The Zone

by **RogueScribner** on Mon May 25, 2009 7:54 pm

The holiday weekend estimates are in:

1 N Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian Fox $70,000,000 - $70,000,000 1
2 N Terminator Salvation WB $53,825,000 - $67,198,000 1
3 2 Star Trek Par. $29,400,000 -31.7% $191,034,000 3
4 1 Angels & Demons Sony $27,700,000 -40.0% $87,811,000 2
5 N Dance Flick Par. $13,100,000 - $13,100,000 1
6 3 X-Men Origins: Wolverine Fox $10,100,000 -31.3% $165,354,000 4
7 4 Ghosts of Girlfriends Past WB (NL) $4,835,000 -27.3% $46,973,000 4
8 5 Obsessed SGem $2,500,000 -45.5% $66,408,000 5
9 7 Monsters Vs. Aliens P/DW $1,900,000 -40.3% $193,546,000 9
10 6 17 Again WB $1,280,000 -62.0% $60,589,000 6

And for those curious, here are the Monday grosses.

by **RogueScribner** on Mon May 25, 2009 7:59 pm

DennisMM wrote:Flashing back, for those who still care: After eleven weeks (March 6-May 21) Watchmen has made $183 million on production costs of approximately $150 million and who knows what promotional costs. Domestic b.o. is $107 million. This compares to $456 million ($211 million domestic) for 300, on a budget less than half that of Watchmen.*

Not gloating, just noting.

* Can anyone explain why 300, an all green-screen film with no-name actors mostly, cost $65 million? Is CGI that expensive? I thought it had become relatively cheap. Sin City, a more complicated project by appearances, only cost $40 million and it featured a few well-known actors (admittedly working for small paychecks).

Sin City was shot digitally while 300 was shot on film. Film does tend to be more expensive, so maybe that's partly the cause.

by **Fried Gold** on Mon May 25, 2009 8:22 pm

RogueScribner wrote:
DennisMM wrote:Flashing back, for those who still care: After eleven weeks (March 6-May 21) Watchmen has made $183 million on production costs of approximately $150 million and who knows what promotional costs. Domestic b.o. is $107 million. This compares to $456 million ($211 million domestic) for 300, on a budget less than half that of Watchmen.*

Not gloating, just noting.

* Can anyone explain why 300, an all green-screen film with no-name actors mostly, cost $65 million? Is CGI that expensive? I thought it had become relatively cheap. Sin City, a more complicated project by appearances, only cost $40 million and it featured a few well-known actors (admittedly working for small paychecks).

Sin City was shot digitally while 300 was shot on film. Film does tend to be more expensive, so maybe that's partly the cause.

Also, Robert Rodriguez is able to cut down on costs by doing several different jobs himself and having the post-production down in-house.

by **RogueScribner** on Mon May 25, 2009 8:44 pm

That's true too.

by **buster00** on Sun May 31, 2009 1:14 am

As expected, Up is off to a big lead in the weekend money chase. Pixar's latest brought in about $21,400,000 Friday, compared to $7,550,000 for second-place Smithsonian (which is playing on many more screens).

In third, fourth, and fifth: Drag Me to Hell, Terminator Salivation, and Star Trek.

Mojo's Friday Chart.

by **RogueScribner** on Sun May 31, 2009 1:39 am

Another $35 million and Star Trek will officially be the most attended Star Trek film ever. Right now it's in the #3 spot on the adjusted gross chart, right behind the first and fourth films.

I thought DMTH would be doing a little better, but it should still place at about $15 - $18 million for the weekend. I'm sure word of mouth will be positive. My theater seemed to have a good time.

by **RogueScribner** on Sun May 31, 2009 3:55 pm

Weekend estimates

1 N Up BV $68,200,000 - 3,766 - $18,109 $68,200,000 - 1
2 1 Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian Fox $25,500,000 -52.9% 4,101 +5 $6,218 $105,296,000 $150 2
3 N Drag Me to Hell Uni. $16,628,000 - 2,508 - $6,630 $16,628,000 - 1
4 2 Terminator Salvation WB $16,140,000 -62.1% 3,602 +72 $4,481 $90,657,000 $200 2
5 3 Star Trek Par. $12,800,000 -44.1% 3,507 -546 $3,650 $209,500,000 - 4
6 4 Angels & Demons Sony $11,200,000 -48.4% 3,464 -63 $3,233 $104,760,000 $150 3
7 5 Dance Flick Par. $4,900,000 -54.0% 2,459 +9 $1,993 $19,241,000 $25 2
8 6 X-Men Origins: Wolverine Fox $3,900,000 -51.7% 2,263 -920 $1,723 $170,870,000 $150 5
9 7 Ghosts of Girlfriends Past WB (NL) $1,905,000 -50.5% 1,450 -805 $1,314 $50,015,000 - 5
10 8 Obsessed SGem $665,000 -66.3% 679 -924 $979 $67,508,000 $20 6

