I don't think liberals will feel obligated to go see it. They just won Congress, so their anger should subside and their attention be focused elsewhere. They don't need to support the Dixie Chicks anymore, and most of them hated the music anyway. I've said all along that their latest CD would debut at #1 with a quick falloff because it would be snapped up by fury-deluded liberals who thought that buying it would be a thumb-in-the-eye to President Bush, as if he pays the slightest attention to the CD sales charts. They would then use it as a drink coaster. But the next CD they release after that will tank badly because Bush will be gone or on the way out, the lib fury will have subsided, the free anti-Bush MSM publicity will be over, and their original audience will have told them to go to hell. (I've worked in radio, records and PR for 30 years, BTW).
A better way to look at the movie's success would be to check the daily per-screen averages. It peaked on the opening Saturday at $5,842 per screen. It fell during the following week to a low of $1,104, rose the next Saturday to $3,853, and during the following week fell to a low of $710. That is a quickly falling downward trend.
If it were building like "Brokeback Mountain," I'd expect the numbers to be going the other direction. For "Borat," they used the strategy of opening in 837 theaters then opening wider a week later. The first Saturday per-screen-average was $12,114, and the following Saturday, even after a week in theaters and expanding to over 2,500 screens, was still $4,482. That means it made over $10 million the first Saturday and over $11 million the second Saturday. Now, that's a hit.
A convincing analysis. I'm pessimistic because of how well various crapumentaries have done in recent years -- I was beginning to think that there was no scenario too outlandish for someone to make a ton of money from angry, delusional liberals.
(Fahrenheit 9/11; Who stole the Electric Car; Inconvenient Truth; 9/11 Press for "Truth" etc.)