MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Friday Estimates By ZD Klady

Another strong opening expansion day for an award-chasing film. The template on this one, however, is more 2002’s Black Hawk Down than Lincoln. And by that standard, this opening day also has to be a little bit of a letdown. A little bit.

With due respect, the public has not spoken to Kathryn Bigelow not getting an Oscar nom… this number has to do—as almost every single opening does—to marketing and not media issues. Sony has done a decent job marketing this film to men and a mediocre one (at best) marketing it to women and Oscar voters. Bigelow not being nominated was a failure. I believe that voting issues were a big part of it, but also, the failure to make the case for her and the film is on the studio and its strategy & tactics.

And my guess is—guess—that there was another $5 million out there this weekend for this movie if some women—not all—felt this was a great choice for them as well as for their male counterparts. After all, this is a movie with a woman at the heart of it who stands up against the boys’ club and turns out to be right. It’s Norma Rae in the CIA… in part.

Anyway…

The most overstated box office story of the week has been the “Oscar bump” story. ZD30 is a massive expansion. Neither Django Unchained or Les Misérables is looking at a weekend bump. Lincoln will be up in the mid-teens, though there was a 7% theater expansion and the film’s numbers were slowing enough to feel even a fairly small bump. Silver Linings Playbook had a 9% theater expansion, but is looking at growth in the 30s, but like Lincoln, the actual dollars we’re talking about are low enough ($1.2m last Friday to $1.5m this Friday) that the idea of a bump gets exaggerated. Life of Pi is estimated to drop “only” 20%, which is better than a normal weekend, but hardly a news flash. Argo‘s impressive 48% leap from last Friday to this one is less exciting when you realize that WB doubled the screen count and the double is still only an estimated $335k yesterday.

In other words, the only real story here in terms of a bump is Lincoln and even that is so-so.

In non-awards box office, A Haunted House came up behind Gangster Squad to win Friday. There is a good chance that GS will regain the #2 slot by the end of the weekend as these spoof movies tend to weaken over even the first weekend. I’m not really shocked by the Gangster Squad start, as the young stars of the film—all of whom I really like and like to see work—have narrow box office powers and this film hasn’t played to those commercial strengths. The ads have gotten to be more and more about Gosling and Stone, which is smart, but not so much that it became the draw of the film. Sean Penn is a great actor and sometimes hits gold, but his stylized work here kinda works against what people like about Gosling. Brolin is a little lost in the marketing. They just never found that clear call to action for ticketbuyers. This isn’t a terrible opening, but it’s not a thriller by any means. It will be interesting to see how the film travels, as this group of actors includes some of the star power that Hollywood expects to rely on for the next couple of decades.

Be Sociable, Share!

28 Responses to “Friday Estimates By ZD Klady”

  1. Joe Leydon says:

    An 82 percent drop for Texas Chainsaw? Holy smokes!

  2. bulldog68 says:

    Anyone know what the plan is for Silver Linings Playbook. Wasn’t this weekend the right time for the bigger expansion like ZD30 did. They are not going to get more free press than this weekend, unless they actually go on to win Best Picture, and by then they would have left a lot of money on the table I think.

  3. etguild2 says:

    A $100 per theater for $ellebrity? Holy Hell!

    Silver Linings is going truly wide next week.

    I can’t recall a time in recent history where there’s been such a dearth of under-12 kids films. No wonder GUARDIANS, GUIDANCE, MONSTERS AND HOBBIT have held so well the past few weeks.

    Next week, it’s two R-rated action pics, and a hard PG13 horror film.

    The following week a hard-R raunchy comedy, and Statham actioner.

    Then the barely PG-13 Hansel and Gretel, a septuagenarian action comedy, and a zombie romance.

    The week after are the Bateman/Melisssa McCarthy raunchfest and Soderbergh’s theatrical farewell.

    Then FINALLY on Valentine’s Day, Weinstein opens an animated kiddie flick. I predict they are going to have a BIG hit, no matter how bad it is.

  4. movieman says:

    They wimped out and went for a “PG-13” w/ “H&G,” Et?
    Too bad, yet hardly surprising.

  5. etguild2 says:

    Yeah IMDB is listing as PG13…I know they were screen testing an R version too.

  6. cadavra says:

    Isn’t Searchlight gonna bring back BEASTS in even a few cinemas? With all those noms it seems like there’d be a few latecomers who’d prefer to see it in a theatre.

  7. etguild2 says:

    You’d think so. Bizarre year for Searchlight with the last second HITCHCOCK push, and really nothing else other than SESSIONS.

  8. Lex says:

    What is the point of Nikki’s– and to a lesser extent, the Hollywood Reporter’s “early Friday numbers!” they post mid-evening every Friday? They are always, always, ALWAYS wrong.

    Honestly, who hasn’t seen LINCOLN yet? Are there honestly still old fucks who whom the verdict was still out until two full months later whether that was worth their “old couple who sees two movies a year” dollars?