I thought DMTH would have done a bit better, but maybe no one is in the mood for horror after seeing Wolverine and T4. :-P

by **TheBaxter** on Sun May 31, 2009 8:16 pm

wow, for a film i've seen or heard practically nothing about, UP sure did some nice business.

by **Nachokoolaid** on Mon Jun 01, 2009 12:01 am

TheBaxter wrote:wow, for a film i've seen or heard practically nothing about, UP sure did some nice business.

It's Pixar, so that's almost like a guaranteed hit.

Most of their stuff is high quality. I haven't seen this, but I most likely will.

by **RogueScribner** on Sun Jun 07, 2009 1:02 pm

Weekend estimates are in:

1 1 Up BV $44,244,000 -35.0% 3,818 +52 $11,588 $137,316,000 - 2
2 N The Hangover WB $43,275,000 - 3,269 - $13,238 $43,275,000 - 1
3 N Land of the Lost Uni. $19,524,000 - 3,521 - $5,545 $19,524,000 - 1
4 2 Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian Fox $14,650,000 -39.8% 3,807 -294 $3,848 $127,341,000 $150 3
5 5 Star Trek Par. $8,400,000 -33.4% 3,202 -305 $2,623 $222,802,000 - 5
6 3 Terminator Salvation WB $8,175,000 -50.3% 3,304 -298 $2,474 $105,495,000 $200 3
7 4 Drag Me to Hell Uni. $7,342,000 -53.6% 2,510 +2 $2,925 $28,534,000 - 2
8 6 Angels & Demons Sony $6,500,000 -42.7% 2,925 -539 $2,222 $116,125,000 $150 4
9 N My Life in Ruins FoxS $3,225,000 - 1,164 - $2,771 $3,225,000 - 1
10 7 Dance Flick Par. $2,000,000 -57.8% 1,707 -752 $1,172 $22,667,000 $25 3

Star Trek just keeps hanging in there, doesn't it? Terminator doesn't look like it'll even match T3's gross. I wouldn't hold my breath on that proposed trilogy, McG.

by **minstrel** on Sun Jun 07, 2009 1:21 pm

Up is still strong in its second week, losing only 35% from opening week. That's pretty impressive. This is an age in which most first-place films lose 50% to 60% by their second week. I think Pixar has another big winner on their hands.

The Hangover is a film I've heard almost nothing about, yet it opened very strongly. I've heard TONS about Land of the Lost and it opened weakly. I think I'd be happier as a WB exec than a Universal exec right about now.

by **Pacino86845** on Sun Jun 07, 2009 1:34 pm

Land of the Lost didn't do as well as I would've guessed, but maybe that's because The Hangover did far better than I would've guessed... and a summer blockbuster that drops only 35% in its second week after such a strong opening? :shock:

by **RogueScribner** on Sun Jun 07, 2009 1:52 pm

Yeah, I thought based upon the Friday numbers that The Hangover would have nabbed the #1 spot this weekend, but Up shot up 36% on Saturday securing its spot at #1.

I'm not sure who the audience is supposed to be for Land of the Lost. It can hardly be labeled as a family film with that PG-13 rating. From the looks of it, it's not a typical Will Ferrell wacky and subversive comedy. It's pretty vanilla. It's not an "event" film, so it isn't drawing in people looking for spectacle. I think the movie is going to peter out pretty fast because no really knows what to make of the film. At least I don't, based upon the ads I've seen thus far. I've never seen the show it's based upon so that isn't a draw for me either.

by **DennisMM** on Sun Jun 07, 2009 4:23 pm

RogueScribner wrote:
DennisMM wrote:Flashing back, for those who still care: After eleven weeks (March 6-May 21) Watchmen has made $183 million on production costs of approximately $150 million and who knows what promotional costs. Domestic b.o. is $107 million. This compares to $456 million ($211 million domestic) for 300, on a budget less than half that of Watchmen.*

Not gloating, just noting.

