MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Friday Estimates by MId-September Klady

Friday Estimates 2016-09-17 at 9.15.08 AM

Sully is doing well. Not “parade” well, but very nicely. It started slightly better than 2014’s The Equalizer and is holding a little better than the same. So look for the hundred & teens. International will be interesting, given the material vs The Hanks.

The trio of newcomers (Blair Witch, Bridget Jones’ Baby, Snowden) could land in any order, with Witch hampered by horror. Bridget is the likely top earner with some date value on Saturday. But Snowden could surprise.

No $10,000-per-screen arthouse stuff this weekend.

Box office should spoke sharply with the number of big titles in the coming two Fridays.

Be Sociable, Share!

17 Responses to “Friday Estimates by MId-September Klady”

  1. Christian says:

    Sad to see those VESSEL numbers. If you admire late-period Malick – and I know not everyone does – you’ll revel at least in parts of the Malick-produced film. It has his fingerprints all over it.

  2. Dr Wally Rises says:

    Tough sledding all round apart from Sully, which will comfortably outgross Bridge of Spies and at least get close to Captain Phillips. Expected more from Blair Witch. Bridget Jones is a head scratcher. After all this time why not just reboot the thing with Felicity Jones or Carey Mulligan or whoever? If we can have three Spidermans in nine years is anyone really bothered about seeing Renee Zellweger come back to that character after nearly fifteen years?

  3. Jspartisan says:

    Kid didn’t want to see movies, based on almost two decade old properties. So not shocked.

  4. EtGuild2 says:

    Malick has a better track record as a hands-on producer than as an E.P., though I always wonder how horrified he is that AMAZING GRACE turned into a Tea Party crucible.

    Given that conventional wisdom around calendar release dates has been totally upended the last few years, I wonder if this year will serve as the slaughter for the last sacred cow of scheduling: that the Labor Day period is meant for dumping only.

    Top all-time movies released between August 20-September 15:

    1. SULLY (assuming it ends over $120 million)

    Given the disastrous results this weekend, the “better wait until 2 weeks after Labor Day” strategy might be done.

  5. Movieman says:

    So sad that a movie starring Jessica Lange and Shirley MacLaine would post just $58-per-screen opening day.
    Figured it must already be available as a VOD, but it’s not.
    Amazon lists a DVD release on October 4th, though.
    (Netflix apparently didn’t get the memo since they’re insisting it hasn’t been dated yet. Oh, that crazy Netflix!)

  6. Arisp says:

    Who is clamoring for a MacLaine Lange movie exactly? And even more – who knows about it?

  7. EtGuild2 says:

    Speaking of rejecting anyone over 50 who isn’t that handsome devil Sully (my great aunt is positively smitten, whether for Sullenger, Hanks, or a threesome with both I can’t tell), at least Lange and MacLaine are in good company. I never thought Eddie Murphy would manage to sink lower than the $940 PTA opening for PLUTO NASH, but MR CHURCH is giving it a run for its money! At least it didn’t cost $100 million.

    @JS it seems the kids want to see remakes of remakes of 60 year old properties instead based on the M7 tracking…as long as it isn’t some ancient history thing. The soundtrack alone poses fascinating anthropoligical questions, such as, how would Akira Kurosawa react when meeting his contemporary, Kanye West? Would Yul Brynner twerk to the sweet strains of the Harlem Shake?

  8. Sideshow Bill says:

    Boy I was wrong about Blair Witch. I guess that’s why I’m just a schmuck amongst the cornfields of Illinois and not a blogger, box office analyst or Hollywood insider. I’m seeing the movie tonight and still expect to enjoy it but the perils of reviving a 17 year old property (as JS alluded too) are, well, perilous. Still been a good year for horror though.

    That being said I watched Rob Zombies 31 last night and I thought it was a piece of shit. His worst movie. Utterly uncompelling and at times incomprehensible. Rob Zombie needs to burn his DGA card and stick with his silly music. Please.

  9. Bitplaya says:

    Blair isn’t just a 17 year old property. It’s one who has had it’s one unique element copied ad naseum ever since. All the Paranormal movies and copycats have done the same thing as this movie but better.

  10. Movieman says:

    I’m always in the market for a movie (good, bad or indifferent) starring Jessica Lange and Shirley MacLaine, Asrip.
    But you’re right about the invisible “marketing.” I’d never even heard of the movie until seeing it listed on RT.
    Clearly Weinstein steered clear of major markets: pretty sure it didn’t rate even a single Manhattan screen.

  11. Sideshow Bill says:

    You’re right, Bitplaya. I personally love the found footage subgenre. I enjoyed most of the Paranormal movies. I think [REC]* is a flat-out masterpiece. Some of them are shit but the good ones work my last nerve. They work on me. Maybe I’m a dumbass. But, yes, kids have grown up with the genre and I’m sure a lot of young people think BWP was crap (a lot of older people do too). I mean my 17 y/o daughter told me the other say she thinks Jaws is shit. I didn’t physically harm her but she got a good long stink-eye. She is excited for the movie tonight. Both my daughters are. They like BWP. I raised them (mostly) right. But a ton of young people obviously don’t. It is what it is.

  12. Pete B. says:

    We have a second run theater showing Mr Church. How weird is that? Its the first time I know of that a brand new release has ever played there.

    Not to be crass, but shouldn’t When The Bough Breaks have been rated R? If ever a movie needed some nudity….

  13. Tom says:

    Can’t wait for the inevitable #OscarsSoWhite backlash against LA LA LAND for being a movie that is set in Los Angeles yet has no Latinos.

  14. JS Partisan says:

    Ethan, if Denzel hasn’t even seen the original, then we can excuse the kids on this one. Also, it has Pratt, and the kids love fucking Pratt. They will show up for his films.

    Tom, THERE ARE NO LATINOS OR HISPANICS IN IT? REALLY? It’s like fucking HER. A movie, that is really fucking wonderful, except for the whole. “Hey everybody! There are hardly any people of color in LA in the future. Have fun watching this!”

    You don’t even have to do a so white campaign, but it’s so weird these movies take place in these URBAN AREAS. Yet, for some reason, they cast them like fucking Friends. Goofy shit like this has to stop.

    Finally, found footage is a fine genre, when it’s not fucking hacky shit. There is no genre without Blair Witch, but kids don’t care. If you were 5 in 1999, you are 22 now, and do you really care about the BLAIR WITCH PROJECT? Fuck no. What Lionsgate should have done, is leave the fucking film titled the WOODS, and watch them make some cash. This is also, a really shitty time of year, for a horror movie.

  15. Bitplaya says:

    JS: Everyone in involved in mainstream movies is rich and privileged. Most never deal with anyone of color in any capacity other than servers. You can be a high earning actor/writer/director and never deal with anyone of color.
    People give Donald Glover shit for hiring black writers for his one show out of like 200 on television. It’s all kinda depressing.

  16. Sideshow Bill says:

    I agree, JS. It was too early to release Blair Witch. I know late October already had Ouija 2 and Rings scheduled, but they should have dropped it early October. Probably would have opened a bit stronger anyway.

    It’s a bummer for me because I really really liked it. It’s the 2nd best Witch movie of the year. My girls freaking LOVED it. They were terrified. I was never really scared but I enjoyed the ride. I don’t want to post a spoiler or anything but the first “reveal” was a great horror movie shot. Reminded me of The Descent.

    I got what I wanted out of it. Probably buy the disc in a few months. So….whatever. I hope Rings is good.

  17. chris says:

    “La La” is virtually a two-hander and the small supporting class does include John Legend.

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