MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Weekend Estimates by Conjured Klady

Weekeend Estimates 2013-07-21 at 9.58.04 AM

The Conjuring is a big horror win for Warner Bros, their best horror launch ever. I wouldn’t be remotely surprised if the “final” number is a couple million lower, but nonetheless, a strong launch.

Despicable Me 2 remains solid and should pass Man of Steel as the #2 movie of the summer domestically next Saturday. Worldwide, too.

Turbo‘s opening is right down there in the “bomb” group for DreamWorks Animation. As I’ve noted before, I think it’s reading too young for the bigger animation audience and it certainly doesn’t have the benefit of being a sequel, which the two biggest animated hits of the summer have. As with Epic, birthing a new animated franchise isn’t easy… and Epic had a 50% better domestic opening.

Grown Ups 2 continues apace, slightly ahead of the original. And critics wept. I’m not sure how this film doubles its domestic gross from here, as the first film did after its second weekend. But we shall see.

RED 2 is running about 15% behind its first incarnation… though it’s probably 30% better as a movie. But as we all know, opening weekend has nothing to do with the movie itself. It’s a novelty idea and the novelty is clearly not as compelling the second time around. But they did everything that you are supposed to do with a sequel. More Malkovich, which people were wanting in the first film. More shooting by Mirren. Check. Add cool Korean action star (Byung-hun Lee) and Oscar-winners Sir Tony Hopkins and Catherine Zeta Jones. No sale.

Pacific Rim isn’t finding its legs. It may find its way to $100m domestic, but that’s no lock. And it’s not enough. The good news is that it’s already over $100m internationally with a lot of big territories to go (including the misleading China, out of which it’s hard to get your money and impossible to get 50% of your gross). Regardless, it has a long way to go before it gets a whiff of breakeven.

Speaking of survival by foreign, Man of Steel is out of the woods thanks to foreign ($350m int), World War Z still has a shot ($270m int), Star Trek Into Darkness shouldn’t lose money ($224m int), and even After Earth, which will still lose, is in a lot better shape after scoring $176m internationally. (It’s not a summer movie, but the most interesting story of the year in this regard is Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters, which grossed $56m here, but a whopping $170m internationally, making it not only profitable, but a bit of a cash cow, more profitable than any of the movies mentioned in this paragraph.)

RIPD is what it is. Mediocre and disappointing was a theme in the reviews and so with the box office too.

In less-wide releases, The Way Way Back is chugging along, expanding to 304 screens this weekend, but not catching on like wildfire. Kevin Hart: Let Me Explain will pass $30m this week with Lionsgate working that Tyler Perry tip. Fruitvale Station is the per-screen champ for the weekend across all categories with $21k on each of 34 screens. Nic Refn’s controversially epic Only God Forgives did okay.

Before Midnight is the clear muscle of this season in the arthouse category, now up to $7.4 million, which is behind only the SummitsGate films, which are indie, but not arthouse. Personally, I think Sony Classics could up the gross significantly with some spending for the film going into August. But next weekend’s release of Blue Jasmine will probably be in the way of that happening.

Other indie hits this summer include The Bling Ring ($5.6m), Frances Ha ($3.9m), Much Ado About Nothing ($3.7m), doc leader 20 Feet From Stardom ($2.4m), The East ($2.2m), The Iceman ($1.9m), Fill The Void ($1.6m), Love Is All You Need ($1.5m), and Stories We Tell ($1.5m). Girl Most Likely and Only God Forgives could join that $1.5m+ club.

Be Sociable, Share!

68 Responses to “Weekend Estimates by Conjured Klady”

  1. Etguild2 says:

    Hard to believe there may be 6 movies that lose at least $50 million each this summer (White House Down, Lone Ranger, and R.I.P.D. for sure, After Earth and Pacific Rim likely, Turbo quite possible). A seventh could be in the cards, depending on how much PERCY JACKSON 2 cost.

    Given that, a big tip of the hat to Brad Pitt, as WWZ just became the biggest domestic grosser of his career, has topped STAR TREK worldwide and is now guaranteed to surpass $500 million, putting it firmly (though not wildly) in the black, with a Chinese release still possible. He really put his reputation on the line, and it paid off, amazingly, given the doomsday prognostications that met it.

