MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Friday Estimates by Is A Star Wars Movie Opening Klady

Screen Shot 2016-12-17 at 8.57.07 AM………………………

Star Warrrrs, fabulous Star Waaarrrrrrsssss…

Reasonably good movie. Too complicated. Cameos are more functional than meaningful. I say, a still-remarkable $1.15 billion worldwide. Nothing there anyone actually needs to see twice.

Of course, if Collateral Beauty turned out to be a Star Wars movie, it too would do $800 million before anyone noticed.

Meanwhile, Collateral Beauty is stillborn and Rogue One is no excuse. It died on its own. Easily the worst Will Smith wide opening of his entire career. Rest in Pieces.

It’s hard to judge the expansions of Manchester and La La by yesterday’s numbers. Both are good. La La’s is better. The level of success will be easier to determine tomorrow (or Monday, really).

12 Responses to “Friday Estimates by Is A Star Wars Movie Opening Klady”

  1. Sideshow Bill says:

    There was a day when a $67 million dollar difference between the #1 film and the #2 would have been awe inspiring. Now it’s kinda common place. I don’t have figures for these types of openings but I wonder what the record is for grosses between 1 & 2.

  2. Geoff says:

    Hey props to Disney/Lucasfilm for marketing the shit out of this film and it is a pretty good film – $500 million domestic is almost assured considering that even mid-December blockbusters with “mixed” receptions like Tron Legacy and King Kong had multipliers between 3.5x and 4x opening weekend.

    There will probably be some talk about a “drop-off” but the most apt comparison is probably how Iron Man 3 performed just a year after The Avengers exploded.

    Next year Episode VIII is almost assured of Avatar-like numbers then who knows?

    Young Han Solo in May 2018 will likely be the first REAL test of the brand: probably a HUGE opening around Memorial Day but no year-end holidays to prop up weekday box office and MUCH more overseas competition. Gotta admit that Donald Glover as Lando sounds pretty cool but I would just prefer a Young Lando movie….one can hope right? 😉

  3. Mostly Lurking says:

    There is no way the Han Solo movie doesn’t get pushed to December.

  4. EtGuild2 says:

    “There was a day when a $67 million dollar difference between the #1 film and the #2 would have been awe inspiring. Now it’s kinda common place. I don’t have figures for these types of openings but I wonder what the record is for grosses between 1 & 2.”

    THE FORCE AWAKENS broke them all last year the previous +$85 million single-day between Deathly Hallows 2 and the second grosser increased to +$115 million. The #1 vs #2 opener, previously held by AVENGERS 1 over Think Like a Manwas broken with a +$230 million difference. Ditto the overall record, now also at +$230, which was previously held by POTTER over POOH.

  5. Sideshow Bill says:

    Thanks, EtGuild! The Avengers number makes $67 million look like nothing.

  6. Movieman says:

    Unlike “The Founder” which I really liked, I can see why Harvey lost faith in “Gold” as a legit awards contender.
    But as a “wintry Saturday afternoon in bed kind of movie,” it’s a decent watch.
    Edgar Ramirez is easily the best thing in it: McConaughey and Bryce Dallas Howard chewed way too much scenery for my taste.
    Bombs away at the box office next month, though. I can’t imagine it’ll do any better than Ramirez’s last Weinstein release, August’s “Hands of Stone.”

  7. JS Partisan says:

    Dave, sums up the problem with Rogue One: it’s nothing you have to see twice! DISNEY: BLEEDING FROM ESPN, AND LEAVING STAR WARS MONEY ON THE TABLE! Much like 2016, it’s something that could have been something, but is just much fucking worse.

  8. Stella's Boy says:

    That’s too bad re: Gold. I was really looking forward to the return of Stephen Gaghan.

  9. charlesmayaki says:

    @Stella’s Boy
    Gold is much better to the average movie than to movieman’s taste.

    It is actually a well-written, well-crafted movie.

    Award-worthy subjective but it’s on the same level as Syriana.

    As entertaining and as plotty.

    Could completely flop or do 50 million but anyone who sees it will be entertained.

    It’s no Sunday afternoon movie. That’s for sure.

  10. Nick Rogers says:

    Having gone trailer-free this year, I had no idea what to expect from “Gold.” But it’s much more “American Hustle” meets “Big Short” meets “Wolf of Wall Street” in spirit than I’d have thought (right down to McConaughey’s “fairydust” whistle and tubby-Bale dishevelment). I think his involvement alone would help it do better than “Hands of Stone,” but I see it topping out at $20 million tops. Solid programmatic entertainment, though, and props for turning McConaughey into a combination of Roy Munson and Dwight Yoakam, and male pattern baldness to match that of the guy who plays his pops (Craig T. Nelson).

  11. Movieman says:

    I said, “wintry Saturday afternoon in bed kind of movie,” Charles, lol.

    Enjoyed it overall, Nick, but the first half was rough going.
    It definitely took awhile to kick in for me. As stated earlier, Ramirez was definitely my favorite part of the movie.
    I think you’re right about Gaghan aiming for an “American Hustle,” “Big Short” or “Wolf of WS.” But he remains a better screenwriter than director. (Curiously, he didn’t write “Gold.)

  12. Glamourboy says:

    Dave Poland…please make a New Year’s resolution to stop starting articles with…’What more is there to say…”

    Thank you.

Leave a Reply

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

A Spirited Exchange

“In some ways Christopher Nolan has become our Stanley Kubrick,” reads the first sentence of David Bordwell’s latest blog post–none of which I want or intend to read after that desperate opening sentence. If he’d written “my” or “some people’s” instead of “our”, I might have read further. Instead, I can only surmise that in some ways David Bordwell may have become our Lars von Trier.”
~ Jonathan Rosenbaum On Facebook

“Jonathan has written a despicable thing in comparing me to Trump. He’s free to read or not read what I write, and even to judge arguments without reading them. It’s not what you’d expect from a sensible critic, but it’s what Jonathan has chosen to do, for reasons of a private nature he has confided to me in an email What I request from him is an apology for comparing my ideas to Trump’s.”
~ David Bordwell Replies

“Yes, I do apologize, sincerely, for such a ridiculous and quite unwarranted comparison. The private nature of my grievance with David probably fueled my post, but it didn’t dictate it, even though I’m willing to concede that I overreacted. Part of what spurred me to post something in the first place is actually related to a positive development in David’s work–an improvement in his prose style ever since he wrote (and wrote very well) about such elegant prose stylists as James Agee and Manny Farber. But this also brought a journalistic edge to his prose, including a dramatic flair for journalistic ‘hooks’ and attention-grabbers, that is part of what I was responding to. Although I realize now that David justifies his opening sentence with what follows, and far less egregiously than I implied he might have, I was responding to the drum roll of that opening sentence as a provocation, which it certainly was and is.”
~ Jonathan Rosenbaum Replies

“In my own mind, I’ve always been a writer and the fact that I act is, well… it’s been very enjoyable and I love doing it. It has been good for me, but in my own mind I’m just a writer with a bizarre activity—acting—that I undertake.”
~ Wallace Shawn