    Give any tweedy critic or pro movie blogger in LA a hundred bucks if you’ll roll into like the Citywalk or Baldwin Hills tonight and plop down dead center for a 10:00 sold-out all-thug screening of A HAUNTED HOUSE.

  9. antho42 says:

    Why are studious risking piracy with screeeners then? Is it just an ego move?

  10. etguild2 says:

    Lex, DRIVING MISS DAISY sold 25 million tickets plus, and TERMS OF ENDEARMENT sold 33 million (DP, run for cover). LINCOLN is still under 20 million. There are old people yet to tap.

  11. sanj says:

    LexG – it’s all about Steven Spielberg – he can do anything… without him this movie should be on the history channel …he used up all his ET power and got some big name actors .

    Spielberg last 4 tv series didn’t last very long..

    if i met Spielberg i’d talk about Animaniacs and Pinky and the Brain …

    how often do the super important film critics bring up his silly cartoons he did like 20 years ago .

  12. Lex says:

    “Brolin is a little lost in the marketing…”

    I hate to even think this let alone type it, because Brolin is a GOD to me, one of my favorite actors from even back in his late 90s Mod Squad, Best-Laid Plans, Hollow Man, Mimic, Nightwatch era and especially since his No Country, American Gangster, Milk, etc etc etc career spike, but…

    Is Josh Brolin ever really a draw? I think he’s one of the coolest actors out there, but his hits (Gangster, MiB III) are all either ensembles or somebody else’s movie. I always kinda wonder if the “general public” even knows who he is. He books SNL and gets first spot on talk shows, and again I think he’s a great actor… the name is respected, sure, but as a solo selling point, he’s kind of like having Garrett Dillahunt or Geoff Stults in the role– not really swaths of people out there racing for the theater because he’s in it. It’s sort of a smart way to build a really respected career and give the appearance of “star” without having a movie that took off on your name alone.

  13. Joe Leydon says:

    Lex: Also, remember, there are lots of us old folks out there.

  14. JKill says:

    I just saw a red band trailer for H&G before GANGSTER SQUAD this afternoon, so if there was a shift back to PG-13, it would have to have been very last minute.

  15. celluloidkid says:

    @cadavra – Beasts is heading back to some theaters next Friday…

  16. pj says:

    I think the actual story is that Lincoln even with it’s Oscar bump almost got beat by SLP even though it is playing in less then half as many theaters….

  17. etguild2 says:

    Really? Even though LINCOLN is at 150 million and SILVER is at 37? I’d call than a “Desperate Weinstein Headline.”

  18. anghus says:

    the screener thing always interests me because i have a lot of friends in lots of guilds and without them they’d never have time to see all the movies nominated.

    I know purists yell “GO SEE THE MOVIES IN THEATERS”, but the people i know who are film industry professionals are usually working a lot. And when they do take time off they cant always spend it catching up on a hundred movies.

    They’re visiting loved ones, taking a breather from 18 hour days, and trying to plan out their next job.

    Without screeners, you wouldnt get a lot of votes.

  19. leahnz says:

    I’m firmly in the ‘see it in the cinema the way it was made to be seen’ camp, but one problem is a sizable chunk of oscar voters live outside the US and possible nominees haven’t even come out yet in theatres in many other countries. I’ve seen Django, the Master and ZD30 via my voting friend’s sceeners and he has a decent little home cinema set-up with digital projector and one of those big-ass pull down screens, but I rue the day not seeing them in the cinema the way they’re meant to be seen (and I still mean to) — the sound people in particular must cringe at the thought of their designs being judged by rinki-dink home theatre standards.

  20. StellaPD says:

    I could have sworn I saw a TV spot for Hansel & Gretel during football today that said rated R.

  21. Dermot says:

    The hobbit might make over 700 mil. ww. Woah

  22. Rashad says:

    Good news: A Good Day to Die Hard is rated R.

  23. cadavra says:

    Celluloidkid: Thanks.

    Lex: At last count, there were 90 million baby boomers, and tens of millons more born before 1946. And shocking as this may seem, there are plenty of people under 45 who will see or have seen LINCOLN. A great film transcends demographics.

    Anghus: Back in the old days, film industry professionals worked six days a week, often almost round the clock, and still managed to see films in theatres–and this was in an era when the major studios were releasing 50-60 movies a year each. I have no objection to screeners for those who live and/or work outside LA/NY/Chi/SF, but folks “in town” really have no excuse unless they’re unable to leave the house.

  24. YancySkancy says:

    I can see L.A.-based Academy members using screeners to catch up on stuff they missed in theaters throughout the year, but they have less excuse for skipping screenings of the late-year Oscar-bait releases, especially since so many are set up by the various guilds.

  25. StellaPD says:

    Bad news: A Good Day to Die Hard looks dreadful.

  26. christian says:

    The lack of physical threat and cg insanity is ruining action films.

  27. Ray Pride says:

    It would also be nice to think that some Academy members are fully employed on movies during the year: if you’re on set for twelve to twenty-five weeks running…

  28. palmtree says:

    Uh…Hobbit is already past 800 million ww (that’s 8), and nearing 900.

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