MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Friday Estimates by 50 Shades of Kla… dy

Friday Estimates 2015-02-14 at 8.56.11 AM

It feels a bit like today’s box office coverage was written last week and is just being adjusted to show the real numbers.

It’s not that 50 Shades of Grey isn’t having a remarkable opening. But it’s opening is still closer to Divergent‘s opening day ($23 million) than The Hunger Games: Mockingjay 1‘s ($55 million). The first Twilight opened to a $36m Friday. Sex & The City‘s $27m launch day (plus 7 years) seems a pretty fair match.

I am not saying that this opening is anything less than remarkable. But it isn’t a phenomenon that’s never been seen. Not close.

Likewise, Kingsman: The Secret Service is a hard-R opening. The comps that seem to fit are Jumper and Constantine. It will be interesting, however, to see how word-of-mouth plays out on this one. It is “the kind of movie you want to see on a big screen.” And for as many trucks that can be driven through its logic, it’s an exciting experience of a film. But because of the hardness of its R rating, the Fox marketing has not really shown how rough the film actually is… and word-of-mouth could draw young men in bigger numbers as word leaks out.

American Sniper is finally slowing a little bit, though this will be the fifth weekend over $10 million. (Remember when 10 weekends in the Top 10 was argued as a reason why Gone Girl would/should get a Best Picture nomination? Seems quaint now.) If you remove the 22 days on 4 screens and the $3.4 million that Sniper earned in that period, the film will hit $300 million domestic in 32 or 33 days, which is faster than THG: Mockingjay 1 or Guardians and a little behind The Passion.

Paddington hits a quiet, but effective, $60 million today. And The Wedding Ringer will eventually pass $60 million, though I bet that number would surprise a lot of people if you told it to them.

Spongebob: Sponge out of Water will be Paramount’s 3rd $100m domestic grosser and will likely end up surpassing the studio’s current #1 animated grosser (not including DWA), Rango and its $123.5m domestic.

Not a lot of thrills in exclusive and limited openings. The best grosser is What We Do In The Shadows, which is on 5 screens and will go about $11k per.

Be Sociable, Share!

22 Responses to “Friday Estimates by 50 Shades of Kla… dy”

  1. movieman says:

    Wow; that’s a really terrible number for “…Blood of Jesus.”
    And for the Hugh Grant-Marisa Tomei movie that apparently escaped instead of actually being, y’know, released.

    Are Spike and Hugh’s careers officially over?

  2. EtGuild2 says:

    Since Spike has another two movies coming out this year, including his first mainstream work in 9 years, my guess would be no. “Blood of Jesus” is the most inaccessible thing he’s done IMO, and that’s saying something.

  3. movieman says:

    Et- If I’m not mistaken, one of those is a documentary, and the other (“Spinning Gold”) is being independently produced w/ no studio/distributer attachment yet. Not sure whether it’s started production (IMDB hasn’t even committed to a cast list).
    “Gold” seems like a bit of a long shot for a 2015 release at this point.

  4. EtGuild2 says:

    Yeah “Spinning Gold” probably won’t make its release date, but it’ll get made eventually. Lee is a director, like De Palma (who hasn’t had a film make money this century), who can go on making movies forever thanks to his iconic stature. And I’m happy he is. “Sweet Blood,” as non-sensical as it can be, was a blast.

  5. movieman says:

    I’m anxious to see “Sweet Blood.”
    The distributer sent me an online screener, but the damn thing wouldn’t play.
    And since it’s only showing at one Cleveland arthouse for what I’m guessing will be an extremely brief run, I’ll probably have to wait for DVD now.
    The unbelievably shitty weather makes a run to Cleveland highly unlikely at present.
    Hope you’re right about Lee remaining a viable force.
    Those paltry “SB” numbers suggest his fanbase may have moved on, though.

  6. chris says:

    I wish De Palma could go on making movies forever, Et, but I see no evidence that that is happening.

  7. movieman says:

    I wish De Palma could go on making movies forever

    I feel the same way, Chris.
    I just hope DePalma never makes another movie as bad as “Redacted.”

