Friday Estimates by Still Hungry Klady
It’s funny how our box office phenoms – and The Hunger Games clearly qualifies – don’t have the kind of impact they used to have. Perhaps it is that The Media doesn’t have the weight it used to have. A cover of Time or Newsweek used to mean something. Now it means that these magazines need to sell more copies and will do anything to draw attention.
Or perhaps it is just that almost everything, no matter how large, feels like it’s in a niche these days. Obviously, 30 million or so people seeing The Hunger Games is a really big niche. But it feels a lot like a cult that you have either joined or rejected. Even from a critical standpoint. I am glad we are having the discussion about the empty death show… but for people who know and care about the books, it isn’t really a serious problem. And the same kind of thing was/is true of the Twilight series. Either you are in or you are out. There there is a boatload of money in “in.”
But look further. Who are Wrath of the Titans, Mirror Mirror, 21 Jump St, The Lorax, John Carter, Salmon Fishing In The Yemen, Act of Valor, and Project X for? These are all niche films. JC hoped to go 4-quadrant, but it suffered crib death. But none of the rest want any of your stinkin’ money if you aren’t geek, kids, hip tweens, kids, geeks, middle-aged women, right wingers, or horny boys.
Obviously, I am simplifying a bit. But on a gut level…
Back to Wrath, this sequel is apparently not suckage… but the opening dropped by more than 50% from the first remake’s surprisingly strong opening. It could make a comeback and get to 50% of the previous remake’s $64m opening. But a rather small victory. How much of this is sequalitis from a movie that is now one of the standard titles used to explain 3D excess and how much is Katniss kicking Zeus in the balls?
Mirror Mirror is, sadly, crappy crappy. It has so many good pieces and so little real energy. Even Relativity, if you’ve seen recent TV spots, has come to realize that the only people they can hope to trick into paying for this are the parents of girls under 10 who either want to be Snow White, laugh at dwarfs, or dig the costumes. Today, they’re hoping for Beauty & The Beast 3D numbers.
And Salmon Fishing in The Yemen shows us, once again, that the desperate effort to keep a movie for over-40s in the theater for long enough for that audience to find it and appreciate it is a brutal task in this distribution era. CBS Films almost doubled their audience from the previous Friday… to $300k. At this pace, the film will successfully gross $6.5 million over the next two months.
On a side note… Emily Blunt should be a movie star. A real one. With her personality defining the work as much as her acting. In an industry desperate for stars, she is one of the rare cases of someone who actually has “It,” but can’t find a project that takes proper advantage of it. If anyone ever wrote a “Pretty Woman” again, Blunt could actually be The Next Julia Roberts. But the rom-coms of the moment are mean in a way that doesn’t fit her. Put her up against Gerry Butler and she would eat the jerks he plays in those movies alive from frame one. Anyway…
ADD, 10:54a – About Bully, Change.org said in an article this week, “Katy’s petition mobilized almost half a million people. If everyone who signed her petition buys a ticket to see this movie, it will be an amazingly successful documentary.”
Fewer than 4000 people went to the film in NY & LA yesterday, reminding us that signatures are cheap.
$112 per screen average for poor Halle Berry.
Ouch!
Is her career over, or does she got a comeback vehicle somewhere down the road?
“does she HAVE a comeback vehicle….”
I have no idea how that happened, lol.
I can honestly say that I had no idea she was in a movie opening this weekend.
Literally the only mention of the film in my inbox was over a month ago from a Home Ent publicist with the subject line, “DARK TIDE (Starring Halle Berry) on Ultra VOD (Video-on-Demand) on 3/8/12.”
Is Klady still pretending October Baby doesn’t exist or did it really drop off that much?
I only knew about Dark Tide because I visit Apple’s trailer site.
Krill – It’s close to A Thousand Words for the 10 spot, either way. No idea what his deal is with that.
According to B.O. Mojo, “October Baby”‘s per-screen average yesterday was nearly comparable to “Yemen”‘s. (“OB” was, however, playing on 100 less screens.)
Can’t say that bodes terribly well for any sizable future expansion for the Hallstrom romcom.
DP get a world exclusive dp/30 with Halle Berry – its been 2 years ? since she did one …
Jennifer Lawrence continues to keep doing press and magazine cover for the Hunger Games – shes on the cover of rolling stone magazine ..which i doubt she reads. it seems like 10x times the amount of coverage for any other movie she’s done – or as DP said it -“i’ve seen your picture like 3,000 times” – JL reply – “oh i’m sorry”
RT score for Hunger Games is 85% vs 51% for John Carter
DARK TIDE is director by one of the gods of awesome filmmaking, John Stockwell, whose movies are always BLUE and NEAR BEACHES and have BIKINI CHICKS. Into the Blue, Crazy/Beautiful, Cat Run, Blue Crush…
Plus he was Dennis Gilder in Christine, and Cougar in Top Gun. Honestly surprised that between his cool ’80s movie background, and hot-chick fetishization, he’s not a more geek-beloved director.
