MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Posted Saturday, October 27th, 2007 - 12 Comments »

Friday Estimates by Klady – 10/26

friest1027.jpg
Based on Klady

12 Comments »

12 Responses to “Friday Estimates by Klady – 10/26”

  1. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:
    October 27, 2007 at 7:23 pm

    See, the reason people keep going back to Saw and Final Destination is that they know what they’re gonna get and it’s something they can’t get anywhere else in such an easily digestible fashion. Still, I reckon this one will dip below $80mil in final tallies.
    Dan isn’t even on 2000 screens, which is perplexing to say the least.

  2. IOIOIOI says:
    October 27, 2007 at 9:59 pm

    So no one wants to see Lars and ITTW? It’s not surprising. ITTW still has the whole “RICH KID PISSING HIS LIFE AWAY” and “SEAN PEAN” vibe. While Lars has a premise that may be sweeter than Lemon Pepsi, but it’s still a whacky freakin premise. This leaves both of these movies sort of hanging out there, loved by critics (and loathed), but without finding it’s audience.
    Nevertheless; the SAW SAGA continues to rack up money. Compared to other flicks. These at least rip-off Phone Booth and have a villian people love. It will be interesting to see how the final two installments far, and if they can keep this pace up over the long haul.

  3. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:
    October 28, 2007 at 12:46 am

    If memory serves, nobody particularly wanted to see Letters from Iwo Jima last year either.

  4. IOIOIOI says:
    October 28, 2007 at 1:38 am

    Camel; a lot of people do not want to see a lot of flicks. The bastages.

  5. jeffmcm says:
    October 28, 2007 at 2:51 am

    IOI, not sure what you mean by ‘final two’ since we are now guaranteed a Saw V, VI, and VII.

  6. IOIOIOI says:
    October 28, 2007 at 3:09 am

    Jeff; there are supposed to be SIX in the SAGA. If they changed that with four, then they are going for a SEPTRILOGY! Which would be… rather precedented in the genre of horrour. Nevertheless; I do love that there’s a huge franchise out there, that I have no attachment to in the least. It’s sort of refreshing in a way.

  7. doug r says:
    October 28, 2007 at 10:02 am

    Drove three hours yesterday to take my family to see Nightmare Before Xmas in 3-D. Ok conversion, but the trailer for the live-action 3-D picture with Brendan Fraser looked way cooler. The $5000 per screen Nightmare pulled in a couple of weeks ago suggests that people want something special in a theatrical experience. Just look at the numbers for Monster House and Polar Express. The 3-D screens pulled in WAY more money.
    Perhaps the draw of the Saw franchise is like Dave implies-they get the storyline on DVD, then the new picture gives them more of the same on the big screen. Coming soon…Saw 6 in 3-D!

  8. Cadavra says:
    October 28, 2007 at 1:21 pm

    “Jeff; there are supposed to be SIX in the SAGA. If they changed that with four, then they are going for a SEPTRILOGY! Which would be… rather precedented in the genre of horrour.”
    You’re kidding, right? HALLOWEEN, FRIDAY THE 13th and NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET have all not only hit seven but passed it; I think Jason’s been in at least 11 by now.

  9. IOIOIOI says:
    October 28, 2007 at 6:01 pm

    Cad; go read it again. It’s a bit of business.

  10. jeffmcm says:
    October 28, 2007 at 6:28 pm

    It’s hard to tell.

  11. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:
    October 28, 2007 at 9:23 pm

    “rather precedented”. It would read “rather unprecedented” if he was implying it never happens.

  12. White Label says:
    October 29, 2007 at 11:30 am

    There was a review posted somewhere (can’t find it now) explaining that the reason why people continue to see the Saw films is that each sequel helps you to understand the previous film, but also leaves its own questions unanswered.

Leave a Reply

Box Office

Comments Most Recent Archives

Quote Unquotesee all »

“I don’t really think, Sean, that you need to know about my various sexual liaisons. Or that anyone else needs to. I did write about them. I filled a hundred pages of Moleskine notebooks with my one-night stands, my affairs. But I decided they didn’t belong in a professional memoir. First of all, these are real people we’re talking about. Many of them were enjoyable. Some were abject failures. My wife said to me when she read the pages, ‘Of what purpose is this in a memoir? Of what purpose is this other than to titillate?’ The point is, I never see them. It’s because I have nothing in common with them, frankly. And probably didn’t at the time. I could not provide a sensible reason why I married these women. The thing is, in the case of my marriages, it takes two people to fuck up a marriage. It wasn’t simply the fault of these women that I lost interest in them and realised they were insignificant relationships. Which is how I look at them right now–as being insignificant. I see them as blips.”
~ William Friedkin On Cutting Interviewers Off At The Sass

“I have to imagine from Mr. Spielberg’s point of view, the paradigm shift in the 1970s was just the new “normal,” a “halcyon era” from which we are straying in the 21st century–because theatrical exhibition is tenuous (as it has been since the 1940s), the home video market has dried up and people are watching pirated movies on their phone. Spielberg’s coming-of-age era was for him the halcyon period that the 21st century “implosion” will cause to go “crashing into the ground.” But he is wrong. The market for movies is actually diverse and highly segmented–although from the top-down movie industry vantage point and media punditry you would not think this to be true.  Would we really mourn for Mr. Spielberg or ourselves if Lincoln would have been made for cable or had played on public television?  Is it bad for humanity that cable television is creating wonderful, resonant stories in long-form series that people want to watch at home on TV (or streamed onto their computer)? I don’t think so, but it is a paradigm shift and it might affect people’s theatrical moviegoing habits. Televisions in people’s homes have had that effect for seven decades–it is not a new phenomenon. As Art House cinema impresarios we need to focus on what WE can do at our theaters and in our communities. It is not productive for us to fret over what pundits say or about what well-meaning filmmakers like the Stevens–Spielberg and Soderbergh–say. We should fret about what we can do in our communities. What we can do to support filmmakers.”
~ From A Response By Russ Collins, CEO, Michigan Theater–Ann Arbor And Director, Art House Convergence, To Mr. Spielberg