  8. EtGuild2 says:

    “Passion” wasn’t that long ago, so I wouldn’t be surprised given his normal time between movies…then again, maybe he’s decided to call it a career at 74.

  9. YancySkancy says:

    I’m a little surprised De Palma’s never done anything for TV. I know he’s not at Scorsese’s level of fame/respect these days, but surely some premium cable outfit would take a chance on “Brian De Palma presents…Something-or-other.”

  10. Joe Leydon says:

    I’m almost inclined to put asterisks next to titles such as Da Sweet Blood of Jesus and The Rewrites because, typically, very little publicity is given to the theatrical openings of movies “opening” simultaneously as VOD product. At least, that’s usually the case here in Houston. To the paper’s credit, The Houston Chronicle often will run wire-service reviews of VOD films opening on only one local screen. But with no ads nearby to direct readers to that local screen… (Yes, I know, we live the age where everyone supposedly goes on line to find times and locations. But, really, how many folks actually make that effort without prodding by print and on-line ads?)

  11. matt says:

    Anyone see What We Do in the Shadows? I’m curious since it’s currently at 93% on RT.

  12. movieman says:

    “What We Do in the Shadows” is a total hoot: easily the best mockumentary since Christopher Guest’s “Best in Show.”
    It would make a fantastic rep house double-bill w/ Polanski’s “Fearless Vampire Killers.” That is, if rep houses still existed.
    Surprised that a more seasoned distributer–Searchlight or even Sony Classics–didn’t pick it up.

    Thanks for the head’s-up on “Sweet Blood,” Joe. I had no idea it was available as a VOD. I’ll definitely check it out this weekend on Amazon!

  13. leahnz says:

    i always wonder if people will ‘get’ kiwi humour but it seems like they do so that’s nice

  14. EtGuild2 says:

    “What We Do in the Shadows” is awesome, agreed. Hilarious pretty much throughout. What is going on down there lately? Between this, “Housebound” and “The Babadook” it’s an Oceanian horror renaissance.

    Leah have you seen Taika Waititi’s first movie “Boy?” I want to check it out, not sure if it’s worthwhile.

  15. leahnz says:

    ‘boy’ is a funny, touching little heart-breaker (i think it might still be our highest grossing domestic film to date in enzed – as in a film made/set here), worth a watch for sure

  16. leahnz says:

    the double post of shame but i was going to add and forgot: for a killer new-wave vampire dvd set, ‘what we do in the shadows’/’only lovers left alive’/’a girl walks home alone at night’ would be a bitchin’ triple play, i think i mentioned elsewhere that these were all faves of mine from 2014, who’d a thunk the vampire genre would have such an arty, off-beat resurgence

  17. brack says:

    Kind of strange to compare a single day opening of an R rated film adaptation to PG-13 film adaptations. Fifty Shades readers are older, so the movie might not be so front-loaded, and Valentine’s Day being Saturday helps as well.

  18. Hallick says:

    For any of the curious, you can still find a posting of the first six minutes of “What We Do In The Shadows” on YouTube and get a good feel for what the movie is like.

  19. Hallick says:

    And I think “Boy” is available for streaming on Netflix right now.

  20. Jeffrey Boam's Doctor says:

    ET – Boy isn’t Waititi’s first film. Eagle Versus Shark is. Check that out for Jemaine Clement’s brutal anti-perf.

  21. EtGuild2 says:

    Oh yeah, I forgot about that. Always thought of it more like a weird spin-off of “Flight of the Conchords.”

  22. movieman says:

    Another thing I loved about “What We Do…” is that, like some of my other favorite horror films (“An American Werewolf in London,” “Shaun of the Dead’),
    it’s also unexpectedly, even profoundly moving at times.
    That makes it the whole enchilada in my book.
    I mentioned Searchlight and SPC, but A24 would have been the perfect fit since they’re quickly making a reputation for themselves as the premier distributer of hip, edgy fare. This would have been right in their wheelhouse.
    Surprised they didn’t bite.

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