* Can anyone explain why 300, an all green-screen film with no-name actors mostly, cost $65 million? Is CGI that expensive? I thought it had become relatively cheap. Sin City, a more complicated project by appearances, only cost $40 million and it featured a few well-known actors (admittedly working for small paychecks).

Sin City was shot digitally while 300 was shot on film. Film does tend to be more expensive, so maybe that's partly the cause.

Ah! I forgot Sin City was digital. Thanks, Rogue! And thanks, FG!

by **TheBaxter** on Tue Jun 09, 2009 10:39 am

Hangover goes up... Up goes down

by **RogueScribner** on Tue Jun 09, 2009 12:26 pm

Woo hoo! I don't know why, but that makes me happy. :mrgreen:

The estimates for both films were low, but the estimate for The Hangover undershot by a lot wider margin.

LotL ended up making less than originally reported. Will it be the first flop of summer?

by **Lord Voldemoo** on Tue Jun 09, 2009 1:19 pm

RogueScribner wrote:I'm not sure who the audience is supposed to be for Land of the Lost. It can hardly be labeled as a family film with that PG-13 rating. From the looks of it, it's not a typical Will Ferrell wacky and subversive comedy. It's pretty vanilla. It's not an "event" film, so it isn't drawing in people looking for spectacle. I think the movie is going to peter out pretty fast because no really knows what to make of the film. At least I don't, based upon the ads I've seen thus far. I've never seen the show it's based upon so that isn't a draw for me either.

The marketing for LotL has been horrendous. I think it's pretty reminiscent of the marketing campaign for Speed Racer last year. Is it a family movie? Is it a teen movie? Is it a geek movie? Is it for fans of the old school show (in either case)? Is it for new viewers?

A film doesn't have to be only one of those things...but it can't be all of them. You end up with NOBODY going to see it.

Now, granted, it sounds like LotL is pretty bad movie, so maybe they were behind the 8 ball from the start, but there have been plenty of other bad movies that have made lots of money because they were marketed well.

by **buster00** on Mon Jul 06, 2009 12:39 am

The weekend estimates have Transformers and Ice Age in a dead heat!

by **Leckomaniac** on Mon Jul 06, 2009 12:42 am

buster00 wrote:The weekend estimates have Transformers and Ice Age in a dead heat!

Oh the anticipation is killing me!

Looks like T2: RotF is going to land somewhere in the 380-390m range. You have to love that disconnect between critics and moviegoers. Some films are just review proof.

by **burlivesleftnut** on Mon Jul 06, 2009 10:09 pm

Well I think this was critic proof, but I have talked with many people (I know, anecdotal evidence sucks) and most seem to agree with the critics after they have watched the film.

Perhaps Transformers: Crawl Further Up Michael Bay's Ass won't be so critic proof.

by **Bloo** on Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:16 am

burlivesleftnut wrote:Well I think this was critic proof, but I have talked with many people (I know, anecdotal evidence sucks) and most seem to agree with the critics after they have watched the film.

Perhaps Transformers: Crawl Further Up Michael Bay's Ass won't be so critic proof.

see I've had the opposite reaction, I've had friends and family tell me they liked it, thought the storyline was good...one of my brothers told me it was the best movie he had seen this year

by **Pacino86845** on Sun Aug 30, 2009 5:18 pm

Weekend box office estimates are in

Only a 47% drop for Inglourious Basterds, which beats out Halloween II... the latter which was probably cockblocked by THE Final Destination. Both horror films were fairly low budget so they're not sweating it. Tarantino is probably happy with his biggest box office draw yet, and District 9 ploughs on!

by **buster00** on Sun Aug 30, 2009 9:50 pm

I would not have expected The Final Destination to be this week's #1 movie.

by **Pacino86845** on Sun Aug 30, 2009 9:55 pm

Well it is The Final Destination!

by **RogueScribner** on Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:56 pm

I'm hoping to see it tomorrow. I know, it's probably the dumbest movie released since G.I. Joe, but dumb can be fun. And in 3-D! :mrgreen:

by **Ribbons** on Sun Aug 30, 2009 11:34 pm

Pacino86845 wrote:Well it is The Final Destination!

