MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Friday Estimates by The Devil Inside Klady


(Corrected… thanks to movieman)

I am put in mind of The Exorcism of Emily Rose, the second highest opening Screen Gems film of all time… and that was 6 years ago. That film was cheap too. And it was a marketing coup. The big difference is that Devil is an R and is being sold as a very hard R. Emily Rose was a PG-13 threatening to have R-rated content in it. But based on the Paranormal Activity 3 weekend, The Devil Inside could end up just incrementally ahead of Emily Rose’s $30m launch.

Regardless, what is completely clear is that Paramount has now built a legitimacy with the people who are looking for a good scare with the Paranormal franchise and is exploiting it with skill. They have taken over Lionsgate’s abandoned niche. And while it is true that running a company the size of Lionsgate based primarily of horror films is not a good business model, the attempt to become a reflection of a traditional studio has been a bit of a bust as well. Meanwhile, a company with as much product as Paramount is thrilled to have another low risk/high publicity cash cow to milk amongst the Mission:Impossibles and Star Treks… especially with DreamWorks out the door.

Paying close attention SHOULD be the indies. It’s easy to dismiss this film and Paranormal as stunts. It’s also easy to forget how much marketing/publicity money is really behind these projects… a lot more than the indies have. But still, there is a piece of business there that has be able to scaled down to a good model for indie as well.

Mission:Impossible continues to… HA!… cruise. Over $400 worldwide and I think there is a word-of-mouth marketing effort that could still be launched into the weakness of January. Meanwhile, Sherlock 2 is certainly going to be well off of the first film in the franchise. But a $300m worldwide grosser with Sherlock Holmes? If the crew involved wants a third film, they can make it work financially for WB and do it. But the next one has to be sharper. Holmes needs a new girlfriend. She needs to be a third wheel in the Holmes/Watson relationship. And it would be a perfect slot for Amanda Seyfried or the Michelle Monaghan of Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, not M:I3.

The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo is likely to be a profitable disappointment, short of the monster hit that I thought it could be, but still well into the (real math) black ink once it goes foreign. But $100m ain’t happening here. But that’s Fincher, ain’t it? Surprisingly, only Se7en and Ben Button have ever cleared $100m domestic for him… and 7 just barely.

Disney is pretty happy with how War Horse is doing. No doubt, the next hope is an awards push from The Academy. And, of course, foreign.

We Bought A Zoo is neck-and-neck with War Horse, though they don’t have an awards future or much foreign to look forward to, as Crowe is an international hero with Cruise and not without.

Be Sociable, Share!

37 Responses to “Friday Estimates by The Devil Inside Klady”

  1. EthanG says:

    Most inexplicable opening in awhile..and it would qualify as the 2nd biggest R horror opening of 2011..Paramount sure is on a marketing roll lately.

    You were right about SHERLOCK 2 DP…it’ll only end up about 25 million off from the first film. ALVIN though…looks to finish 80 mil behind the Squeakquel. Time to put the munks out to pasture.

    MI4 might make it to 200 million after all.

  2. Paul D/Stella says:

    Sweet baby jesus The Devil Inside is a bad movie. I wasn’t expecting a masterpiece or 90 minutes of sheer terror, but I have a pretty high tolerance for this stuff and I figured it might be an OK matinee (my sister wanted to see it and extended an invite; I would have waited for DVD or cable). It is totally inept and incompetent and mind-numbingly stupid. Stay Alive is like The Exorcist in comparison. The trailer for Silent House is more frightening and coherent. The stable of directors at The Asylum churn out better horror movies. Over and over again there’s build up with no payoff whatsoever. The performances are grating and horrible. And then it just ends, as if the filmmakers knew they had shit and just threw in the towel. What an abysmal and worthless pile of crap. My sister owes me $8.

  3. chris says:

    I thought the performances were surprisingly persuasive, Paul D/Stella. But, yeah, the movie’s bad.

  4. Paul D/Stella says:

    The mom is OK, but I found the rest terrible and irritating. It seemed as if they had never done any acting before.

