MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Friday Estimates by Len Klaywalker

Friday Estimates 2017-12-16 at 10.31.06 AM

What is there to say? The only shocking thing about this opening is that anyone ever thought that the Force Awakens opening was going to be replicated… and how close Last Jedi is to doing that.

The Last Jedi is on track to open to over $175 million domestic… #5 or #6 domestic opening ever… stronger than Rogue One (and done), about 30% off of The Force Awakens… more than double the non-Star Wars December opening record.

There is no big box office story here. This is what Star Wars openings should look like for the foreseeable future. How the audience feels about the movie will be established in the weeks to come. Poor Last Jedi may only do $650 million domestic. Boo-hoo.

Why did Fox put Ferdinand in the way of this thing? And who knew that the idea of the Disney Empire eating the little Fox bull rebel would be so ironic this week?

Lady Bird will become A24’s #3 grosser this weekend, #2 by next Saturday and #1 before the New Year. The Disaster Artist is zooming up the company’s charts as well. The Greta Gerwig/James Franco movie should be shooting any minute (kidding). Huzzah.

Be Sociable, Share!

11 Responses to “Friday Estimates by Len Klaywalker”

  1. Christian says:

    What are we to make of that 72% dip for “The Disaster Artist”? I’m as surprised by that turnaround as I was by the way the film broke out last weekend.

    It’s a funny movie, with an entertaining performance. I don’t think of Franco as someone whose fan base is front-loaded in terms of box-office, so the only logical explanation would seem to be bad word of mouth, right?

    But that movie’s funny, so I can’t really figure this out.

  2. Bender says:

    Anybody else see Thelma? What a trip. I love going into a movie with no idea what’s gonna happen. Near the third act I thought it was going to go to a Carrie place but it turned a different corner. A great performance from the lead actress. I was terrified in a few scenes. A real find.

  3. David Poland says:

    Disaster is a strong movie with a narrow audience. Not sure why they expanded this weekend. But Star Wars also hits the Disaster audience head on… 30-50 year olds who grew up with Star Wars and enjoy irony.

    I expect there will be some recovery over the holidays… but last weekend was surely the peak.

  4. Doug R says:

    When Star Wars has made its contractual month run in the biggest house in each theater around early January, Warner should release Wonder Woman and Justice League as a double feature both as a back door Awards push and to goose JL’s box office. I can see the TV spots now-lots of WW leaping and jumping and punching in both pictures with a few shots of Flash, Batman, Aquaman, Cyborg AND Superman.

  5. JS Partisan says:

    Wow. JJ Abrams created a Star Wars film, that got people excited for the sequel. I’m sure the crap sandwich sequel, is only going to fester for people over the next two years, but it is what it is. Here’s to Solo making some damn money. That would be swell.

    Now, why did anyone PUT ANYTHING OUT THIS WEEKEND, AND NOT THE FUCKING LAST? Sweet merciful Kylo nipples! It’s just so confusing.

  6. lockedcut says:

    If TLJ is opening at 105 and TFA opened at 120 how is that off by 30%?

  7. Film Fanatic says:

    @Christian I’m not a huge Franco fan by any measure. I watched the film last week and felt the first half was a bit tedious although it became stronger after that.

    David’s right on about the film having a narrow audience. “Mainstream” comedies can clean up here in the U.S., but I felt TDA is more on the art house side of the ledger.

  8. JS Partisan says:

    Hey Ray! Why are the links sending me to indie, and not to the hot blog? Is this happening to anyone else?

  9. Geoff says:

    You can’t say it’s not a big story, Dave – it’s probably going to open over $200 million domestic, last I checked only three other films have done that.

  10. Ray Pride says:

    That’s the page it’s posted on, if you mean the two director tweets. Shouldn’t be redirecting…

  11. Bob Burns says:

    TLJ made $230 million. where did the $175 million number come from?

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