Hopefully that's a promise...

by **magicmonkey** on Sun Aug 30, 2009 11:57 pm

RogueScribner wrote:I'm hoping to see it tomorrow. I know, it's probably the dumbest movie released since G.I. Joe, but dumb can be fun. And in 3-D!

I agree about the dumb can be fun, but Dude, there were no press screenings, that shit sounds alarm bells in my head. Beware! Beware!

by **RogueScribner** on Mon Aug 31, 2009 1:37 am

I just really dig the premise. Death will always find you. And fuck your shit up in creative ways. The first movie was great in the way it introduced us to this idea of trying to escape Death and Death still coming to get you; the second movie had a bit of a dumb plot but it had some awesome kills (especially the opening disaster--fuck you crashing airplane!); and the 3rd one was even dumber, but again, it had some cool kills and even some nice T&A (can't go wrong with that). I'm not expecting much from this one. I can already tell it probably won't be an improvement on the last one, but if it somehow matches the creativity of the 2nd one I'll be all smiles. :mrgreen:

by **magicmonkey** on Mon Aug 31, 2009 2:15 am

I totally loved the 2nd one, never got round to seeing part 3. I just fear that this one may be teh sucketh!1

by **TheBaxter** on Mon Aug 31, 2009 10:46 am

magicmonkey wrote:
RogueScribner wrote:I'm hoping to see it tomorrow. I know, it's probably the dumbest movie released since G.I. Joe, but dumb can be fun. And in 3-D!

I agree about the dumb can be fun, but Dude, there were no press screenings, that shit sounds alarm bells in my head. Beware! Beware!

that didn't hurt gi joe... at least not opening weekend.
speaking of gi joe.... $175m budget... about $135m in ticket sales.

by **RogueScribner** on Mon Aug 31, 2009 12:11 pm

It'll earn at least twice what it cost when you factor in foreign box office. Which is more than you can say for Terminator Salvation (whose foreign b.o. was twice its domestic take and it still didn't break even).

by **TheBaxter** on Mon Aug 31, 2009 12:26 pm

i don't know how gi joe is doing in other countries. i'm just hoping those countries have good enough taste to stay away from it.

by **Leckomaniac** on Mon Aug 31, 2009 12:29 pm

TheBaxter wrote:i don't know how gi joe is doing in other countries. i'm just hoping those countries have good enough taste to stay away from it.

They don't

by **Bloo** on Mon Aug 31, 2009 12:33 pm

TheBaxter wrote:
magicmonkey wrote:
RogueScribner wrote:I'm hoping to see it tomorrow. I know, it's probably the dumbest movie released since G.I. Joe, but dumb can be fun. And in 3-D!

I agree about the dumb can be fun, but Dude, there were no press screenings, that shit sounds alarm bells in my head. Beware! Beware!

that didn't hurt gi joe... at least not opening weekend.
speaking of gi joe.... $175m budget... about $135m in ticket sales.

so the two times I saw it didn't help it?

by **Pacino86845** on Mon Aug 31, 2009 12:46 pm

The two times you saw it didn't help society... :wink:

by **TheBaxter** on Mon Aug 31, 2009 2:13 pm

Leckomaniac wrote:
TheBaxter wrote:i don't know how gi joe is doing in other countries. i'm just hoping those countries have good enough taste to stay away from it.

They don't

well, it's less than the domestic take... so at least they have better taste than us.

by **Leckomaniac** on Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:48 pm

Not sure if anyone cares, but H@rry Potter 6 became only the second film in the franchise to cross the $300 Million mark on Tuesday.

Of course, adjusting the franchises for inflation they all cross the $300 million mark except Prisoner of Azkaban.

by **burlivesleftnut** on Wed Sep 30, 2009 10:13 pm

I care because you care.

by **Leckomaniac** on Wed Sep 30, 2009 11:11 pm

burlivesleftnut wrote:I care because you care.

Ha!

Love it, burl. Get back into the comics thread, why don't ya? I have, like, the last 4 posts in the review thread.

by **burlivesleftnut** on Thu Oct 01, 2009 7:52 pm

Leckomaniac wrote:
burlivesleftnut wrote:I care because you care.

Ha!

Love it, burl. Get back into the comics thread, why don't ya? I have, like, the last 4 posts in the review thread.

