a pro script reader ponders movies, reading, writing and the occasional personal flashback

Friday, May 04, 2007

Weekend Boxoffice #30

Spiderman 3 is opening in a record 4252 theaters; aside from Lucky You, everything else has gotten out of the way.

I was going to do a complete summer prediction for everything, but I decided it was futile: a lot of movies are going to make a lot of money, and ultimately the one that will make the most (out of Spiderman, Pirates, Harry Potter and Shrek 3) is the one that turns out to be the most entertaining.

I have no idea which that'll be -- yet -- so I'm going to stick to week-by-week.

SPIDERMAN 3 (4252 theaters). I don't think it'll set a weekend record, since most people are at school/work today, and the buzz isn't that great. Still, the movie is supposed to be okay, and there will be lines. Call it $102 million for the first 3 days.

LUCKY YOU (2525 theaters). Maybe people who can't get into Spiderman 3 will go see it. Or maybe they'll just buy tickets to it, then sneak into Spiderman 3. Or maybe they'll just go to see The Invisible. $10.3 million.

Anyhow, let's have guesses. How much money will Spiderman 3 make in its first 3 days? Deadline is midnight tonight. Winner wins bragging rights.


At 10:47 AM, Blogger shecanfilmit said...

I'm going to go low and say $79.9 million because of the lackluster reviews. Mick LaSalle of the Chronicle was not too kind. I've read a synoposis of the plot and it sounds pretty strained to me.

At 12:37 PM, Blogger jason said...

I'm in London this week where the two big movie openings are The Transformers and Upside of Anger

How does that work?

At 12:49 PM, Blogger dannyboy52472 said...

I suck at this game, but I'll guess 90 mil (basically splitting the difference between Scott and Shecanfilmit). :-)

Jason, have you seen Transformers? Is it the screaming pile of suck that we all know it will be?


At 1:07 PM, Blogger Scott Eggleston said...

I'm gonna go high, because of the record number of theaters, and the fact that this franchise makes tons of dough.

All the regulars are back, and it features a very popular Spidey villain, Venom.

I also think timing is right, as target demos everywhere will clamor to get to the first big movie of the summer.

And Sam Raimi is very, very good.

$120 million. Easy.

At 6:21 PM, Anonymous Joe Valdez said...

Maybe I'm getting older and fussier, but the Spiderman movies have never appealed to me. I'd be curious to hear someone with good taste over the age of 25 explain what the appeal is here.

For me, Tobey Maguire & Kirsten Dunst seem almost embarrassed to be in these movies and haven't been that good in them. Someone suggested Topher Grace as Peter Parker and I would've liked to have seen that. The fx always looked ridiculously fake, which boggles the mind considering how huge the budgets have been. The music sucks - no Spidey theme - and James DeFranco reminds me of Paul Walker, without the depth, yet there he is appearing in each installment.

Sam Raimi did a beautiful job on A Simple Plan eight years ago, but I've yawned by way through every other movie he's made in recent memory.

I'd love to see 3 gross $9.5 million over the weekend, but somehow I doubt that. $95 million in the U.S.

I'm going to go watch Batman Begins now and hope that cures my crankiness.

At 8:56 PM, Blogger Chris said...

Nikki Finke (columnist for the LA Weekly, who purportedly gets early B.O. numbers from Sony, so take with a grain of salt) is reporting a $50 million Friday take. I'm assuming, though she doesn't say, that includes the midnight showing numbers (which I believe were around $10 million). So it should get close to $90 million by Saturday alone.

At 10:44 PM, Blogger Patrick J. Rodio said...

Huge - 142 million.

Big dropoff next week, but the damage will be done.

At 12:31 AM, Anonymous Matt said...

I have good taste, and I'm over the age of 25. I can't stand Kirsten Dunst, but I've always enjoyed Tobey's acting. So far he's fairly one note, but that one note entertains me. I felt the special effects in part one weren't up to snuff, but in part two they were incredible.
James Franco is much better than Paul Walker. Ever see his work on Freaks and Geeks? Great stuff. I don't know, I don't care much for the summer popcorn movies, but I love the Spiderman movies.
I did giggle when I read where Dunst said without her or Maguire these movies wouldn't do very well. I think they'd do just fine without her.

At 8:26 AM, Anonymous blair said...

Briefly as can be;

I'll agree with Matt on this -- I'm over 25 as well. Granted, I grew up on Spidey (and Batman) comics, so I might have a slight bias, but not to the extreme of some people who complain they deviated from the source material (uh... duh.).

I always hoped Alicia Witt would've been Mary Jane -- I'm still not happy with Kirsten Dunst. I probably never will be. I'm fine with Tobey. I was embarrassed at a bunch of dialogue in Spidey 1, the special effects early on in Spidey 1, but was quite happy with part 2, save for some minor things.

The appeal is the escapism, the fun, the fact that this is many people's four-color hero finally realized.

I enjoyed Batman Begins as well -- but Batman is a completely different beast (and the whole "Gordon in the Batmoblie" bit was ugh).

At 8:58 AM, Blogger Emily Blake said...

$400 gazillion.

