Friday U.S. Movie Box Office- 'Gods and Generals' Strongly Holding in the Top 10

Box Office Mojo.com ^ | March 1, 2003 | Brandon Grey

[ewing]

Top 10 Friday U.S. Box Office Reciepts

1. Cradle to the Grave (Martial Arts/Action -Jet Li 'Leathal Weapon 4,' Rapper DMX) 6.1 Million

2. Old School (Frat House Comedy-Will Ferrell 'SNL') 4.5 Million

3. Daredevil (Comic Book/Action-Ben Affleck, Jennifer Garner 'Alias') 3.15 Million

4.How to Lose A Guy in 10 Days (Romantic Comedy-Robert Klein, Bebe Neuworth 'Frasier,' 'Cheers') 3.14 Million

5. Chicago (Bob Fosse Musical -Catherine Z. Jones, Richard Gere) 2.25 million

6.Shanghai Knights (Martial Arts/Action/Buddy Comedy-Jackie Chan, Wilson Brother) 1.375 Million

7.The Life of David Gale (Death Penalty Drama/Mystery-Kevin Spacey, Laura Linney) 1.325 Million

8. The Jungle Book 2 (Walt Dinsey Cartoon Classic) 1.310 Million

9. Gods and Generals (Civil War Epic-Robert Duvall, Jeff Daniels, Phil Gramm, Robert Byrd) $780k

10. The Recruit (CIA Thriller-Al Pacino, Colin Farrell) $760k

[ewing]

It's doing very well for only being shown twice a day in some cities..

[ewing]

ping

[ewing]

heads up

[John H K]

It's pretty terrible for a second week of release, any way you slice it.

[ewing]

I think the key here is that most small theatres cannot afford to put it on screens because of the two shows a day.

Most theatres dont make any money on new releases, only popcorn and concessions.

[Chewbacca]

Waiting to see this at the $1 theater. Then I will buy popcorn during the intermission.

[GeneD]

God and Generals did $504 per screen on Friday. Dividing $504 by $8.50 (the approximate average movie ticket price) is roughly 59 tickets. Even at two shows per day this masterwork is playing to largely empty houses. Ted's folly will be out of the theaters in about three weeks.

[GeneD]

GODS and Generals. (Why can't we correct our typos?)

[WL-law]

I saw it opening weekend, in Lexington VA -- at the old/only movie theatre in town -- and it wasn't sold out, which surprised me. Sat next to a group of VMI cadets, and we were all choked up at the local scenes, as well as the battle scenes.

Having said that, it was a deeply flawed movie on many levels. This was a case where one person's vision (director/screenwriter) was just too claustrophobic. He needed another pair of critical eyes in the editing.

The re-enactors were too fat and too old.

The southern women were ridiculous cartoon caricatures of 'southern belles', when real and natural performances would have been so much more effective.

And Jackson was, in real life, far more idiosyncratic than he was portrayed. That doesn't mean artistic license couldn't be used, but it was wrong to use it the way the director did, which was to caste all things southern in a false, cloying, over-romanticised light.

Jackson was zealously religious,yes, but that's not the same as PRESENTING the CHARACTERS as god-like, rather than real historical people. Unfortunate, in that the director's shortcomings make it too easy for the masses to dismiss the ideas (attempted to be) presented in the film (and in the eventual trilogy), i.e., why the war was fought, whether it needed to be fought

[ewing]

Even Gettysburg was slated for cable release.

I think the film will remain in the top 10 for some time, mainly because it is difficult to get to see the film because of the number of theatres.

[ewing]

I think that 'Gettysburg' was a better Civil War film, but I think that the historical accuracy of the period of the time was still better than most any other movie out there.

[ckilmer]

I saw the movie last night in Tysons Corner Virginia. That's inside the beltway of Washington DC. There were about 10 people in the audience.

The movie was too long and not really well organized the way Gettysburg was well organized. That is, Gettysburg was the story of one battle. The story telling organized itself well around this one great battle with the climatic vain glorious butcher shop of pickett's charge.

God's and generals was several stories: the story of three battles (1st Manasses, Fredericksburg,Chancellersville)plus the story of Stonewall Jackson's brief but storied career as a civil war general. Throw in some Robert E. Lee and numerous lush southern family set piece scenes in the parlor or on the front porch or in the foyer. Finally, throw in a bunch of Southern generals scenes where the dudes just kind of seem to be there and pose on their horses. Oh and then there's Ted Turner doing the rennassance patron bit and seeing his face in the moving pictures-- Figure, Heck he got something for his 80 million smackers.