I am on hiatus until a, ahem, certain website decides to come back online.

by **TheBaxter** on Sat Oct 24, 2009 7:40 pm

Paranormal Activity = SAW FAIL!

even the people who didn't care for PA have to be happy that it knocked Saw 381075839078935 off for the #1 spot.
let's hope this spells an end to the horrid Saw series and opens up future halloweens for some REAL horror films.

by **Fievel** on Sat Oct 24, 2009 8:47 pm

TheBaxter wrote:Paranormal Activity = SAW FAIL!

even the people who didn't care for PA have to be happy that it knocked Saw 381075839078935 off for the #1 spot.
let's hope this spells an end to the horrid Saw series and opens up future halloweens for some REAL horror films.

Yeah like The Wolfman!!!!!

...oh wait, that's being released in time for Valentine's Day. :oops:

by **Bloo** on Sat Oct 24, 2009 10:52 pm

TheBaxter wrote:Paranormal Activity = SAW FAIL!

even the people who didn't care for PA have to be happy that it knocked Saw 381075839078935 off for the #1 spot.
let's hope this spells an end to the horrid Saw series and opens up future halloweens for some REAL horror films.

isn't there like 8 more Saws in the can ready to be released upon us

by **Pacino86845** on Sun Oct 25, 2009 4:03 am

I don't know how many theaters played Saw VI this weekend (compared to 2000 for Paranormal Activity) but indeed this is a joyous thing... more movies in the vein of Paranormal Activity and less like the Saw series is a very good thing!

by **travis-dane** on Sun Oct 25, 2009 6:34 am

Since a SAW movie costs about 10 to 13 million $ and a SAW movie makes around 130 to 150 million $ worldwide, I think we will see some more SAW movies. which is not a good thing.

by **Pacino86845** on Sun Oct 25, 2009 7:41 pm

Weekend estimates are up on Box Office Mojo:

1 Paranormal Activity $22,000,000
2 Saw VI $14,800,000
3 Where the Wild Things Are $14,420,000
4 Law Abiding Citizen $12,713,000
5 Couples Retreat $11,097,000
6 Astro Boy $7,017,000
7 The Stepfather (2009) $6,500,000
8 Cirque du Freak: The Vampire's Assistant $6,348,000
9 Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs $5,600,000
10 Zombieland $4,300,000
11 Amelia $4,025,000
12 A Serious Man $1,129,000

Saw has already made more than its budget... damn it! Paranormal Activity rolled out wide and made a killing at the box office.

Wild Things had a fairly predictable drop, with $100 million budget though I think it'll just barely break even...

Law Abiding Citizen, continuing Gerard Butler's unholy missions to make only the worst movies imaginable, will sadly turn out a profit by the time it fades from theaters...

Couples Retreat, - ...

Astro Boy got pretty PWNT if you ask me, this movie will end up being a loss.

Skip the next few... Amelia and A Serious Man with not-quite-wide-releases are doing very well for themselves on a per-theater average, each film with $4921 and $6415 respectively per theater.

by **TheBaxter** on Sun Oct 25, 2009 7:50 pm

saw was playing about 1000 more theaters than PA
it may not be the end of the saw franchise, but it will be the beginning of the end. they'll keep making less and less til they end up as DTV or VOD. that's the important thing, that in a year or two they will stop polluting the theaters with this crap every halloween, and those screens will be opened up for some real horror films. you figure it had to be only a matter of time, didn't the lead guy like die in #3 or something? it's amazing to me they even made it this far.

by **Bloo** on Mon Oct 26, 2009 2:31 am

looking over the budgets/casts of the Saw movies how did the casts get more b-moviesh with higher budgets

by **RogueScribner** on Mon Oct 26, 2009 9:00 am

The writers/producers GOTTA EAT!

by **travis-dane** on Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:18 am

New Moon beats The Dark Knight for Biggest opening day...(from CHUD)

All this could be said of New Moon. Opening day record is now somewhere between $67-$73 Million dollars (Nikki Finke is reporting $72.7 Million) with the $23 Million midnight the new record holder for a midnight show.

Oh Lord.

link
http://chud.com/articles/articles/21645/1/DELLAMORTE-DOES-BOX-OFFICE-SPECIAL-NEW-MOON-REPORT/Page1.html