2005 at the Box Office (1 Viewer)

[TerryRL]

No problem, and thanks for the compliment.

That's what I get for not having an editor.

 

[Jason Harbaugh]

I can't believe that Universal is making so much Focking money! When I saw it I figured it would top out at $125-$150m and I was being generous. I guess, kudos to them.

 

[Jim Barg]

I happen to work at a theater, and that night was surprisingly busy up until 10. After that, business understandably slowed down. (By the way, the district manager insisted on having midnight shows to the area's chagrin - "we don't want to leave any money on the table". 18 people showed up for seven shows at my theatre.)

 

[TerryRL]

Weekend Estimates

#1 "Coach Carter" $23.6 million
#2 "Meet the Fockers" $19.0 million ($230.8 million) -33%
#3 "Racing Stripes" $14.0 million
#4 "In Good Company" $13.8 million ($14.3 million) +9536%
#5 "Elektra" $12.5 million
#6 "White Noise" $12.1 million ($41.2 million) -49%
#7 "The Aviator" $4.7 million ($49.9 million) -36%
#8 "Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events" $3.9 million ($111.0 million) -46%
#9 "The Phantom of the Opera" $3.5 million ($26.4 million) +3%
#10 "Ocean's Twelve" $2.8 million ($119.8 million) -45%

After a very long dry spell, Paramount Studios is enjoying a nice little streak with the studio's third big opening since November. Their drama "Coach Carter" took the top spot this weekend and joined 'Lemony Snickets' ($30.0 million) and the 'SpongeBob' movie ($32.0 million) as the studio's third $20 million-plus opening during the last nine weeks.

"Coach Carter" took in $23.6 million this weekend, as it surprised many by out-distancing Fox's "Elektra". The film's $9,350 per-theater average (from 2,524 locations) easily was the best of the top ten. 'Carter' is the first of five films that will feature star Samuel L. Jackson this year. The other four he'll be seen in are the Indie drama "In My Country", Sony's action flick "XXX: State of the Union", Lucasfilm's 'Revenge of the Sith' and New Line's "The Man". Sam has been a very busy guy.

With decent reviews and solid word-of-mouth, 'Carter' should go on to do big business for Paramount over the coming weeks. Paramount is hoping for numbers similar to "Remember the Titans" ($115.6 million), but are expecting a final tally closer to that of "Friday Night Lights" ($61.2 million). Either way, "Coach Carter" is going to become a bigger hit than the studio probably anticipated.

After reigning as the top grossing film for three consecutive weeks, Universal/DreamWorks' sequel "Meet the Fockers" took the #2 slot this weekend. The film suffered only a 33% dip and has so far tallied a phenomenal $230.8 million. The movie is on course for a final tally in the neighborhood of $275-$285 million, making it one of the most successful comedies in history. How long do you think its going to take Universal and DreamWorks to greenlight another sequel?

WB's family film, "Racing Stripes", got off to a solid start this weekend as it pulled in $14 million. It should have a healthy run in theaters before hitting home video.

Universal's "In Good Company" went wide this weekend (1,566 theaters this weekend compared to the three it had been playing in) and took in a stellar $13.8 million. The film's $8,869 per-theater average was the second best of the top ten behind "Coach Carter". The movie wasn't expected to bring in such strong numbers and it bodes very well for the film's long term success.

Fox's hugely hyped "Elektra" got off to a very disappointing start this weekend as it pulled in $12.5 million from a whopping 3,204 theaters (second only to the 3,554 locations "Meet the Fockers" is currently playing in), giving it a very lukewarm average of $3,901. What also has to be troubling to Fox is that the film opened less than WB's poorly received "Catwoman" ($16.7 million) did last summer. Fox even attached the new "Fantastic Four" trailer exclusively to prints of "Elektra" because the execs were convinced the movie would open at #1. Ouch. Look for a very fast fade from "Elektra".

Universal's thriller, "White Noise", slipped to the #6 slot this weekend as it took a less-than-expected hit of 49% (some were speculating that it would suffer a 55-60% fall). The movie is on course for a final tally in the area of $65 million, making it a very solid hit for the studio.

The Miramax/WB Oscar hopeful "The Aviator" took only a 36% dip in business this weekend. The film has so far earned just under $50 million. Paramount's "Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events" saw a 46% hit as its total now stands at an impressive $111 million.

WB's Oscar hopeful "The Phantom of the Opera" saw a near 4% increase in business this weekend. The film is currently playing in only 907 theaters and has so far tallied $26.4 million. WB's "Ocean's Twelve" rounds out the top ten. The film took a 45% hit and has so far earned just under $120 million.

Next weekend will see Sony's comedy "Are We There Yet?" and Focus Features' action/drama "Assault on Precinct 13" battle it out for the top spot. I think 'Assault' will have a strong debut, but "Are We There Yet?" is my pick to take the #1 slot. We'll see what happens.

 

[Edwin Pereyra]

Phantom Of The Opera's 4-week take of $26.4M is the equivalent of approximately 38 weeks' gross of its hit running counterpart on Broadway.

~Edwin

 

[Joel C]

So.... Fox is surprised no one wanted to see a confusingly linked spin-off from a relatively disliked superhero movie? Weird.

 

[Haggai]

Yeah, but I assume the movie cost a lot more than the stage production as well.