    RONIN 47, you’re up.

  2. Nick says:

    Is the conjuring a sequel to insidious?

  3. chris says:

    No, but they are making a sequel to “Insidious.”

  4. Gus says:

    It is depressing to think about how the “original” titles are getting slaughtered this summer while the sequels and franchise reboots are doing great. People criticize Hollywood all the time but the proof is in the pudding. If people weren’t turning out for these things they wouldn’t be making so many of them, plain and simple.

    The ‘original’ hits this year include movies like the Conjuring, Heat, and TITE, all of which are smack in the center of the wheelhouse of the people making them.

    I suppose the big standouts are WWZ, Mama, and, to a lesser extent, the Purge… But whaddyagonna do.

    My favorite movies this year have been either very small (Upstream Color, Beyond the Hills, Laurence Anyways) or relatively small (Place Beyond the Pines, Mud). At least some of those were successes on their own scales but yeesh.

  5. David Poland says:

    Et… $500m worldwide does not put WWZ firmly in the black. More like $600m. And yes, that includes post-theatrical revenues.

  6. Etguild2 says:

    “Speaking of survival by foreign, Man of Steel is out of the woods thanks to foreign ($350m int), World War Z still has a shot ($270m int), Star Trek Into Darkness shouldn’t lose money ($224m int)”

    Im assuming you’re talking about strict box office profitability? STAR TREK and MOS did and will continue to do gangbusters on ancillaries, and STAR TREK was one of the biggest selling home market titles ever when it was released in 2009 (nearly $200 million in just domestic DVD and Blu-Ray sales…that’s without rentals, foreign sales, TV rights…). The sequel going to make a crap-ton of money.

    As for WWZ, with Japan, Spain and likely China left, it’s clearly “out of the woods.” I’m not sure what high-end production budget estimates you’re using…but $500 million is plenty to clear. Even if the movie cost $400 million with marketing and does the home market number of “Warm Bodies,” it’s in the clear.

  7. pat says:

    Lone Ranger is one franchise that isn’t doing great.

  8. David Poland says:

    Uh Et… assuming you are mixing ideas. Your $400m cost includes marketing? Still less than WWZ cost.

    I do think that WWZ will end up being breakeven or maybe make pocket change. But not there yet. (And duh, yes, I always include post-theatrical) And the idea that it was this massive underdog that overcame was a brilliant creation of Paramount marketing. It’s the great, “Lowered your expectations, suckers!” film of this summer.

  9. Etguild2 says:

    “Your $400m cost includes marketing? Still less than WWZ cost.”

    I’ve seen estimates on the production budget that range from $170-250 million. Estimates on R.I.P.D. run from $125-200 million. I like to think the median is a good place to settle, instead of going with wild speculation on either end. Thus, 210+200…which is high by Hollywood standards as a marketing percentage of production budget.

    And I don’t think a zombie film that makes half a billion dollars can lower anyone’s expectations. I don’t think anyone was expecting that, Paramount included, when the project was greenlit.

    EDIT: Also, if you always include post-theatrical, you’d have to be shit-balls insane to make a statement like “Hansel & Gretel” is more profitable than “Man of Steel” or Star Trek.” Just sayin’

  10. WWZ really cost over 400 million, all things considered? Sweet Jesus.

    I wish I understood Hollywood business like you do so I wouldn’t be so shocked by such amounts of money.

  11. Bulldog68 says:

    I am surprised that Pacific Rim is struggling so. I wasn’t expecting Transformers type numbers but I thought it would be a solid mid level hit, at least easily $150m. With such good audience responses I am amazed at that level drop. People are talking about the fanboys but to me this had good action junkie appeal, fanboy or not. This 58% drop is especially troubling when no big blockbuster opened this weekend and it wasn’t a big opener to begin with.

    I wish this and WWZ would trade box office results. WWZ was a snoozefest. This was anything but.