Essentially everyone needs to face the TIDE.
Hell of a hold for 21 Jumpstreet.
I feel the same way about Clive Owen that you do about Blunt. (RIP Intruders, which I actually saw…yawn.) Everyone should just try to get a good HBO, AMC, or FX series, movies aren’t really interested in actors anymore.
It’s not a niche as much as it’s the way the world works now. It’s circles. Certain circles overlap into other circles and so on and so forth. Using the word “niche” ignores that nothing can truly be a niche, when everything can have it’s day in the sun thanks to the net.
This is why Circles works a lot better as an explanation for these things, because there are certain circles that some people are in and others they are not in. They are still a part of the BIGGEST CIRCLE, which is POP CULTURE, and that touches everything. No niches. Just circles. Also, the empty death show? Seriously, you are so catty :D.
Also, either BD or Jesse suggested (or maybe neither but someone did), the 150 million opening may be the new 100 million opening. We have enough screens and bumps in the world that a big event movie should open to 150 million. The next one to do this could be the Avengers. Last week, 152m seemed like a stretch for the Avengers but after having a week to ponder the above theory, it sort of seems more and more possible that it could open that huge.
Oh yeah, Emily Blunt would have already been a movie star, but she gave that away to Scarlett Johansson.
When you write that THG is down 61%, that’s off 61% of what? Because it opened to about $69M last Friday, and 18.5 does not represent a 61% drop from that. It’s more like 74%. So do you just not count midnights?
Clash of the Titans was pretty weak, so I’m not surprised its sequel didn’t open as well.
We are a society full of niches, more than ever before. That’s what happens when we have so many more things to choose from as far as entertainment dollars go. But The Hunger Games probably has a more broad appeal than the Twilight series, if only because it doesn’t have the stigma of being a chick flick.
The five Blunt titles due this year suggest that she’s going for it (maybe “The Five Year Engagement” with Jason Segel will do it?).
I didn’t care for the movie much but Blunt is as charming as ever in Salmon Fishing. Not that it’s a very demanding role. The 40+ crowd was out in full force at the free screening, and they seemed to love it. Obviously that didn’t translate into strong box office this weekend. And most people like free movies.
I like Emily Blunt. I still think she would have been perfect for Catwoman inTDKR. I hope she breaks out.
I don’t think the Lorax is niche. It’s an animated movie suitable for kids that stunt-casts celebrity teen heartthrobs in the leads, and a veteran beloved character actor in the title role, clearly hoping to rope in those demographics. It’s not the kids who are going to buy the cars that have the Truffula seal of approval.
JSP… sorry, but Scarlett Johansson can’t open anything but a button fly from across the room these days.
And “either BD or Jesse suggested (or maybe neither but someone did)” Yeah… glad you forget the author of the long piece you read last week. I am apparently Obama to your Republican. If I said it, it must be wrong.
Circles? Yeah, if you want to rethink it under another name. But niche is actually accurate and as I have written for over a decade, the evolution of how content is created and marketed.
Are you suggesting, Luke, that adults without kids are paying to see that movie?
Yes, David, absolutely I am. My 23 year-old fiancee has been begging me to take her for weeks.
The Hunger Games may not have the stigma of being a chick flick, but its acquiring the stigma of being a story beloved by bigots:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2012/03/hunger-games-and-trayvon-martin.html
and
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/mar/28/hunger-games-cast-racist-imagined
As for “none of the rest want any of your stinkin’ money if you aren’t geek, kids, hip tweens, kids, geeks…,” I’m reminded of the Stargate TV series when it was picked up by Sci-Fi. The channel discovered that a large portion of the audience was middle-aged women, hot for the character of Daniel Jackson, but Sci-Fi didn’t want middle-aged women watching the show because they’re a lousy demo for advertising. So they killed off Daniel Jackson, replaced him with a young dude, and saw the ratings nosedive because none of the young males Sci-Fi so desperately wanted decided to give the show a look.
They eventually ate crow and had to figure out a way to bring Daniel Jackson back to life before the end of the season.
David, seriously, a niche doesn’t work because it equates these things to being in a corner, when they are not. They are all part of a bigger collective and that is why referring to them as CIRCLES works much better, but you go ahead with your antiquated thinking. I will go with my approach sponsored by Google +.