 

[TerryRL]

Joel, that relatively disliked superhero movie still made $102.5 million domestically, it also did very well on DVD. I am in no way agreeing with Fox execs on this one, but they really did believe that this movie was going to be a relatively big hit, especially considering that many within the industry believe Jennifer Garner is going to be a big star. The problem is why would anyone pay to see Garner kicking ass, when they could see it for free on "Alias" every Wednesday night? That's just me.

 

[Parinya]

Thanks for info.

 

[Tim Ke]

I just saw Elektra last night, and for the life of me can't figure out what the hell they thought they were doing. True, Daredevil made money, and most people hated it, but I'm sure even the ones that liked it weren't begging for an Elektra movie. (BTW I saw it for free, and certainly wouldn't have paid for such rubbish.)

 

[TerryRL]

The thing is, all the studios are going to make as many superhero movies as they possibly can, hoping to land that property that turns into a lucrative franchise. This is why crap like "Catwoman", "Elektra", etc. get made. Comic book movies are extremely "hot" right now and the industry can't get enough of them.

Last year there were five major comic book adaptations ("Spider-Man 2", "Hellboy", "Blade: Trinity", "Catwoman" and "The Punisher"). This year also sees five with "Elektra", "Constantine", "Sin City", "Batman Begins" and "Fantastic Four". 2006 already has "X-Men 3", "Superman Returns", "Iron Man" and "Ghost Rider" set for big releases.

With the massive success of both the "Spider-Man" and "X-Men" film series, Hollywood studios are going to keep mining this particular well until they've exhausted every possible potential future franchise.

 

[Joel C]

My point was, the "good" superhero movies make $150 million up. Daredevil made $40 million in one weekend and then took months to creep over $100 million. And unlike X-Men and Spider-Man, it got bad reviews from critics and very mixed WOM from fans.

 

[TerryRL]

I agree with you, but Fox only saw that all important "bottom line". At the end of the day, the movie still made money for them and they didn't see why "Elektra" couldn't also turn in similar numbers.

Again, most of these movies are seen as experiments to see which one will "stick" with the public enough to warrant a franchise.

 

[Malcolm R]

Elektra was an underdeveloped bit player who didn't really bring anything to the "Daredevil" film. Yet they thought the character could anchor a whole movie? No one was asking for an Elektra film. The execs should have recognized the huge round of indifference.

Silly studio execs. They're like weathermen...get paid good money to be wrong. I wish I could screw up time after time and still keep my job.

 

[Ray H]

I liked Daredevil, but that won't get me to watch Elektra. The trailers and ads just look ridiculous. I was watching Garner on Leno and the clip they showed was just too damn crazy for me tastes. Too many animals jumping out of people's chests and moving real fast. It's like they made a live action video game.

 

[Rob Bartlett]

It's not just that Fox wanted to make a quick buck from Daredevil, the property has been shopped around Hollywood on its own for quite a while. And Elektra movie was inevitable if Daredevil was a successs.

Marvel is not doing spelndidly right now. After the performance of this and Blade Trinity, and some very uncomfortable word on Fantastic Four, studios are going to have to do what was working before: get a more maverick director to handle your property, just be sure to keep closer to two hours.

 

[Edwin Pereyra]

Suprisingly very poor showing for House of Flying Daggers. I don't think its entire run's box office will even come close to Hero's opening weekend gross.

~Edwin

 

[Ernest Rister]

"Studios are going to have to do what was working before: get a more maverick director to handle your property."

I think they need good scripts, good characters, and good storytellers. Maverick or not. Ang Lee was a maverick, but the wrong choice for The Hulk, in my opinion. Sam Raimi is a pro and an iconoclast, but was right for Spider-Man.

By the way, I liked Daredevil. Not art, but it was fun.

 

[Matt Stone]

Agreed, Ernest. I hated it the first time that I watched it, but a view more viewings got me to like it a good deal more. Not a top tier comic flick, but still a fun watch.

That being said, I agree comic movies should go back to being made in some sort of traditional way. It seems like they're starting from the back these days, if that makes any sense. For example, Fantastic Four had a release date before it had a director or complete script. Definitely trying to rush it out quick as opposed to making a solid film.

 

[TerryRL]

As Matt just pointed out, comic book movies are being made "from the back". The problem is that the movies themselves are almost secondary. Often release dates are set in stone before any of the principles are even put in place (i.e. a director and a cast). The studio goes with an idea (a "cool" scenario to put a superhero in), then string together a workable plot between the huge action sequences and hope the movie moves a lot of merchandise.

You know its out of control when you see massive toy lines being made for films carrying an R rating ("The Matrix" films, the "Terminator" movies, the two "Kill Bill" flicks, the "Blade" trilogy, "Constantine" will have a line of toys as well). The studios are actually surprised when a lot of the stuff doesn't sale.

As as I've said before, most "event" movies these days are little more than two-hour trailers promoting the toys and the DVD release (usually 4-6 months after their theatrical launches). You'd think everyone would have learned from WB's mistake with "Batman & Robin". The sad is that the lure of the millions (even billions) that can be earned from merchandise sales (toys, video games, t-shirts, books, etc.) is among the key reasons why a lot of these movies are rushed into production.

The DVD release is where the movie can be packaged as a director's cut or an extended version or whatever. These movies are all about the bottom line. Whether they're actually good or not doesn't matter as long as they move product.

At the end of the day, greenlighting a superhero movie is very much a business decision. Yes, I know its called show business and I have no problem whatsoever with that. I just think that every opportunity needs to be made to make sure the movie which they hope will move all this product is at least good instead of being a paint-by-numbers action flick with little to no originality. But that's just me.