  12. movieman says:

    Didn’t I read that Paramount has already signed off on a “Hansel & Gretel” sequel, solely because of its foreign gross?
    I bet Jeremy Renner doesn’t re-up.
    Even if there was a sequel clause in his original contract, a smart agent/manager should have no trouble freeing him from that blood pact, lol.
    No summer indie has really taken off–especially compared with spring’s “Mud.:”
    “20 Feet from Stardom” is probably the closest thing to a legitimate WOM sleeper hit.
    But the rest? I’m pretty sure that “Bling,” the Linklater, “Frances,” “Much Ado,” et al were aiming a lot higher.

  13. Man, I’m about to light a candle for ’47 Ronin.’ I really hope it performs at the box office.

  14. Jack1137 says:

    Movieman when Dredd came out the writer said that if in North America if it breaks 50 mill they could do a sequel(I’m not sure about inter) and it has the same budget and H&G which had done that and good Intl.So if Renner stays it will probaly be a go.

  15. David Poland says:

    That includes marketing, Gustavo.

  16. David Poland says:

    ET… not close to “shitballs insane.”

    And if you want to base your thinking on stuff you read, great. I don’t know what every movie costs. Some, I do.

  17. Etguild2 says:

    I’ll take your word on it, that a zombie film cost half a billion dollars…still, even if the film cost as much as “Avatar,” it probably has $100 million to go. It’s fine, and Paramount will undoubtedly get a big back-end licensing fee for image use off of the skyrocketing book sales of Z before post-theatrical even kicks in.

    I guess I missed all the Hansel & Gretel action figures, literary tie-ins, and rabid fans clamoring for Blu-Ray box sets. “Hansel” opened to $7.8 million on Blu-Ray. One-fifth what “Star Trek” opened to. It will likely finish with around $35 million in domestic DVD/Blu-Ray sales. Assuming STAR TREK 2 bleeds the same as it did in box office, it will finish with about $180 million. The margin in rentals and foreign home market sales will be smaller, but that’s again leaving out ancillaries.

    It’s just not close.

  18. brack says:

    I’m not surprised by Pacific Rim’s take at all.

    Pacific Rim was not sold well enough. It is this year’s Snakes on a Plan, or Scott Pilgrim vs. The World. Lots of Internet hype that just did not garner much traction.

    Funny, I found WWZ riveting throughout. A great action thriller with plenty of scares. Maybe it was the 3D working wonders, but I loved it.

  19. cadavra says:

    Re TURBO and EPIC. I hate to put on my Old Dude hat again, but here goes: When I was a lad, Disney made one animated feature every two or three years. Each one was regarded as a capital-E Event. Occasionally another studio might put out a one-off like GAY PURR-EE or HEY THERE! IT’S YOGI BEAR!, but that would be it. So each animated feature was a BFD. Now, there’s well over a dozen every year, most of them jammed into the summer; we’ve had three in just the last five weeks. So hitting the saturation point was inevitable. They really, really need to cut back.

  20. movieman says:

    …or “A Man Called Flinstone.”
    I feel ya, Cad.

    Maybe it’s all part of the Instant Gratification Generation. Can you imagine a typical ’00 kid waiting 2-3 years for anything?
    Of course, it’s also about corporate greed. Once everybody figured out that CGI, preferably 3-D, animated features were no longer just the province of “kiddie matinees,” every studio in town wanted in on the “all-demographics-all-the-time” action…and the potential franchises, action figures, home video sales, etc.
    And when it quickly became apparent that American CGI, preferably 3-D, animated features were, if anything, even more popular overseas, there was no stopping the product flow. It’s become like–to pull another old man reference, lol–(“I Love) Lucy” in the chocolate factory.

  21. Etguild2 says:

    And Disney did the same things in the 1970’s with the once a year releases and the films were mostly capital T terrible. In reality, we are having the slowest year, release wise, for animated titles to this point since 2004.

    There have traditionally been ebbs and flows in the animation market, as studios have periods of innovation and then rest on their laurels, overstuffing the marketplace with sequels and the same idea over and over (Despicable/Megamind, Happy Feet 1-2/Surf’s Up/Penguins of Madagascar!., Rio/Newt! [Pixar killed the latter but it cost the studio months of work])

    We’re in one of the ebbs….the animated marketplace was perfectly fine from 2006-2010 with 10+ studio animated releases a year. We have fewer or the same than the norm this year, but the quality is off…thus how Disney can release direct-to-DVD product into the market (Planes). It’ll get better.

