Page 2 of 2

Re: SPEARE'S TIPS - THE FILMS OF 1/22

Posted: January 23rd, 2010, 5:01 pm
by BanksIsDaFuture
Yeah, Inception has got a whole Matrix vibe to it. I think it'll do great, esp in IMAX.

Re: SPEARE'S TIPS - THE FILMS OF 1/22

Posted: January 23rd, 2010, 8:14 pm
by Shrykespeare
Friday totals:

1. Avatar - $9.2M
2. Legion - $6.7M
3. Eli - $4.9M
4. Tooth - $3.5M
5. Bones - $2.5M
6. Measures - $2.0M

Expect Tooth Fairy to do much better on Sat/Sun, given that its a family flick and most kids see movies on those days.

Re: SPEARE'S TIPS - THE FILMS OF 1/22

Posted: January 23rd, 2010, 8:47 pm
by Buscemi
I'm surprised that Legion is doing well, considering all of the Internet backlash on it. But then again, maybe more people saw the red-band trailer than I thought (you know, the good trailer).

Re: SPEARE'S TIPS - THE FILMS OF 1/22

Posted: January 23rd, 2010, 9:11 pm
by numbersix
silversurfer19 wrote:I thought the same way about TDK. Never underestimate the power of word of mouth if a movie is good.
Yeah but there's a difference between reviving an already household name and creating a new concept entirely. Hell, The Prestige looked amazing from its trailer and it had a great cast and it only mustered up 50 mil. I just think for every one of us who love the idea of Inception there's gonna be millions of people who don't give a dam and who'd rather see Twilight 3 or wait for Salt or Dinner for Schmucks instead. I think 150 mil is a realistic ambition, where it would need to earn double that to break into the Top 5.

Re: SPEARE'S TIPS - THE FILMS OF 1/22

Posted: January 23rd, 2010, 9:45 pm
by undeadmonkey
I would love for Inception to be huge, but i agree with 6, $150M is a very realistic number

Re: SPEARE'S TIPS - THE FILMS OF 1/22

Posted: January 23rd, 2010, 9:48 pm
by W
I'd say $150 is in the realm of possibility, but looking at the thing as a mainstream item with a lot of question marks... I've gotta say closer to $100 M if not under. It's just too far out and too many questions to brand it a $300 M flick at this point.

Re: SPEARE'S TIPS - THE FILMS OF 1/22

Posted: January 23rd, 2010, 9:51 pm
by Buscemi
I don't see Dinner For Schmucks doing that well for two reasons:

1. Has anyone even seen the original (entitled The Dinner Game)?

2. Paul Rudd's schtick is wearing thin and he seems to be playing the same role that he always plays in this one (an obnoxious and unlikeable jerk). I wish Sacha Baron Cohen was still doing the film. He really needs a good role again after the reception of Bruno.

Re: SPEARE'S TIPS - THE FILMS OF 1/22

Posted: January 23rd, 2010, 9:59 pm
by Geezer
The Prestige was also horribly marketed 6. I remember people telling me it was good before I had ever even heard it existed. This was before FM of course. As for Inception, word of mouth will make it or break it.

And Buscemi, don't mistake your opinion for the general response of the American population. You did think the Hangover would fall on its face also. A lot of people like Paul Rudd.

Re: SPEARE'S TIPS - THE FILMS OF 1/22

Posted: January 23rd, 2010, 10:20 pm
by Buscemi
Have the writer's strike not canceled a number of projects and had the film not been saved by rewrites (seriously, I don't think that the writers of Four Christmases and Ghosts Of Girlfriends Past came up with any of the film's now-famous humor), The Hangover would have fallen on its face. A stroke of luck saved it from being dumped into the dregs of September or even the video market (where Trick 'r Treat went due to a falling-out between Warner Bros. and Bryan Singer).

Re: SPEARE'S TIPS - THE FILMS OF 1/22

Posted: January 24th, 2010, 4:37 am
by BanksIsDaFuture
I don't think any part of the script was responsible for alot of the humor, I'd put that down to the 3 main guys. Also maybe Ken Jeung.


And I'll think we'll see Legion drop around 60% next weekend, esp with Edge of Darkness coming around.

Re: SPEARE'S TIPS - THE FILMS OF 1/22

Posted: January 24th, 2010, 5:17 am
by Buscemi
I didn't find Ken Jeong that funny in The Hangover. He came off as more of a stereotype of gays and Asians than anything.

Re: SPEARE'S TIPS - THE FILMS OF 1/22

Posted: January 24th, 2010, 6:41 am
by numbersix
I see Dinner for Schmucks performing well for a few reasons

It's a broad comedy in July.
It has Steve Carrell and Zack Galifianakis, both appealing names for different reasons. Paul Rudd may not be a household name but his last two leading films performed moderately well. Plus, with Carell and Rudd together many will associate it with 40 Year Old Virgin.
On paper it's a good premise.

Of course, it doesn't help that Fockers 3 is out the following week, and of course it could be a terrible movie, but in theory this film could be a big hit.

The fact that it's a remake will have no impact, good nor bad, on its box-office intake.

Re: SPEARE'S TIPS - THE FILMS OF 1/22

Posted: January 24th, 2010, 2:02 pm
by Shrykespeare
BOM Sunday Estimates:

1. Avatar - $36M (now 30 Top 5 pts, $552M overall, #2 all time)
2. Legion - $18.2M
3. Book of Eli - $17M ($62M total... not too bad!)
4. Tooth Fairy - $14.5M
5. Lovely Bones - $8.8M

7. Extraordinary Measures - $7M
15. To Save a Life - $1.5M


PTA (Nov-Dec):

5 points - Last Station
4 points - Avatar (now 23 total)
3 points - Legion
2 points - White Ribbon
1 point - Book of Eli


PTA (Jan):

5 points - Legion
4 points - Book of Eli
3 points - Tooth Fairy
2 points - To Save a Life
1 points - Extraordinary Measures
(Fish Tank - unknown)


User Ratings:
Spy Next Door (didn't have one last week) - 5.3
Tooth Fairy - 4.0
Legion - 5.9
Extraordinary Measures - 6.3
To Save a Life - 5.3

Re: SPEARE'S TIPS - THE FILMS OF 1/22

Posted: January 24th, 2010, 5:50 pm
by W
The only time the word "remake" has an effect on a film is if the general public knows its a remake.

Re: SPEARE'S TIPS - THE FILMS OF 1/22

Posted: January 24th, 2010, 10:52 pm
by Leestu
Buscemi wrote:I don't see Dinner For Schmucks doing that well for two reasons:

1. Has anyone even seen the original (entitled The Dinner Game)?

2. Paul Rudd's schtick is wearing thin and he seems to be playing the same role that he always plays in this one (an obnoxious and unlikeable jerk). I wish Sacha Baron Cohen was still doing the film. He really needs a good role again after the reception of Bruno.
I have, and it was a very good movie. Good enough for me to not want to see a bastardised dumbed down version (just assumptions obviously).