Posted on 12/17/2005 11:10:22 AM PST by dangus
A gross of $11,000 per screen is quite good. If you're an autumn Wide Release, opening on 3500 screens across the country. When a movie opens on only 69 of the nation's largest theaters in a few dozen of the largest cities, with almost all of your target audience within range of those theaters, it's pretty bad.
Brokeback Mountain played in fourteen times more theaters this Friday than last Friday, and made less than four times as much money, only $760,000. It looks like the movie will make considerably less than its $15 million budget before the Academy Awards come out. How many tens of millions of dollars in free promotion, reduced pay and credibility were spent on this film?
King Kong also appears to be a flop. I've seen this movie: Peter Jackson has mastered many movie-making techniques with the Lord of the Rings, and the movie is an amazing spectacle with much positive and true to say about human nature. But Jackson did not learn how to discipline his budgeting or story-telling. His movie is also bloated, over-long, too violent, very horrific and a bit tooo preposterous.
The early part of the movie centers around a movie director too obsessed with his story, prone to overkill, and swindling a movie company out of far more than they would have been willing to spend. Given that actor Jack Black even slightly resembles Peter Jackson, I can't help but to wonder if how consciously auto-biographical the film is. It will make many, many, many times more than Brokeback Mountain, and still become known as a flop. I sincerely hope Peter Jackson learns the right things from the experience; he is very talented, very passionate, and, from the messages of his movies, very decent. King Kong made $14 million last night... It will probably easily pass $100 million, but land short of its $200 million budget. On the other hand, it is precisely the sort of movie that translates well overseas, and does well on DVD. But it will not be the Box Office savior hoped for.
Chronicles of Narnia will apparently need a rebound in the Christmas vacations to be profitable. Except for a literally rushed ending, it's almost perfect, a purely magical delight. But it seems to have very weak legs; it's not surprising since everyone who wanted to see this movie knew they did so a long time ago, and most rushed out to see it immediately. Today's movie markets don't allow for the sort of excellent word of mouth that Narnia is getting.
That word of mouth means probably good DVD sales, and strong anticipation of a sequel, so Narnia's Box Office is by no means a failure... just it'll take some time to become profitable. Narnia sold about $9 million worth of tickets, down over 60% from last Friday.
But there doesn't seem to be any great challenger to Narnia for the Holiday season. The Family Stone opened weak ($4 million), Harry Potter is mostly played out ($1.5 million), as are Walk the Line ($1 million) and Yours Mine and Ours (under $1 million) Syriana also fell hard, too... ($1.6 million).
Don't look for any saviors at the box office next week either... Cheaper by the Dozen 2, Fun with Dick and Jane, The Ringer, and Rumor Has It all open, but none look too strong
"Wait until it goes overseas and they love it to death in Europe."
It's already opened overseas, and recouped its costs. Whatever else happens, the movie will not lose money. Factor in future DVD sales, and it will make a profit.
Have you seen 'An American Friend'(1977). directed by Wim Wenders, starring Bruno Ganz and Dennis Hopper (as Tom Ripley - yes, that Ripley). Robbie Mueller shot it with incredible art amd shading. For my money it is what small film should be, if a bit ambiguous in spots.
If this movie is such a flop at the box office how could it possibly pick up seven nominations for a Golden Globe?
I agree with you. I said that in all my posts.
OK
Ordinary moviegoers find its theme repulsive. The Hollywood congniscenti are not ordinary moviergoers.
It is the "best" movie only if you have a warped view of what qualifies as quality entertainment. Brokeback Mountain is a movie Hollywood made for itself. The storyline perfectly reflects Hollywood's liberal conceit and morally dissolute values. That's why the Hollywood congniscenti rave over it.
Brokeback Mountain might even win the Oscar for best picture. It is analogous to nominating multiple murderer Tookie Williams for the Nobel Peace Prize, or awarding it to the dictator-appeasing Jimmy Carter or master terrorist Yassir Arafat--two men who have done more to undermine world peace than any other two men in the past 35 years. But they satisfy the warped Nobel Committee's liberal sensibilities, so there you have it.
From the "Defamer" H'wood gossip site:
The Clip Show: Thou Shalt Love “Brokeback”
· Critics everywhere fall all over themselves heaping praise and going Golden Globe gaga over the gay cowboy movie, further pushing us to a fearsome Brokeback Police State, where any criticism above a hushed whisper will result in you being instantly shot (a dirty gay look).
http://www.defamer.com/
====================================================
No it has not. And, the foreign sales numbers will not be effected by whatever it does at BO overseas. Sales deals are made by territory for a fixed amount. Any film is considered exceptionally fortunate to get even 50% out of foreign. A controversial film can expect even less.
As for rentals, this is never a significant piece of revenue for the studios primarily because their piece is limited.
Most films do not come close to breaking even. This will fare worse than most. The numbers are already in steep decline and unless the hard-core audience who packed the theaters (all puns intended) last week-end turn this into a crusade and spend their lives in the theater this will disappear long before the mid-January target date for 300 plus theaters.
I've seen American Friend several times, if just for Bruno. Wings of Desire is a favorite movie. It's good, but Ripley is a tough character to make sympathetic. However, the re-make did a credible job.
...actually, not exactly a re-make, but you know what I mean.
btw...the best part of An American Friend was Mueller's camera work and lighting followed by hopper's odd intensity. This was made in Europe (under the then existing tax shelter laws which gave birth to dozens of films that otherwise would not have been made - including the great war film "Cross of Iron") at a time when Hopper had killed his US career and was paying the bills in low-budget fare overseas (like "Mad Dog Cole" from OZ). This period has his best work imo.
Patricia Highsmith was an extremely odd person. And Ripley is probably one of the oddest characters in modern fiction.
I was never a dennis hopper fan, though he did do some good things recently -- Bruno the art collector in Basquiat etc. Some of the scenes playing opposite David Bowie as Warhol are great.
I thought Damon was a good Ripley -- a blank that's filled in slowly. Plus, there's Philip Seymour Hoffman.
No, we are conservatives not libertarians. We actually care about the moral fiber of this country know as our founders new with moral decline comes the loss for freedoms because an immoral society is one that preys on each other.
The only thing that puzzles me about all the buzz around Brokeback Mountain, is that the short story that it's based upon was written by the otherwise brilliant E. Annie Proulx. (The Shipping News)
I've not seen that mentioned in any reviews, nor mentioned here. She is a masterful storyteller, and while there was a thread of homosexuality in the original short story, which I read, they more than exploited it in the movie to pander to some unknown sector of the audience.
Since she's not standing up and taking any credit for it, nor did she write the screenplay, I find that to be A Good Thing. Hopefully just a misjudgement on her part as to who she sold the rights to?
Has anyone seen anything, anywhere on this? (Besides the slanted cr@p at Wikipedia.) *Rolleyes*
It also truly amazes me that Larry McMurtry would be involved in writing the screenplay. I've always had a lot of respect for his writing, as well (Lonesome Dove, Terms of Endearment, etc.)
Why would talented people, both Pulitzer Prize winners, want to be involved in exploitation like this? Oh, yeah. Money! LOL! Well, they'll be saddened on this one...
Larry McMurtry must be senile to attach his name and talents to this oatburner.
As for DVD sales I think it will flop because some retailers such as Wal-Mart won't carry a controversial homosexual cowboy movie.
I think you might have responded to the wrong post. I never said anything about a movie being bloated or violent. I like bloated, violent movies, actually.
My thirteen-YO granddaughter, a girl who adores all things HarryPotter, was so disappointed in the latest movie that she wept for days. It hasn't flagged her rereads of each one of the books, though!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.