The battle scenes were good. The ghastly bureaucratic slaughter of union troops at Fredericksburg was the emotional climax of the movie just as the Picketts charge was the climax of the earlier movie Gettysburg. (and the federal troops called out "Fredericksburg Fredericksburg" to Pickett's men dragging themselves off the battlefield in history and in the movie. In history Gettysburg comes after Fredericksburg and in this trilogy the movie Gettysburg is released before the Movie God's and Generals in which we see the battle of Fredericksburg--got that.)

But the movie went on long after the battle of Fredericksburg ended. In fact, I couldn't help but think people died because they were bored with themselves. Or maybe they had characters fit for some other age. Maybe those characters fitted the time 100 years before when virginia was last a wild frontier. maybe those characters couldn't countenance railroads. or the telegraph. much less the new cannons or guns.

I don't know. There was a strangeness to the movie to my lights. Maybe I don't want to see tragedy. Where the outcome is doom. and you know its doom and the people in story know its doom. So we're all waiting for godot only godot is death.

I'd of liked Jackson better if there was either less of him or more of somebody else who was powerful enough and different enough to bring Jackson's character and thinking into context. The movie had the glimmering of this sort of thing in the first cut between the Jackson and his wife and the union officer and his wife--and then this was dropped.

As it is Jackson just sucks up whole scenes so it looks as interesting and informative as a close up on a tree. And the lens just holds there oh for several hours. Why? Because there can't be anything more interesting than bark.

[Polybius]

The battle scenes were good. The ghastly bureaucratic slaughter of union troops at Fredericksburg was the emotional climax of the movie ..... But the movie went on long after the battle of Fredericksburg ended.

No matter how you look at it, Fredericksburg was an ugly battle.

It was not won by brilliant Confederate leadership. You or I could have commanded the Confederate forces and achieved the same results. Fredericksburg was a battle that should never have been fought and the outcome was determined by Burnsides' stupidity and stubborness.

Chancellorsville, on the other hand, was as elegant example of generalship as can be found in military history. An army almost half the size of the attacking army routed the invasion by splitting it's forces in the face of a superior enemy and taking the offensive initiative in a flanking movement to outflank the enemy's original flanking movement.

For time limitations, several major battles involving Jackson needed to be trimmed for this movie. Those trimmed included the Seven Days, the entire Valley Campaign and Second Manassas. All of those can also be called very elegant victories by Confederate forces against a superior foe.

If any battle should have been cut out, it should have been the travesty of Fredericksburg.

[Polybius]

The re-enactors were too fat and too old.

I fully accepted the fat re-enactors at the scenes of First Manassas. Fat boys are patriotic too and this was one of the first battles of the war.

However, after that, there was no way that those Butterballs could have maintained their weight on a diet of marches and Confederate rations. :-)

[Dante3]

After having read several the negative comments on this board, my husband (who is a Civil War buff) and I were surprised what an excellent film it was. We both thoroughly enjoyed it. Even though it was long, there was an intermission.

The people felt real, not like Hollywood extras trying to look pretty. They spoke like people of that era. Lang's performance as Jackson was terrific.

I am sure that it will become one of the classics.

[Dante3]

Some people are so antagonistic towareds Ted Turner that they will attack anything he does. Actually, there are even worse people in Hollywood producing films. This is an excellent film. Even Michael Medved had praised it.

[rustbucket]

I saw it today. Small audience, mostly older white couples. I thoroughly enjoyed it.

Some of the dialog was a bit wooden, but that's a small price to pay in exchange for historical accuracy. No Oliver Stone warped-history treatment here.

The combat scenes gave a real sense of the battles without being gory. I liked the mounted staff officers with their drawn long-barrel pistols.

Most of the movies these days are junk having no story but lots of special effects, violence, and bad language. Gods and Generals on the other hand was worth seeing. Mrs. rustbucket was impressed enough with the movie that she started reading a history book on Lee.

[let us cross over the river]

Mrs. rustbucket may also enjoy a biography or or two on TJ Jackson.

[ewing]

I thoroughly enjoyed Stephen Langs performance of Stonewall Jackson.

[Dante3]

I thought Lang was excellent as Stonewall. He should get at least an Oscar nomination. To me the people appeared real.