MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Friday Estimates by Leonard Part 1


Be Sociable, Share!

25 Responses to “Friday Estimates by Leonard Part 1”

  1. Christian says:

    I saw “Left Behind” reported elsewhere as only a 40% dip, which kind of surprised me considering how poor that movie is.

  2. EtGuild2 says:

    I wonder how much the debate over GONE GIRL is fueling buzz and word of mouth? $125 million seems likely now, which is considerably more than expected.

  3. movieman says:

    “The Book of Life” is the most bedazzling 3-D ‘toon since “The Lego Movie.”
    I just wish the (hackneyed, trite, generally witless) script had been as compelling as the visuals.
    The 3-D was excellent, though: it really popped off the screen.
    And the vocal casting (Tatum; Saldana; Luna; Ice Cube; etc.) is pretty inspired as well.
    Its b.o. fate will be a litmus test of just how truly multi-cultural a country America is.
    Will whitebread suburban tykes respond to a movie this proudly and unapologetically Hispanic-‘centric? I’d like to think so.
    Guess we’ll know this time next weekend–just not on B.O. Mojo.

  4. palmtree says:

    Did we just collectively lose our Mojo? (Sorry, I had to.) I’m hating Amazon more and more…

  5. EtGuild2 says:

    @movieman It’s another case of a second tier animation house running in and poaching an announced Pixar concept film, the last case being the “Rio” movies which were jacked from something called “Newt” (though the animations looks gorgeous in this case).

    I’m assuming the long rumored Pixar “Day of the Dead” film is now kaput.

  6. dinovelvet says:

    Sooooo…how long before Downey locks down a deal for Iron man 4, 5, and 6?

  7. movieman says:

    I was unfamiliar w/ that backstory, Et.
    Assumed it must have been a del Toro passion project (like “The Strain”).
    It certainly feels like one.

    And the animation is light years ahead of a crap-fest like “Free Birds.”
    It’s kind of shocking they could have both come from the same animation shingle.
    A Pixar or (even) DreamWorks “Book of Life” would’ve probably had a (much) better script, though.

  8. movieman says:

    My thoughts exactly, Dino.

    The biggest problem w/ “The Judge”–aside from the fact that it’s 30 minutes too long– is that it feels like a movie that was already made 20 years ago.
    Except it would have been called “John Grisham’s ‘The Judge'” and starred Tom Cruise. (Duvall could have still played the old coot daddy.)

  9. EtGuild2 says:

    Yeah, “Judge” feels like a prototypical USA Network movie. I wonder how much of the $50 million budget (!?) is going to Downey. It’s probably going to end up being one of the few big money losers this Fall given what I assume is limited international appeal. But yeah, should do wonders in syndicated reruns.

  10. dinovelvet says:

    Yeah The Judge does look curiously dated, I kind of hadn’t noticed that the “legal thriller” genre seems to have died out completely. Guess it isn’t ready for a comeback anytime soon, either!
    And speaking of Avengers crashing and burning, am I reading these Kill the Messenger numbers correctly? 31K from 374 screens = $83 per screen?! So, seven or eight tickets sold over, what, four screenings per day? Is that a record?! (Bizarrely, the local Muvico put it on one of their giant screens typically given to whatever’s No.1 at the box office).

  11. BoulderKid says:

    No dino, the per screen average is around $830 not $83 for Kill the Messenger, decimal places alas. The film would have been on 2,000 screens fifteen years ago. What is considered arthouse today is so bizarre. KtM is a great mix of important recent history (that has ramifications for the U.S. border crisis) with solid white knuckle thriller elements. The fact that this can’t get a wide release and a real ad buy explains a lot about why mainstream adult cinema is in the toilet.

  12. dinovelvet says:

    Well now I’m totally confused – deadline seems to suggest it IS more in line with 31K :

    Also in a moderate limited release from Focus Features is Kill The Messenger, starring Jeremy Renner. The film is off to a poor start with a current screen average of just $105 dollars. On 374 screens, Kill the Messenger is facing a $700-$880K bow that could make execs want to do just that.

  13. movieman says:

    My favorite part of Variety’s tersely worded B.O. Mojo article:

    Its subscription-based IMDb Pro subscription site has slightly more information.

    That “slightly more information” cracks me up.

  14. EtGuild2 says:

    Mojo is back. What the hell? Was it a test run to see how much protest it would generate before making a final decision? If the site was simply offline, it marks the strangest lack of communication between a major company and the media in quite some time regarding a site outage.

  15. movieman says:

    What Et said (re: Mojo).

  16. movieman says:

    Looks like “The Equalizer” could turn out to be the quietest $100-million grosser of the year.
    It’s already surpassed “The Maze Runner” which, being YA, got considerably more press for an (admittedly strong) b.o. performance.
    And “MR” opened a week earlier.
    The powerful of Denzel won’t be denied.

  17. EtGuild2 says:

    On the other hand, MAZE RUNNER is a very good bet to get to $300 million worldwide, possibly surpassing the much more highly touted DIVERGENT and FAULT IN OUR STARS.

  18. Hcat says:

    You guys scared the hell outta me about mojo, it’s likely not a amazon conspiracy, I always find it gets spotty over three day weekends for some reason.

  19. rabartlett says:

    Grossing more worldwide than “Divergent” is pretty impressive, but as a sci-fi action movie, it has more overseas appeal than “Fault”.

  20. cadavra says:

    MESSENGER was scheduled to go wide in two weeks. Wonder if they’re going to rethink that. Three adult thrillers cannibalizing the hell out of each other–where were these in June when we coulda used something grown-up?

    ET: It’s my understanding that everybody worked well below their quote to get JUDGE made. Downey has said flat-out that the only reason it got the green light was because he was starring in it.

  21. palmtree says:

    Yeah, “slightly more” probably equates to their Starmeter, an imaginary metric they created in order to say they provide more information.

  22. EtGuild2 says:

    cadavra, if that’s true, then I’m even more confused. How do you drop $50 million on a legal drama shot in rural Massachusettes? Maybe the number is bogus.

  23. cadavra says:

    Location shooting is always more expensive. Sufficient equipment has to be shipped in; it’s not like you can drive over to J.L. Fisher and pick up an extra length of dolly track if you’re short. Cast and crew have to be fed and housed instead of them simply driving home each night. Dozens and dozens of plane tickets. Insurance up the wazoo. Tons of shooting permits. And on and on. Plus “below their quote” doesn’t mean scale; it just means less. Considering that the average Adam Sandler crapfest cost $90 million, I’d say 50 was a real bargain for a picture like this.

  24. sanj says:

    i watched The Equalizer 2014 – the biggest surprise wasn’t Denzel but the bad guy Marton Csokas who did some awesome acting.

    isn’t the deal with most dramas about good guys vs bad guys. how come none of you mention how good the bad guys are in dramas. acting.

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