Have you seen the cast doing interviews? It's like they're not even trying. They all seem so bored.

At 9:05 AM, Blogger Allen said...

Saw it last night...awful.

Painfully bad. It'll still do really well this weekend though, but by the time Shrek comes out, it'll be blown out of the water by that...

At 11:22 AM, Anonymous Matt said...

Well, if I was being asked the same questions day after day after day dozens of times a day I'd be pretty damn bored after awhile. I think we can blame the people conducting the interviews for their lack of originality.
If you had to sit in a room and be asked about your job ten times a day, every day, for weeks on end do you think you'd get a little bored? I would, no matter how much they were paying me.

At 11:23 AM, Anonymous Matt said...

And the movie was really good, not great. Not as good as the second one, but it was really good.

At 11:37 AM, Blogger Scott the Reader said...

Now they are estimating $59 million for Friday, counting the post-midnight Thursday previews. New record.

Disturbia was in second, with $2 million.

At 11:52 AM, Blogger Max Konwal said...

Spiderman 3 will break the $100 million barrier but I think it will land somewhere around 110. I found this interesting list for this summer's grossing prediction:

At 1:14 PM, Blogger Allen said...

Matt, I believe in subjectivity, to a point. I'm not sure what you're sniffing, but that movie was just plain bad. Here are JUST a few beefs I had with it (minor spoilers)...

* Parker cries about 10 times.

* Mary Jane goes from Broadway star to cocktail waitress/jazz singer in a heartbeat.

* There are 3 villains at one point and aside from Topher Grace, they weren't really scary or bad.

* Yes, we get that Parker lives a simple life, but does he really have no phone in his in studio apartment?! Cmon. If he uses that ghetto pay-phone one more time...

* Why did MJ break up with Parker? If she was being threatened by Harry (which they strongly imply), don't you think she'd just tell her BF aka Spiderman that he's threatening her?

* The spiderweb fight scene towards the end, it seemed really weird/silly/unrealistic that the crowd just right there watching.

There was one good thing though - RON HOWARD'S DAUGHTER.

At 1:40 PM, Anonymous Matt said...

"Matt, I believe in subjectivity, to a point. I'm not sure what you're sniffing, but that movie was just plain bad."

That's your opinion. I liked it, and so have plenty of other people I know. No need for you to make it personal. Pretty sure I'd dislike plenty of movies you like.

At 8:28 PM, Anonymous Blair said...

Saw it. Liked it. Didn't rave about it. A few really darn flat lines (like part one), a couple of lousy special effects (like one), some incredible effects, incredible fight coreography, overly convenient plot bits, unintentionally dangling plot threads and characters, some good performances, some lousy ones, and evil Peter lookin' like the lead singer of an emo band (that's a bad thing).

I'd see it again... but I'm not rushing to see it again. I'd love to see it on IMAX though.

And the word verification wants me to type "drpssy". Read into that what you will.

At 8:56 PM, Blogger Patrick J. Rodio said...

Christ, I am good. They estimate it'll land somewhere between 140-150 million. My guess, as it was posted here last night well before I knew of any numbers, was 142 million.

Yes, yes, thank you, thank you.

At 10:46 AM, Blogger Scott the Reader said...

The current official estimate is $148 million, a new record.

Meanwhile, Lucky You completely tanked, earning an estimated $2.5 million -- less than $1000 per theater. Boy, did they pick the wrong weekend.

At 3:21 PM, Anonymous Matt said...

It doesn't make any sense that they would hold off Lucky You for two years, and then when they finally release it, put it up against possibly the biggest opening movie of all time. They should've released it sometime in March or April.
Crazy opening weekend for Spiderman though. Sure, it will die off when Shrek opens but it has already made more than it's astronomical budget worldwide.

At 3:32 PM, Blogger shecanfilmit said...

Boy was I wrong. I've got to stop factoring my own logic into these estimates each week and ask - what would my brother see?

At 8:08 PM, Blogger E.C. Henry said...

After see Spiderman 3 with my family, I have to side with the beautiful and brilliant, Emily --

$400 gazilion just sounds right!

Spiderman 3's story ROCKS! What they did with the Peter Parker-Mary Jane Watson-Harry Osborn triangle was VERY, VERY creative. Wasn't too crazy about the Sandman was handled in the last fight scene, and wish Topher Grace had more lines, but overall Spiderman 3 more than holds its own as the tent pole, must see movie of 2007.

Can't wait to hear what you have to say about the film, Scott. You should do a post on it.

- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA

At 1:52 PM, Anonymous robotdog said...

uh... it seems to me that the debate of whether spiderman3 is a good movie or not stops stone cold the moment someone brings up....

jazz hands.

not to mention the seventies-style finger-guns he was shooting at girls on the street. and then, what's this, no he didn't... did he...? did he really just holster those finger guns???

At 7:30 PM, Blogger Emily Blake said...

"After see Spiderman 3 with my family, I have to side with the beautiful and brilliant, Emily --

$400 gazilion just sounds right!"

You mean I finally got one?

I like the way you talk, e.c.


Post a Comment

<< Home