  22. jesse says:

    Also, can I add that the idea that having more than two animated movies per calendar year is somehow pure super-corporate instant-gratification kids-today weakness is kind of ridiculous bullshit? Yeah, it’s much better to have ZERO movies for six-year-olds to see (cue Lex talking about how in his day six-year-olds saw movies like RIPD and Red 2 and Only God Forgives). If you happen to be six the year they do no animated/kid-aimed movies, too bad! Now let’s queue up another discussion about how there’s nothing for mature adults to see these days. It’s far more important that we serve the 40+ crowd than kids!

    I’m not saying all of these cartoons in the glut are good, or deserve to be successful. I didn’t like Epic or Despicable Me 2 and probably won’t see Turbo. But it’s actually pretty awesome that there are a bunch of different studios doing animation right now. Remember just 15 years or so ago, where it was conceivable that Disney would crush (or at least wing) any out-of-house competitors in the animation market with a re-release or something? That would be unthinkable now.

    If some animated movies suck, it’s not because there are too many of them. Would Epic be AMAZING if it happened to be the only cartoon released this year? Or would it have made the filmmakers make a better movie? I kinda doubt it on both accounts.

    Plus, last year we had three really good stop-motion cartoons. (Granted, that may not happen again for a while given their grosses.) That’s great!

  23. Bulldog68 says:

    Maybe if they had made RIPD before MIB3 it might have made more coin. Also, with the obvious comparisons, maybe they should have switched it up and get a female rookie along with Jeff Bridges. @ over $150m prod cost they could have tried Angelina Jolie. Enough action creds to carry a film, a new strong female character, enough to be different from all the sausage fests right now, and would have been an interesting twist if she was seen as the old asian guy and Bridges was the hot blonde.

    No guarantee it would have saved the film, and I actually like Ryan Reynolds, but it could have been one way to go.

  24. Jack1137 says:

    Bulldog Angelina Jolie Directed a War film a year or so ago that no one saw it bombed no one liked it(Critically) and now she’s doing it next year with anticipation of Oscar glory.I don’t think she would be Interested.Also check Timur Bekmambetov’s Wanted for been there kinda

  25. cadavra says:

    Jesse: No one’s saying there should be NO animated movies (though that was my childhood, more often than not). But when studios insist on making three or even more a year, talent gets spread thin, a lot of chaff is gonna get released, and a shitload of money will be lost in the process.

  26. LexG says:

    Animation = not a movie.

  27. jesse says:

    I’m saying if you’re treating it like a genre (which you probably shouldn’t but I get that “kid-targeted animation” kind of is), three or four a year isn’t exactly a market flood. Does anyone ever say “they put out THREE horror movies this year, that’s CRAZY”?

    I mean, I know cartoons cost more than some $20 million horror movie, but there were a ton of animated hits last year so I don’t know that it’s exactly the worst gamble I’ve seen the studios roll on.

    And if you treat it like a medium, well, pretty much the same thing: it’s not that weird that studios would use animation to make four or five or six of their collective 120 or whatever wide releases per year.

  28. Bulldog68 says:

    Who would have thought Jeff Bridges would have been interested in RIPD, or even the upcoming Seventh Son, after being an Oscar fave in the past few years.

    Not saying Jolie would’ve worked, but it would’ve been more interesting.

  29. leahnz says:

    Bulldog i like your RIPD idea (maybe with someone really unexpected and out-of-the-box like jessica chastain, she’s so freakin’ talented i’d love to see her in something weird and fun), but i haven’t seen the movie so just in a general ‘more-women-fewer-penis-o-ramas-please’ way, the fear of womancooties/female protagonists seems epidemic in mainstream film at the moment and only getting worse — then again when i heard they were doing a sequel to ‘men in black’ i was looking forward to the will smith/linda fiorentino team that worked well from the conclusion of the first flick, they had a great rapport, but alas no such luck

  30. Jack1137 says:

    Bulldog no you are right she would have possibly worked and that is a good idea but i think the Goddess would not like to play with the Peasants.BTW Bridges work is fine you have to do the Big and Small.