  5. movieman says:

    Isn’t that one, not ten, screens for “Anatolia”?
    Pretty sure it’s only playing at NYC’s Film Forum.
    Yeah, P.T. Barnum is once proven wrong again re: “Inside.”
    But I’m sure that I’ll see plenty of worse movies in 2012.
    As far as faux-doc horror flicks go, “DI” does a better job of sustaining the verite illusion than some. And whoever shot the briefly seen “1989” TV news clips at the beginning of the movie deserves major props. It was nearly as painstakingly accurate a (formal) pastiche as “The Artist.”
    Also, the girl is kinda cute in a Shannyn Sossamon sorta way.

  6. David Poland says:

    Silent House is imperfect, but it’s not remotely painful.

  7. LexG says:

    I know this is a long shot, but did anyone have to see BENEATH THE DARKNESS? It has Dennis Quaid and Aimee Teegarden, but I barely know what it is.

    Wondering if it’s at all worth it, since it’s booked only at the Universal Citywalk where parking is like 12 dollars.

    (I know that was pressing.)

    Do critics and bloggers find just a little bit of deflated gallows humor in the fact that for EIGHT MONTHS (or however long ago Toronto was), they’ve been talking up two dozen potential Oscar movies like they were THE “It” Juggernaut to look out for… Then in quick succession 90% of them opened and tanked, but some $5 VHS camcorder movie is gonna open to 30-plus mil, and will probably top DRIVE’s domestic gross by Tuesday?

    It just speaks to the two realities, where your Oscar bloggers spend MONTHS ON END poring over every tea leaf regarding something like YOUNG ADULT, but in the end it tanks like James Garner. How many tens of thousands of words were spent prognosticating IS IT YOUNG ADULT? IS IT DESCENDANTS? IS IT WAR HORSE?

    Then the general public takes a pass and goes to see “CONNECTTHECUTS CONNECTTHECUTS.”

  8. Paul D/Stella says:

    I first read about Beneath the Darkness on some horror sites a few weeks ago. The reviews from those sites have not been kind, to say the least. Proceed with caution, though Julie Taylor might make it worthwhile. Dennis Quaid’s not doing so hot right now is he?

    Devil Inside might sustain the illusion better than some, but that is damning with faint praise. I’d rather it was even slightly scary.

  9. chris says:

    “Ain’t happening?” I feel like “Dragon Tattoo” can get to $100 million domestically, with a little help from MLK and good weekdays. Maybe I’m nuts.

  10. David Poland says:

    Possible, Chris. I guess I was a little aggressive on that.

    $75m at the end of this weekend. $6m, $3.7m, $2.2m, $1.2m on the weekends… sure… it can make it with a steady drop… we’ll see.

  11. chris says:

    That’s about what I was thinking, with slightly better holds. Awards traction would make $100 million a sure thing, but that does not look like it’ll be happening.

  12. movielocke says:

    Well its hit thepga adg and wga so it has awards traction that will probably lead to three of the top nom categories. Maybe it is one of those movies that is an oscar movie but critics who are willfully blind to the historical diversity of bp nominees have stupidly dismissed for not being as generically blandly an oscarplay ala thedescendants

  13. Joe Leydon says:

    Actually, I would not be surprised if both Simon Quarterman and Evan Helmuth both wind up getting a lot more work based on their performances in Devil Inside.

  14. movielocke says:

    Another thing to consier about dragon tattoo is that 90% of critics saw the swedish version and 90% of the academy did not. Sinceits a mystry, secondary exposure is less effective. Most critics are completely unable of making reliable judgements on this film because of being tainted by seeing the original.

    Additionally, reading a movie is a completely different neurological experience than a movie in your native language. Reading subtitles engages a totally different part of your brain that is usually passive when watching films. In other words, reading a film makes a viewer that wants to read a film feel smart–it is masturbation for the ego and you get a little endorphin rush ala an orgasm but much less intense from making yourself feel smart.

    So when a critc sees dragon tattoo and they don’t get that endorphin shot they perceive the Lack of it. They look foran explanation and immediatey blame the film. Selection and confirmation bias and herd behavior does the rest automatically in creating a dismissive pileon. But the blame in this case is on the viewer not on the viewed.

    The academy and guilds have none of these problems because most of them never saw the original and so are not tainted.

