MCN Blogs
Ray Pride

By Ray Pride

Friday Estimates By Lean Len

Friday Report 170902

What’s notable on the Friday of a second desolate box-office weekend in a row?

Weinstein Co.’s summer’s-end clearing of the shelf with three features—Leap!, Tulip Fever, Wind River—nets nearly $3 million, with Wind River at a notable $13.5 million cume. Logan Lucky holds onto nearly 3,000 screens with the lack of incoming product. Two episodes of Marvel’s ABC television series “Inhumans” grosses $500,000 on 393 Imax screens. (The series was partially filmed in that format).

11 Responses to “Friday Estimates By Lean Len”

  1. Bulldog68 says:

    The Hitman’s Bodyguard is certainly benefiting from the lack of new releases and has turned into a decent hit with a $75m possibility. Not bad.

  2. Movieman says:

    “Patti Cake$” is the biggest “Sundance-movie-picked-up-for-a-small-fortune” bomb since…?


  3. Hcat says:

    I will have to look but it may holld the all time title as i believe it sold for half a million more than Happy TX which was the previous cautionary tale. Though I would like to point out that I enjoyed Happy and have heard that Patti is decent as well, the common critique of the two is that they were a little too on the nose.

    So since there will be little to say about the box office, what tops your list of Sundance films that were criminally ignored? Mine would be Transsiberian, tight thriller with a fantastic Woody Harrelson and Emily Mortimer performance.

  4. Ray Pride says:

    Reported purchase prices without other consideration indicated:
    Patti Cake$: $10.5 million
    Birth Of A Nation, 2016: $17.5 million
    Happy, Texas, 1999: estimated $10 million
    Next Stop Wonderland, 1998: $6 million
    Spitfire Grill, 1996: $10 million

  5. js Partisan says:

    Put Pattie Cakes on Netflix, and watch it be a whole thing.

  6. Triple Option says:

    Ha! I was going to say Spitfire Grill. How much was that Mary May Marlene cult movie? That was Sundance, right? I don’t know which ones have made money but I’m trying to think of a film that came out of there that wasn’t overrated.

  7. J says:

    As far as other considerations go, ‘Next Stop Wonderland’ was the first time I saw Hope Davis. It is therefore priceless.

  8. Spacesheik says:

    Bulldog68 says:
    September 2, 2017 at 3:09 pm
    “The Hitman’s Bodyguard is certainly benefiting from the lack of new releases and has turned into a decent hit with a $75m possibility. Not bad”.

    Number #1 for 3 weeks – marketing can exploit that – it is a crowd pleaser, the audience I saw it with seemed to have enjoyed themselves – good chemistry, good action, fast paced.

  9. Thorough Henry says:

    What was the last movie to be number 1 for three weeks with this low a gross? I remember even Disturbia breaking double digits all three weeks it led the box office.

  10. EtGuild2 says:

    DISTURBIA actually only hit $9 million in weekend 3 but had miniscule drops the following few weeks. If HB cant’ break $80 million, it would be the lowest BO hat-trick grosser since WHOLE NINE YARDS back in 2000.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

What do you make of the criticism directed at the film that the biopic genre or format is intrinsically bourgeois? That’s the most crazy criticism. That’s an excuse for not engaging with the content of the movie. Film critics sometimes, you know, can be very lazy.

Come on, formal criticism is valuable too. But I’m amazed when this is the thing they put in front of the discourse. My situation is that I’m dealing with a highly explosive subject, a taboo subject that nobody wants to deal with.

Karl Marx? Yes, this is the first film ever in the Western world about Marx. And I managed to make an almost mainstream film out of it. You want me at the same time to play the artist and do a risky film about the way my camera moves and the way I edit? No, it’s complicated enough! The artistic challenge — and it took me ten years with Pascal to write this story — was the writing. That was the most difficult part. We were making a film about the evolution of an idea, which is impossible. To be able to have political discourse in a scene, and you can follow it, and it’s not simplified, and it’s historically true. This is the accomplishment. So when someone criticizes the formal aspects without seeing that first, for me, it’s laziness or ignorance. There’s an incapacity to deal with what’s on the table. I make political films about today, I’m not making a biopic to make a biopic. I don’t believe in being an artist just to be an artist. And by the way, this film cost $9 million. I dare anyone in the United States to make this film for $9 million.
Raoul Peck on The Young Karl Marx

“The Motion Picture Academy, at considerable expense and with great efficiency, runs all the nominated pictures at its own theater, showing each picture twice, once in the afternoon, once in the evening. A nominated picture is one in connection with which any kind of work is nominated for an award, not necessarily acting, directing, or writing; it may be a purely technical matter such as set-dressing or sound work. This running of pictures has the object of permitting the voters to look at films which they may happen to have missed or to have partly forgotten. It is an attempt to make them realize that pictures released early in the year, and since overlaid with several thicknesses of battered celluloid, are still in the running and that consideration of only those released a short time before the end of the year is not quite just.

“The effort is largely a waste. The people with votes don’t go to these showings. They send their relatives, friends, or servants. They have had enough of looking at pictures, and the voices of destiny are by no means inaudible in the Hollywood air. They have a brassy tone, but they are more than distinct.”All this is good democracy of a sort. We elect Congressmen and Presidents in much the same way, so why not actors, cameramen, writers, and all rest of the people who have to do with the making of pictures? If we permit noise, ballyhoo, and theater to influence us in the selection of the people who are to run the country, why should we object to the same methods in the selection of meritorious achievements in the film business? If we can huckster a President into the White House, why cannot we huckster the agonized Miss Joan Crawford or the hard and beautiful Miss Olivia de Havilland into possession of one of those golden statuettes which express the motion picture industry’s frantic desire to kiss itself on the back of its neck? The only answer I can think of is that the motion picture is an art. I say this with a very small voice. It is an inconsiderable statement and has a hard time not sounding a little ludicrous. Nevertheless it is a fact, not in the least diminished by the further facts that its ethos is so far pretty low and that its techniques are dominated by some pretty awful people.

“If you think most motion pictures are bad, which they are (including the foreign), find out from some initiate how they are made, and you will be astonished that any of them could be good. Making a fine motion picture is like painting “The Laughing Cavalier” in Macy’s basement, with a floorwalker to mix your colors for you. Of course most motion pictures are bad. Why wouldn’t they be?”
~ Raymond Chandler, “Oscar Night In Hollywood,” 1948