  31. Fitzgerald says:

    I like this idea of female lead casting for RIPD. Flipping the husband and wife dynamic would also have been an interesting consequence. So I saw the movie, and while it is flawed, I’m pretty surprised at the level of critical hate-on, even more than with Lone Ranger. I laughed and enjoyed throughout. What struck me was how incredibly odd and weird the whole thing was. It’s ironic that so many people are bashing it for lack of originality. I found more minute to minute inspiration and crazy than in just about any other summer film, albeit in a somewhat familiar package. The Indian food interrogation cards? The VCR store? The scene where the Jeff Bridges character rants against “jack offs” who make destructive magic doohickeys? The song at the end? I kept thinking that this is a cult film that somehow got through the studio process, which explains the downright confusion with which it was presented to the public.

  32. LexG says:

    Yeah, put me down for TEAM R.I.P.D. too. “The scene where the Jeff Bridges character rants against “jack offs” who make destructive magic doohickeys?” THIS. OH MY GOD THIS, and Bacon’s RIOTOUS smarmy-asshole performance, albeit acknowledged that it’s a retread of his villain from SUPER.

    Glad there’s a small contingent of smart people (Glenn Kenny liked it to) who have some affection for R.I.P.D. One of those cheap-shot punching-bag movies that isn’t nearly as bad as anyone’s making it out to be. I was grinning like a dumb-ass through most of it.

  33. movieman says:

    Speaking of Kevin Bacon: I think I’m going to start calling him Dorian Bacon.
    Dude doesn’t appear to have aged a whit in 20 years.
    I’m thinking he has to be the same age as me (“Animal House” was made in 1977, and Bacon had to have been at least–what?–18 when he shot it), and it just seems wrong, and intrinsically unfair, that he’s remained so eternally, impossibly young while I wither away into senescence, lol.

  34. LexG says:


  35. The Big Perm says:

    Etguild2, I do think Paramount was hoping for those WWZ numbers…how could they not with that budget plus Brad Pitt? They were making a blockbuster action movie, not a typical zombie movie. That’s why it’s PG-13. Zombies aren’t like a little horror trope for low budget movies anymore, they’re mainstream.

    I’m not surprised at all by Pacific Rim. I could have been surprised if it were doing better.

  36. hcat says:

    Does anyone think the general public might have responded better to Pacific Rim if it was made on the cheap? This is the problem I thought the Grindhouse double feature of a few years ago had, if you are going to celebrate the source material why not put yourself within the same contstraints and make a cheap, fun, see some of the wires, chock full of ideas blast of a movie? I’ve actually heard more of a positive response online and in person to whatever the hell Sharknado is than to Pacific Rim.

    I have yet to see PR so I can’t speak to its quality, but it always seems odd to me that these mega budgets are used to pay homage to genres whose charm came from being made on the cheap and shot on the fly (Land of the Lost and Dark Shadows are other examples of this).

    I would not be at all suprised anymore if some studio dropped $150 million on some rock musical version of The Banana Splits just because up and coming director was a huge fan of them when he was seven and has had this as his dream project since he got into the biz.

  37. movieman says:

    A Banana Splits movie would be totally groovy, Hcat!
    But only if done on the el-cheapo (say, half the budget allegedly accorded “Oogieloves”). Which is pretty much your point, right?
    Although I loved Tim Burton’s “Dark Shadows,” my original (fantasy) vision for the film was Burton doing his very own Ed Wood-ian movie in homage both to the original series and Wood.
    But I wouldn’t have wanted del Toro to compromise his vision in any way while making “Pacific Rim” since the end result is so fantastic.
    And I still think it’ll earn back its formidable costs between foreign and ancillary.

  38. cadavra says:

    Well, you could argue that HOUSE OF DARK SHADOWS was the el-cheapo version, and that Burton’s was the big, expensive one we fans always dreamed of. I suggested to the Cinematheque that they run them as a double feature, but it hasn’t happened yet.