  15. Don R. Lewis says:

    You kinda have to laugh at the critical attack/freak out on THE DEVIL INSIDE attached to the money it’s making. If I’m the “same” writer, personality wise, I was 5 years ago….stuff like that would have me enraged. Now, it’s all “Chinatown.” I agree with what Lex wrote above.

    The only bummer is- TDI is Paramount Insurge’s first of those 10 movies for $1 million each movies which I think is really cool. But if they’re all gonna be terrible, seems like a wasted opportunity for a new model. Then again, it’s evidently going to make like, 50 million times the money it cost to make on it’s opening weekend so maybe a change towards cheaper movies on a shit ton of screens will happen? Who knows.

  16. waterbucket says:

    Goes to show if you’re making something that people want to see, they’ll go see it.

    The Artist still hasn’t come to my city and I’m starting to lose patience.

  17. Paul D/Stella says:

    Guess I’m in the minority. Those guys didn’t impress me at all in TDI. I found myself laughing at their performances during the more dramatic moments. Not that the writing did them any favors. I wonder if they’ll get more work now though. Have the actors in the Paranormal Activity movies done much? Is one in ABC’s The River or am I thinking of someone else?

  18. Joe Leydon says:

    Paul: Next time you have nothing better to do — and I mean absolutely nothing better to do — pop Roger Corman’s The Raven or The Terror into your DVD player, and tell me whether you would have predicted that Jack Nicholson had any sort of future in movies.

  19. matt says:

    @movielocke- intriguing theory… perhaps Tattoo will make a showing with the Academy

  20. Paul D/Stella says:

    I saw The Raven once, many years ago. Haven’t seen The Terror. I’m sure that’s true for a lot of stars Joe. Brad Pitt in Cutting Class. George Clooney in Return to Horror High. Holly Hunter in The Burning. And so on. I still think those two guys in Devil Inside were awful.

  21. Ivan says:

    I think you are wrong about “The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo”, it is holding up very nicely. It is only off 34% from last friday (another mistake in your estimates, along with NEW YEAR’S EVE, which is estimated at 1.1 million, not 2.3) and will end up with more than 11 million over the weekend, less than 25% drop from last weekend, and a 77 million cume. And there is also extended weekend next week, so expect it to drop even less. So 100 million is definitely happening.

  22. cadavra says:

    Maybe I shoulda gone to Paramount with the LOST SKELETON movies! 🙂

    CHIPWRECKED has already outgrossed ARTHUR CHRISTMAS and TINTIN combined. Those fucking chipmunks ain’t goin’ anywhere for a while.

  23. Chris says:

    “In other words, reading a film makes a viewer that wants to read a film feel smart–it is masturbation for the ego and you get a little endorphin rush ala an orgasm but much less intense from making yourself feel smart.”

    Really? I thought I was reading subtitles because I don’t understand Cantonese (or Mandarin or French or whatever the hell foreign language the movie is in).

  24. JKill says:

    Also, TGWTDT is holding up well during weekdays. I’m not a betting man, but I’d bet it gets to 100 million domestic.

  25. Direwolf says:

    Don’t we think most critics and many, many ticket buyers read Dragon Tattoo? Those books were mega popular. Not much mystery left.

    Tinker Tailor roll out going well. Dark horse for a Best PIc nom? OK, not exactly dark but seems like grosses on per screen show promise. I loved it but had just read the book so I knew exactly what was going on. Very old school.

  26. Tuck Pendelton says:

    Dragon Tattoo could get close to $100M or just past it. But they were looking for something much bigger for sure. I think it would have done much better had they released it in October/November as opposed to Christmas time. I still haven’t gotten around to seeing, but will next week.

    Depending on how well The Artist does at the Globes will determine how much it expands. I’ve seen it twice. I like the film a lot, but I’m a huge film fan. I really think some people will be bored by the last act.

    I’m assuming Tin Tin as seen as a small disappointment state-side, but it’s doing great business over seas.

    I saw Tinker Tailor about a month ago and frankly thought it was boring…but I can’t stop thinking about it, and will probably see it again. The de nou mount is a WOW.

