MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Friday Estimates by RePo Klady

Friday Estimates 2016-02-06 at 10.47.21 AM

It’s Super Bowl Weekend and the 3-day numbers will be hurt… on Sunday. But that’s no excuse for a poor showing Friday or today.

That said, what a Poo Show… or it’s a Po show, if you prefer.

19% off the 2nd Friday of Panda 2 and 35% the total gross after 8 days. $105 – $115m domestic total. Mr. Peabody & Sherman numbers. You may remember how dramatic things got after that film didn’t fly.

You may wonder why DreamWorks tried the January launch that is certainly helping to sink this franchise. Fourteen more animated movies from the major studios (inc Universal’s Focus division) this year. FOURTEEN. 2 in March. 1 in April (which was probably the most vulnerable slot). Angry Birds in May, Pixar sequel in June, 2 in July (Universal and Fox’s next Ice Age), 2 in August, 2 in September, 2 in November (inc DWA’s) and 1 in December.

Hail, Caesar!, the 17th Coen Bros film, is just their 6th opening on over 1000 screens. And it should be noted that only two Coen film that grossed over $25m domestic was a platform release (O’ Brother & No Country). So, you can understand the angle that Universal is taking. That said, the opening, which will probably land between $10m and $11m, will be their worst opening on over 1500 screens, including The Ladykillers. The comp that seems to fit best is another Universal/Coens release with Clooney, Intolerably Cruelty, which did $35 million in October 2003.

Pride & Prejudice & Zombies couldn’t overcome the general disinterest in seeing young women in petticoats kill zombies. If there is more to the movie, no one told potential audiences.

Be Sociable, Share!

10 Responses to “Friday Estimates by RePo Klady”

  1. Stella's Boy says:

    What did people think of Hail, Caesar! It didn’t do much for me really, although I feel like a second viewing is necessary before it’s fair to pass judgment. I chuckled a few times, and there are some great scenes, but as a whole it left me feeling a little cold and detached. I read all these reviews praising its examination of faith and capitalism and Hollywood, and I don’t think I missed anything, but it didn’t feel all that profound or provocative or anything like that. I don’t know. I guess the fact that I want to see it again means something, and their movies always deserve multiple viewings.

  2. dinovelvet says:

    LOL at PP&Z. Wasn’t that in really tortured, prolonged development for years, with various people like Natalie Portman, David O Russell, and Bradley Cooper attached? Who the hell was so determined to make this happen? Did nobody gauge the lack of public interest in this thing at any point? And from the same braintrust who gave us the flop Abraham Lincoln vampire hunter? This seems like a study in clueless studio decisions.

  3. PcChongor says:

    Watch “Barton Fink” right before “Hail, Caesar!” and its strange tone and story structure will probably make a whole lot more sense. I thought it was a great parody/love letter to the Hollywood studio system, both past and present, but I can totally see how people expecting a wacky kidnapping caper comedy would be thrown off by it.

    Releasing it in February seems like miraculous wishful thinking or an extremely crafty calculated tax loss opportunity on Universal’s part. Late summer/early fall probably would’ve made much more sense. Oh well, hopefully their much more straightforward Ross MacDonald adaptation lights a fire underneath audiences’ asses in 2018.

  4. lazarus says:

    Why wouldn’t their next film be out until 2018? Do they have any other plans this year besides shooting it?

  5. Stella's Boy says:

    My expectations weren’t off PcChongor. I was not expecting a “wacky kidnapping caper comedy.” Not sure why you’d assume that. Maybe you’ve come across others who had that expectation, people not familiar with the Coen Brothers. I’ve also seen Barton Fink fairly recently and I think it’s much better.

  6. David Poland says:

    Stella… look at the TV spots… all wacky all-star hijinks…

  7. PcChongor says:

    I just assumed 2018 because the Coens usually have about a two-year gap between their films, and I didn’t think that a throwback Lew Archer flick would be getting released anywhere near Star Wars: A New Hope 2 II.

    I only watched the “Hail, Caesar!” trailer after seeing the film, but it’s blatant carny barker-esque deception was a great meta commentary on the film’s own meta commentary about the studios’ tireless dedication to superficial image making. The DP/30 with Josh Brolin made me appreciate the film even more, and even though it might take a decade or so for it to fully find its audience footing, once Beijing finally buys out Hollywood and turns it into a giant Foxconn facility for hollow-eyed visual effects artists, I’m absolutely positive that film lovers everywhere will be pining for the nostalgic Tinseltown fjords of “Hail, Caesar!”

  8. lazarus says:

    Star Wars won’t be the only film released in December. It’s more likely that would open in October or November anyway. They have a year and a half to shoot and edit; no reason it won’t be ready for Autumn 2017.

    You’re right about the Hail, Caesar trailer: they made it look like Brolin teams up with Johanssen, Tatum, and Ehrenreich to solve the kidnapping case. They took the “Thank you all for coming” line from the scene with Brolin and the religious leaders and stuck it over quick shots of the three actors.

  9. Stella's Boy says:

    But DP that isn’t the movie I was expecting considering who made it and what I read about it before seeing it (and I assumed the studio was selling something different to try and draw a large audience to a Coen Brothers movie). Plus I didn’t even see many TV spots for it. I never saw one with Brolin saying that line.

  10. cadavra says:

    The February release makes sense. The fall has become a massive pile-up of pictures for grown-ups, so us old fogeys appreciate having something to see in the winter dumping ground.

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