  39. Bulldog68 says:

    But Hcat, everyone is chasing Jaws, Raiders of the Lost Ark, and Jurassic Park. They brought a level of quality to what was B and C movies and turned these genres into qualified blockbuster material. Ironic that they are all from Spielberg. The guy has probably read more comic books and watched more Saturday morning cartoons than anyone else.

    And as far as Saturday morning cartoons go, Pinky and the Brain and Anamaniacs ruled.

  40. Fitzgerald says:

    Yes, Lex, I loved Bacon in this too. There were so many clever and funny lines throughout. It had its own language. Something Harry Knowles got right in his review, in which he said the word weird about a dozen times, was that this is more like crazy John Carpenter territory. Anyway, I liked it.

  41. Bulldog68 says:

    I’ve read some of those really negative reviews for RIPD. And for some reason, I get the feeling that I might like it. The only problem I may have is how much money they spent to make it. It looks like it deserved a $75m budget at best.

  42. Bulldog68 says:

    RIPD might have good one for Neil Blomkamp.

  43. The Big Perm says:

    hcat, people (white geeks mainly) responded to positively to Sharknado because it allowed them easy snarking where they can be all ironic and shit, and look down their noses at garbage…which is what they’re best at doing.

  44. hcat says:

    Bulldog, Agree with you on Pinky and Anamaniacs, and yes Raiders and Star Wars were homages to cheap serials of the past (though given much more depth and backstory than i am sure the Flash Gordon weeklys ever had), but I don’t immediatly agree with Jaws as being a B movie, or that if it is that Jaws started the trend. Isn’t the film meaty enough to be considered an epic adventure along the lines of a Gunga Din, a Moby Dick or even something on a smaller scale like Wages of Fear? If Jaws is a glorified B picture than wouldn’t other large action classics like Guns of Naverone and Great Escape also fall into that category.

    And as far as genre, given when it was released wouldn’t Jaws fall firmly into the disaster genre, with a single decent man warning the immovable powers that be about a powerful natural force (Fire, Earthquake, Giant hungy fish etc. etc.). And since those were the big earners of the time, I don’t think they were really considered B’s and C’s.

    So I don’t disagree with you entirely, but other directors before Speilberg brought quality to b genres (Hitchcock with fright, Ford and Hawks with westerns), but they didn’t go all in without proven stars and big name directors.

  45. The Big Perm says:

    Spielberg didn’t want to do Jaws because it was basically a giant monster movie. That’s what it is, not a disaster film. I don’t know how meaty it started as, it seems like a lot of the good stuff got added as they shot and wasn’t in the script. It was the good luck of the shooting running so long, they could have all that extra time to hone the characters.

  46. Bulldog68 says:

    I would never call Jaws a B movie Hcat. Just that the genre be it disaster flick or man against monster was never viewed as “for your consideration” material.

    “And since those were the big earners of the time, I don’t think they were really considered B’s and C’s. ”

    You’re right. Just googled the b/o from 70′-75′. Jaws was the daddy of them all of course, but in the top 25, 2nd was The Exorcist, 6th and 7th was Blazing Saddles and Towering Inferno, 11th and 13th was Airport and The Poseidon Adventure, and 15th and 17th was Young Frankenstein and Earthquake.

  47. The Big Perm says:

    That’s true, but the 70s was a weird time…when directors were taking movies from genres considered to be shit (and still are today somewhat) and turned them into artistic triumphs. Like Coppola didn’t want to make The Godfather, it was considered an artistic trashy sellout…until he did what he did to it.

    All of those disaster movies were earners, but they weren’t considered good movies. Like doing Thor 3 would be making a big movie, but the average director with artistic ambition wouldn’t necessarily want to do it (except for the big wad of money).

  48. hcat says:

    Then the teen cruising American Graffiti is in there somewhere, The Sting, a silly heist movie, had to make the 25, Love Story, a weeper whose source material was every bit as slight as Jaws. All could be considered glorified Bs, including a certain gangster movie that is pretty high on the list.

    So while you could say that Speilberg elevated what would in anothers hands have been B material, others had already been doing the same to great box office results previously. In the decade before Jaws, George Roy Hill took three outdated genres 20’s musical, 30’s gangster, early westerns and fashioned huge hits out of them.