  27. movieman says:

    I know that it was one of the most acclaimed docs of last year (and received a s**tload of BAFTA nominations), but am I the only one who thought “Senna” was a colossal bore?
    From the butt-ugly archival footage to the constant drone of (unseen, mostly subtitled) voices, it nearly put me into a coma.
    While I’ll be the first to admit that I know zero about Formula One racing, many of my favorite non-fiction films have been about subjects (or subject matters) I didn’t give a flying f**k about going in–e.g., “Searching for Bobby Fischer.”
    Can somebody please explain to me what is so off-the-charts awesome about “Senna”? I simply don’t get all the love. It has the look and feel of something tossed together by some cable sports division’s C team that might run during a rain delayed baseball game. At which point I would have turned the channel.

  28. David Poland says:

    I thought Senna was brilliant.

  29. movieman says:

    Why, Dave?
    I just don’t get what all the fuss was about.
    Convince me that I missed something ineffable about the movie that was indeed “brilliant.”

  30. David Poland says:

    I don’t know that I can convince you.

    But, great story… fascinating way of telling it. What else is there?

  31. JS Partisan says:

    Yeah Movieman, that’s your typical glib response about film and in the case of Senna: it’s complete and utter bullshit. How you can dismiss is it as if it’s some doc about the production of meat paddies, is just goofy.

  32. Paul D/Stella says:

    Senna is fantastic. I know nothing about Formula One, I don’t like car racing, and I have never watched car racing of any kind. But I was totally riveted by Senna. He was a captivating figure, as was the French guy he was always competing with for #1. I was totally enamored with their battles and with Senna’s troubles with the Formula One powers that be. I liked Senna, I was rooting for him, and I was saddened by his fate. He was just a really intriguing individual. Easily one of the best movies I saw in 2011, documentary or otherwise.

  33. Brett G. says:

    Devil Inside’s performance is kind of inexplicable, but when you consider that audiences for whatever reason eat up this Satanic/demon shit, it’s not that unexpected. Even The Rite opened pretty healthily in a similar slot; package the same gimmick with the whole found footage thing, and BOOM, instant money. But, man, if you wanna see a legendary week-to-week drop, wait until next weekend.

    Still, it brought something to mind: how odd is it that Hollywood actually cashed in on the found footage thing this time around? How many cheap cash-in/rip-offs did Blair Witch inspire 12 years ago? Even its own sequel didn’t do found footage. Is that a sign that Hollywood has become lazier in the last decade? I guess.

  34. movieman says:

    While I’ll give you that the editing job in “Senna” is a marvel of doc filmmaking craft (just finding and assembling all of that distressed looking old footage into a linear, even coherent narrative was pretty damn impressive), the unremitting sameness of the enterprise–visually and aurally–became, for me anyway, oppressive and, yes, seriously boring after about a half hour.
    Maybe if Senna himself had been some kind of electric personality: wildly charismatic, devilishly handsome, anything. But he kind of looks like a (non-pro) actor from a Pasolini flick, and was (again for me) deeply, profoundly uninteresting.
    Jesus, J.S.! Why do you always feel the need to defame anyone who disagrees with you? Does that really make you feel better about yourself (and your fave raves)? It just makes you look like a blowhard and a bully.

  35. JS Partisan says:

    Movieman, if you think that’s bullying, or if anyone agrees with you on that point, then you really haven’t been on the other end of it. I am sorry but you respond to movies you do not like in a glib and condescending matter that I find to be pure and utter shit, especially when it comes to a film like Senna that’s an absolutely tremendous doc.

  36. movieman says:

    Just call me “Mr. Glibly Condescending,” JS, and move on.
    If I raised a hissy fit over every posting on the HB that pissed me off–for whatever deeply personal reason it may have been–I’d never shut my damn computer off.
    Sorry that I didn’t share your passion for “Senna,” but it left me colder than a witch’s t*t in January.
    So let’s agree to disagree and quit accusing me of glibness and condescension just because my opinion was different than yours. I was simply expressing my thoughts about a movie I felt was absurdly overrated by many of my critical brethren.
    How’s this for trifling?
    Maybe I would’ve liked the docudrama version of “S” better: one with pretty photography and better-looking actors who can actually speak intelligible English

  37. Chris says:

    Senna is fantastic.

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