I also have no idea what you are referring to with your second sentence. If you brought that up, sorry that I forgot you did, but I did not associate that with you. If that offends you then really, grow a thicker skin because CRITICISM IS NOT ALWAYS PERSONAL even though you take it personally :D!
Finally, what fucking year do you think this is? 1957? It’s not about opening a movie, Poland. It’s about name recognition and being in high profile movies. Scarlett is in Avengers, Iron Man 2, and countless other films with more profile then anything Blunt has ever been in.
If anyone has a higher Q, it’s Scarlett, and Emily walked away from that Q rating. She walked away from it and whatever it brings but please, keep acting as if anyone lives by your limited view of a movie star. Ryan Gosling is a movie star. Has he opened shit? No, but he’s a movie star. The same with Scarlett while Emily is a fine actress. Thus the difference.
My understanding was Emily Blunt did everything she could to get out of doing Gulliver’s Travels so she could be Black Widow and couldn’t. And I feel bad for her becuz Gulliver was pretty bad.
Scarlett vs Emily – Scarlett still does ads for makeup and fashion in major magazines .. Emily not so much.
i like Emily’s interviews better .. but both have done
movies with Ewan Mcgregor and Matt Damon
did either of them lose any major roles that ended up being huge ?
both can pull off getting more oscar nominations … if they really care about this acting thing ..
i’m sure DP has a box full of movie scripts he could send over.
crazy at how many actresses who seemed to have the movie star mixture didnt catch on do to either choices or the audience didnt warm up. rachel Macadams, emily blunt, scar jo, should at least be headlining solid performing romantic comedies. even reese has fallen off a bit. Is it that audiences arent looking for that type of female star in that they rather see the angelina jolie action star type now. hence all the underworlds being made. Seriously there have been more underworlds than lethal weapons!!
Salmon Fishing in the Yemen may be intended for the middle-aged woman niche, as you say, but it didn’t work for this middle(ish)-aged woman.
There are some very cute — and, unfortunately, overly cutesy — devices employed. A lot of the dialog is simply ridiculous. I know that some of it is supposed to sound stilted and odd, but it ought to be kinda-sorta believably stilted and odd.
As for the acting, Kristen Scott Thomas chews the scenery, but at least appears to be having fun. Amr Waked, who plays the sheik is magnetic and wonderful. McGregor and Blunt have NO, NOOOOOOOOOO, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO chemistry.
I spent a good deal of the third act thinking of other things, not the movie. That’s never a good sign. The ending is a disappointment. Basically, the film is just…Meh.
“Angelina Jolie action star” earned more guffaws than praise when folks wondered how an anorexic could do all those stunts in Salt.
Would the Black Widow part have done anything for Emily? Is an actor’s best hope these days to end up in indentured service to Marvel? Or in Jennifer Lawrence’s case, spending much of your twenties making Hunger Games sequels?
Rob, if it gets you on posters and magazine covers the world round, then that’s doing something for you. That’s the point of it all. It gives you face time on a global scale that something like The Adjustment Bureau does not.
As far as being more famous goes, along with name recognition and all that, SJ wins hands down. But who do you think will have the longer and more diverse film career? My money is on EB.
That being said, SJ did get notoriety in this business, not for being a bombshell, but for stuff like Horse Whisperer, Lost in Translation, The Other Bolelyn Girl, and indie cred with Ghost World. So she has it in her to do both the stuff that’s flashy, and the stuff that’s character driven.
blunt would have been better. scarjo always seems out of place in these bloated big budget monstrosities. She was a sore thumb in Iron Man 2 and the less we say about The Island, the better.
That’s not a shot at her. I think she’s great. she’s not built for this kind of stuff. I’d almost say she’s too good for popcorn junk.
Wow, that’s an entire dismissive post about comic book films, that she excelled in.
BD, they are about a year apart, so this is probably going to go on for a while. I’d still go with Scarlett due to the Marvel films and Blunt seemingly avoiding being a part of something big, that will pay a lot of bills.
100 million dollar action movies are usually the popcorn junk … which involves a lot of other characters that
don’t have enough screentime …. not sure why Portman needed to be in Thor ..
but there`s a lot of good stuff just not with super big budgets like Hanna – Saoirse Ronan – Super – Ellen Page…
Emily Blunt on Iron Man 2 —
“Apparently not wanting to be typecast, Blunt says she is open to all kinds of film genre.
But she told Vulture magazine: ‘Usually the female parts in a superhero film feel thankless: She’s the pill girlfriend while the guys are whizzing around saving the world.
‘I didn’t do the other ones because the part wasn’t very good or the timing wasn’t right, but I’m open to any kind of genre if the part is great and fun and different and a challenge in some way.’
Sanj, Emily is the “face” of Opium perfume, all over fashion magazines.