  49. hcat says:

    And as far as disaster not being considered ‘For Your Consideration Material.’ I believe Airport, Posiden and Towering Inferno were all nominated for BP.

    But I see your point that Rim is just the latest in a long line of people polishing up the genres they loved as kids and making them respectable.

  50. bulldog68 says:

    So Hcat, I guess today’s equivalent to those movies would be Titanic, Rings, Avatar. Even stuff like Bravehart and Gladiator.

  51. leahnz says:

    not to really disagree with anything but re: ‘jaws’, it was a super successful bestselling thriller novel by benchley in its own right before it was a film and the characters are lifted fairly faithfully from the page to the screen – really only leaving out hooper’s affair with ellen brody and some minor changes in the story – so i’d think it falls under a slightly different umbrella as an adaptation of very popular source material at the time

  52. Hcat says:

    Leah, Airport was the same circumstance. Big book pricey adaptation but people still classify that as a disaster genre

    I would say Gladiator fit the raiders Star Wars pacific rim mode, but Braveheart and Titanic were actually taking reputable genres. After True Lies Cameron said he now wanted to make a David lean type film, that’s hardly polishing a disreputable genre

  53. leahnz says:

    ha ‘airport’ – i think i’m a bit too young to remember that one as far as the novel goes, so i don’t know if it was anything like the ‘jaws’ phenom, but when i was a kid (before the movie came out) benchley’s novel was huge, it seemed like it was everywhere and all the adults i knew had read it – i remember being really annoyed because my older cousin was allowed to read it then but my mother wouldn’t let me (deemed too adult) despite many attempts at the time, but when the film came out a year or so later i was allowed to go with my whole family. it might be an age thing but possibly people who weren’t alive/or old enough to actually remember that time and how huge the book was may not realise just what an impact the book had before the film was even made.

  54. Joe Leydon says:

    This is a weird recollection, but: I chose Jaws to read during my very first airplane flight. It was a night flight, and I vividly recall that, at one point, I looked out the window and saw water below. I was already nervous about flying. But when I saw the water, I couldn’t help thinking, “Even if would survive a crash…”

  55. leahnz says:

    that’s a cool memory, Joe – it’s fascinating the little moments in time that imprint to become indelible memories while the vast majority of our experiences just wash away in the tide of time (the mind is a mysterious thing)

  56. Joe Leydon says:

    It’s funny how we tend to remember the extremes — times of great happiness, dreadful sorrow, gnawing frustration, passionate love, tremulous fear, etc. — and forget all the mundane day-to-day stuff. Like, when I think back on days/months/years I worked in certain places, I can remember only a handful of outstanding events — interviews I did, stories I covered, maybe a few movies I reviewed — and next to nothing about the routes I took going to work, or where I went to lunch, or what else was on the street where my workplace my located, etc.

  57. The Big Perm says:

    The Godfather was also a bestseller, but Coppola didn’t want to do it because it was considered a big trash novel. There are tons of bestsellers but that doesn’t equal quality.

  58. hcat says:

    Are you telling me that 30 million Twilight fans MIGHT be wrong?

  59. The Big Perm says:

    They might be! Also bestsellers: Bill O’Reilly books!

  60. leahnz says:

    not sure about what anyone else meant, but i didn’t mention ‘quality’ in the point i was trying to make (and benchley’s ‘jaws’ was on the NYT bestsellers list for 44 weeks – looked that up, that’s a long fucking time, a bona fide smash – was puzio’s ‘the godfather’ or a single twilight edition there for anything like that long? just asking because i have no idea, but i’m doubting it, i don’t remember seeing ‘the godfather’ everywhere when i was a kid but that might have been a tad before my time)

    – Joe jts that’s weird you should say that about memories because sometimes i’m just the opposite, i’ll remember the general gist of extreme moments or big events, but for me it’s often the image of something inexplicably small or mundane that implants itself in my brain so that i can actually see it clearly in my head for all time to come afterwards – like grass in a field or taking popcorn off the stove or someone’s eyebrow hair or walking down one little section of a street or waiting in a long line that winds around the block outside the cinema but not remembering for which movie, etc, why does my brain decide to clearly remember those seemingly random images and not others?…maybe i went ‘shrooming once too often in my misspent youth hahaha

  61. hcat says:

    So Despicable Me 2 just passed Fockers to be become Universal’s biggest(#3) non-Speilberg film and FF6 also cracked their top ten this summer. Certainly makes the failure of RIPD go down a little easier.

