet experience (from an excellent local production of “Glengarry” two summers ago), so that’s a definite plus.
    Thanks for the pep talk!

  29. leahnz says:

    speed the plow, cool. having actors experienced with the limber tongues required to pull off ‘mamet speak’ is definitely a plus! (also, do not let any of them eat sushi before production 😉 )
    (i know i’m in the vast minority on this but ‘house of games’ is my fave mamet by far, and one of my all-time fave flicks full stop. mamet, crouse and mantegna are a force to be reckoned with)

  30. movieman says:

    “House of Games” is my favorite Mamet film, too, Leah (altho I do really, really love “The Spanish Prisoner”). It’s actually a perfect distillation of the whole Mamet-ian ethos, and Mantegna and Crouse remain the two greatest “Mamet Actors” ever (no disrespect to Bill Macy, of course).
    I’m not going into “Speed” expecting it to be a big crowd pleaser (more the half the audience will probably wonder what the **** it’s all about and why we even bothered). But if I can get three dynamite performances out of my cast–and I’m pretty sure that I can: this group is super talented with years of c/theater experience among them–I’ll be satisfied.

  31. Hallick says:

    You know a great Mamet movie that time forgot? “Things Change”.

  32. leahnz says:

    “”House of Games” is my favorite Mamet film, too, Leah”
    yay!
    i’m also a big fan of ‘the spanish prisoner’, the world could use more campbell scott (what’s become of him anyway? the last thing i can seem to remember him in is ‘exorcism of emily rose’ but that can’t be right…so odd how all these actors i consider to be genuinely compelling and talented just fade into obscurity while so many shitty ones just seem to keep on chugging and getting roles. sorta depressing)
    hallick, i’m thinking i must have seen ‘things change’ because it definitely rings a bell but i can’t remember it at all! now i must find it in an attempt to be a mamet completest

  33. IOv2 says:

    HEIST! FOR GOD’S SAKE! HEIST!

  34. Eric says:

    The Spanish Prisoner is probably Mamet’s best, but Heist is pretty great too. House of Games is one of his stronger scripts but it’s just so stiff.
    I also have a serious love for Spartan, because it’s one of the only times it seems that Mamet has actually translated all of his theorizing about film into a successful piece of art. Usually his successful movies work in spite of his academic approach, not because of it.

  35. Cadavra says:

    He didn’t direct it, but let’s not forget he wrote the screenplay for THE VERDICT.
    Movieman, I don’t know if it’s in the stage directions, but in the recent Broadway revival, the writer character gets so elated at one point that he starts humping the desk. Huge laugh.

  36. Joe Leydon says:

    Years ago, Don Ameche told me that he thought Things Change was one of the two best films he ever made. (The other: Ernst Lubitsch’s Heaven Can Wait. Frankly, this shocked me. Mind you, I liked the film — a lot — but I was shocked that Ameche valued it so greatly. Years later, when I got to visit the set of Oleanna, I told David Mamet about this, and gave him a tearsheet of the interview in which Amecehe made the comment. And, well, he was shocked, too. He had enjoyed working with the guy… but evidently had no idea how much the experience had meant to Ameche.

  37. Joe Leydon says:

    And Eric: Spartan is amazing. I often recommend it to would be scriptwriters because (a) it demonstrates just how little exposition and backstory you really need, and (b) it also demonstrates that no one, not even Quentin Tarantino, can write badass dialog like Mamet. “Are you ready?

  38. leahnz says:

    mamet is a genius wordsmith. and even his ‘lesser’ movies are always a worthwhile watch, unique and verbose, an attempt at something clever and beyond the pale even if he succeeds to varying degrees
    i like ‘heist’ ok, but it feels like mamet having a go at the more conventional mainstream or something, it lacks the subtly and subterfuge of his other mystery-crime-drama-thrillers where you never really know what the fuck is going on until the end; but ‘heist’ is a bit more obvious/conventional, maybe because of all the well-worn ‘movie heist cliches’ and we pretty much know it’s a heist all along (hence the title) so…the surprises seem more conventional in the more traditional “how does this heist go down” vein rather than the top-form-mamet “holy shit, it was a heist along?!” vein.
    eric, re: ‘house of games’, i can actually relate to your “stiff” reference, i had to watch it a good 3,4 times (perhaps i should be embarrassed about that and don’t even realise it) to see it differently; it’s all very repressed and cadenced, esp crouse, but under the surface there’s this brilliant sort of tango with her and mantegna, all the emotion bubbling away beneath the carefully scripted exterior, quite subtle; and crouse as margaret has a really interesting arc, the end is rather morally ambiguous to say the least, knowing as we do that margaret’s weird liberation and new-found thirst for danger will almost certainly lead to her own downfall
    or not, you may never perceive it that way if you watched it a hundred times, but one of the things i admire most about ‘house of games’, it’s sly and clever and it grows on you (not mention i think it’s one of the great straight-up ‘con man’ movies, and i don’t say that lightly as there are some corker con flicks)

  39. leahnz says:

    mamet is a genius wordsmith. and even his ‘lesser’ movies are always a worthwhile watch, unique and verbose, an attempt at something clever and beyond the pale even if he succeeds to varying degrees
    i like ‘heist’ ok, but it feels like mamet having a go at the more conventional mainstream or something, it lacks the subtly and subterfuge of his other mystery-crime-drama-thrillers where you never really know what the fuck is going on until the end; but ‘heist’ is a bit more obvious/conventional, maybe because of all the well-worn ‘movie heist cliches’ and we pretty much know it’s a heist all along (hence the title) so…the surprises seem more conventional in the more traditional “how does this heist go down” vein rather than the top-form-mamet “holy shit, it was a heist along?!” vein.
    eric, re: ‘house of games’, i can actually relate to your “stiff” reference, i had to watch it a good 3,4 times (perhaps i should be embarrassed about that and don’t even realise it) to see it differently; it’s all very repressed and cadenced, esp crouse, but under the surface there’s this brilliant sort of tango with her and mantegna, all the emotion bubbling away beneath the carefully scripted exterior, quite subtle; and crouse as margaret has a really interesting arc, the end is rather morally ambiguous to say the least, knowing as we do that margaret’s weird liberation and new-found thirst for danger will almost certainly lead to her own downfall
    or not, you may never perceive it that way if you watched it a hundred times, but one of the things i admire most about ‘house of games’, it’s sly and clever and it grows on you (not mention i think it’s one of the great straight-up ‘con man’ movies, and i don’t say that lightly as there are some corker con flicks)

  40. leahnz says:

    fucking hell

  41. Hallick says:

    I think “Spartan” just doesn’t build up to much in the end. The last 20 minutes keep leaving me with a flattish feeling, and I think its because for all of his ice cool dialogue, it really needed an emotional undercurrent that he just couldn’t bring to the climax or the conclusion. I got the point he was making, but I couldn’t care less about it.
    I’d put it in the same category as “Redbelt”, in that both movies have interesting almost samourai-like central characters whose arcs kind of get a lot less interesting as they reach their landing points.
    Then again, I was riveted by “Oleanna” and “The Winslow Boy”, which aren’t held in a keen admiration by Mamet fans or most anyone else.

  42. Eric says:

    Leah, re: House of Games. I agree with you on just about everything, although as I watch it I’m a bit less struck by Crouse and Mantegna’s chemistry than you are. Crouse’s character is indeed interesting and the various cons are compelling, but I think Mamet was still uncomfortable behind the camera and Crouse just isn’t a very good actor. That’s why I think it’s a better script than a movie.
    Nevertheless, it is still one of the best of its kind, and I think it really set the template for a lot of the crime movies that followed. It’s impressive that it can still draw you in after movies like Matchstick Men pulled the same trick in the years that followed.
    Joe, re: Spartan: Yes. It sounds like we appreciate it for many of the same reasons. Mamet put all his talents into a spare, streamlined action flick. I was so disappointed that it wasn’t a success at the box office, as I think Mamet probably won’t ever do another movie like it.

  43. Hallick says:

    “hallick, i’m thinking i must have seen ‘things change’ because it definitely rings a bell but i can’t remember it at all! now i must find it in an attempt to be a mamet completest”
    I loved “Things Change” when I saw it years back. It’s a very atypical Mamet movie that’s got a lot of charm going on. I gotta take another look at it soon to see if it holds up.

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