  62. bulldog68 says:

    Still can’t believe that The Conjuring is at 85% among Top Critics on RT. Saw it and I was unimpressed. It was well done, and the actors were all good in their roles, but it did nothing new, had few chills or scares for me, and it was just a smidgen above being a bore.

    For this year, Evil Dead is still tops in my book.

  63. Fitzgerald says:

    Yes, bulldog… so much is about expectations going in.

  64. Bulldog68 says:

    I’m hoping the opposite happens with RIPD. I saw The Conjuring, but didn’t want to, due to all those glowing reviews that this was like the next Exorcist or something. I want to see RIPD, and while crfitics can’t dissuade me from seeing movie I want to see, I’m hoping it’s not as bad as they say it is. It looks like good b movie fun for me, and the only problem should be the amount of money they spent to make it.

  65. Fitzgerald says:

    To me, that’s exactly what RIPD is. Fun B movie with a surprising amount of clever to go with the goofy. It also has a pretty appealing self-awareness of end of the world movie tropes, like that scene I mentioned earlier where Bridges can’t believe someone actually sat down to make the world-ending device and some of Bacon’s stuff too. Everybody in the movie pretty much professes ignorance to how all the magic works, and why would they know?Anyway, I definitely see why some might hate it, and many might be indifferent, but I can also see a little core of smart people repeating lines and feeling like it belongs to them. And you are right about the budget. What’s good about the movie had nothing to do with the scale. Would have been better cheaper.

  66. leahnz says:

    i just want to thank ‘the world’s end’ for “let’s boo boo” as my pithy new movie quote when i want to leave – and i look forward to trying to work ‘oh fuck off, you giant lamp!” into conversation somewhere (plus i may take a crazy straw to the pub the next time i intend to imbibe a few pints)

    ETA just noticed ‘the world’s end’ isn’t on the list of releases above, i just assumed it was…hell must have frozen over again and we got a new release before other places

  67. christian says:

    Too bad Yanks will hear “boo boo” and think of that wretched reality show….

  68. leahnz says:

    holy shit i hadn’t thought of that – maybe they can change their version to ‘let’s butter’…

The Hot Blog

Leonard Klady's Friday Estimates
Friday Screens % Chg Cume
Title Gross Thtr % Chgn Cume
Venom 33 4250 NEW 33
A Star is Born 15.7 3686 NEW 15.7
Smallfoot 3.5 4131 -46% 31.3
Night School 3.5 3019 -63% 37.9
The House Wirh a Clock in its Walls 1.8 3463 -43% 49.5
A Simple Favor 1 2408 -50% 46.6
The Nun 0.75 2264 -52% 111.5
Hell Fest 0.6 2297 -70% 7.4
Crazy Rich Asians 0.6 1466 -51% 167.6
The Predator 0.25 1643 -77% 49.3
Also Debuting
The Hate U Give 0.17 36
Shine 85,600 609
Exes Baggage 75,900 62
NOTA 71,300 138
96 61,600 62
Andhadhun 55,000 54
Afsar 45,400 33
Project Gutenberg 36,000 17
Love Yatri 22,300 41
Hello, Mrs. Money 22,200 37
Studio 54 5,300 1
Loving Pablo 4,200 15
3-Day Estimates Weekend % Chg Cume
No Good Dead 24.4 (11,230) NEW 24.4
Dolphin Tale 2 16.6 (4,540) NEW 16.6
Guardians of the Galaxy 7.9 (2,550) -23% 305.8
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 4.8 (1,630) -26% 181.1
The Drop 4.4 (5,480) NEW 4.4
Let's Be Cops 4.3 (1,570) -22% 73
If I Stay 4.0 (1,320) -28% 44.9
The November Man 2.8 (1,030) -36% 22.5
The Giver 2.5 (1,120) -26% 41.2
The Hundred-Foot Journey 2.5 (1,270) -21% 49.4