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

Friday, May 29, 2009

Weekend Box Office #136

Two fairly big movies opening today, and I have no real idea how well they might do. Which of course won't prevent me from taking a guess.

Plus it's my birthday today. For some reason, I'm getting older every year. There's gotta be some way to address that.

UP (3766 theaters). On the one hand it's Pixar, which is a big plus. On the other hand, it features a kid, a dog and a crusty old man, and seems to skew a little young to really grab the adult audience. Still, it should do fine. My guess: $56 million for the weekend, and it'll hold well.

DRAG ME TO HELL (2508 theaters). On the plus side it's a good title, it's Sam Raimi, and it's getting very good reviews. But a PG-13 horror movie? Let's call it a solid $22.6 million.


Last weekend, NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM 2 did $70 million. TERMINATOR: SALVATION did only $51 million. I saw it, and it's not great or terrible; it just is, and it'll probably drop pretty quickly.


At 12:54 PM, Blogger marcoguarda said...

(()(())()())))))()()( )
|\ /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\|

The cake is a little wobbly. I hope it displays quite right despite the formatting.



At 3:36 PM, Anonymous jefe said...

I say UP hits $80 this weekend.

At 4:33 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

we gotta remember that half, or more of the audience, for UP, will be kids.

That equals half-price tickets for half the audience.

I call it at 55 million (translation: an 80 million dollar weekend if everyone had to pay the same price as TS).


At 5:37 PM, Blogger E.C. Henry said...

Hey, happy birthday big boy!

21 yet? If ya are I'm good fer takin' you for good ol' fashion cup of good cheer (of cource you have to BE in the greater Bonney Lake, Washington area to collect on that...)

"Up" and "Drag Me to..." have like ZERO appeal to me.

Glad to hear you saw "Terminator: Salvation," Scott. I was a litte underwhelmed by it too. WISH they would have explained Skynet's agenda. THAT was hinted at/moreless promiced in the IBMD summary of "Terminator: Salvation," which had me salivating for months.

(Cut and pasted off IMBD) "... As Skynet prepares its final onslaught, Connor and Marcus both embark on an odyssey that takes them into the heart of Skynet’s operations, where they uncover the terrible secret behind the possible annihilation of mankind."

Explaining Skynet's motivation, and what's behind it COULD be an interesting pickle for those of a sci-fi bend. WISH it would have gone into more in the movie, BUT say you were in charge, Scott, how would you exlain it?

Almoast done with a 250 page plus draft of a sript. Will be shooting you an e-mail seeing how you want it; 120 page scaled down, the entire large script (cleaned up of cource) or feature length with DVD extras (like I've given you before). Also hard at work on a romantic comedy. May have them done at the same time.

- E.C. Henry

At 8:14 PM, Blogger Grubber said...

Happy Birthday Scott, always good to be around to make another one!

At 10:56 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you have zero interest in a Pixar movie, you have zero business calling yourself a storyteller.

At 10:57 AM, Anonymous jefe said...

Peter -- good call on the 1/2 price tix thing! Didn't think of that.

At 10:58 AM, Anonymous jefe said...

I also have to agree with Mr. Anon on the Pixar thing.

At 1:10 PM, Blogger Matt said...

"If you have zero interest in a Pixar movie, you have zero business calling yourself a storyteller."

Idiotic statement. And I do like Pixar but I know several terrific writers that don't.

Blanket statements make you look like an idiot.

At 7:43 AM, Anonymous jefe said...

Whatever, Matt. I stand by it. Appreciate the name calling, though.

I'm not saying you have to LIKE Pixar movies. But if you don't find value in what that do... if you can't look at a film like The Incredibles and appreciate the craft behind the structure and storytelling... if you're not at the very least interested enough to see how they do it, to analyze their choices... if their track record isn't enough to "appeal" to you... then yeah, I'd bet you're not much of a storyteller. You don't care enough about the craft to be.

At 9:50 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Blanket statements make you look like an idiot."

The above is a blanket statement.

Draw your own conclusion.

At 10:30 AM, Blogger Matt said...


It's just your opinion. It can't be backed up by anything. So what if William Goldman doesn't like Pixar movies? Does that make his entire career worthless? Of course not.

Pixar are not the only movies that have great structure, or storytelling. Movies were great pre-Toy Story. Maybe you need to expand your knowledge of film.

I could just as easily say, if you don't enjoy the work or appreciate the work of Billy Wilder, then you're probably not much of a storyteller. After all, he made one masterpiece after another, in different genres, over several decades.

But, of course, it's not true in that case either. Does that make Pixar superior to Wilder?


That's some interesting logic there. Unfortunately, it doesn't hold up to any real scrutiny. Blanket statements are for lazy thinkers. It's easier to make a broad statement (especially when it can't be backed up) than to actually think it through.

Yes, I see the circular logic you're pointing to. And as adults, I think we both know the difference.

At 11:33 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Goodness Matt. I was just making a dig at EC. Don't get your panties in a wad.

At 12:05 PM, Blogger Matt said...

My panties are completely unwadded...but if I had known it was a dig at EC I would've played along.

At 12:06 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Yes, I see the circular logic you're pointing to."

You're not guilty of "circular logic" -- that's "begging the question"; but you are guilty of another logical fallacy --i.e., the "stolen concept". This means that you're making use of the very concept -- that you're attempting to invalidate -- in your attempt to invalidate it.

"And as adults, I think we both know the difference."

The above is another logical fallacy known as "Appeal to Authority".

And your reply to Jefe is stuffed with other examples of faulty argumentation.

not to be confused with Anon...
or Anon.

At 5:41 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jefe is a faggot.

At 8:27 PM, Anonymous jefe said...

Wow. I earned that how?

At 11:09 PM, Blogger MattDW said...

Heh-heh. Comments here are the best. I love this pattern that emerges about once a month or so:

1) EC posts a few unusual opinions.

2) Someone overreacts and insults EC.

3) A third person insults someone for insulting EC.

4) All hell breaks loose.

Meanwhile, EC just chills out in Bonney Lake.

At 12:15 AM, Anonymous Christine F said...

MattDW ...

You kill me!! That was some funny and on the nose observation. LOL.

At 8:49 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Maybe EC, the critic of EC, and critic of EC's critic are all the same person.


At 10:02 AM, Blogger E.C. Henry said...

MattDW, LOVE the insightfull breakdown of the (sometimes) dynamics of blogee posts on this site... and you're right!

I find it shocking that what I have to say provokes the responces it does. Aren't the fellow people who visit this site writers? Creatives who are about CONTSRUCTING stories. (Empasis on the word constructing)
Usually I just let the arrows fly, figuring it's part of working on developing a tough skin: a writer's responce to critism.

What I'm learning through all this is that Scott has a lot of friends who have VERY strong opinions about matters of taste as pertains to movies. Most of the time I feel their passions are misdirected. I wonder why they hold to their opinions so tightly that can't come to understand the reasoning behind a different stream of thought?

Lemme leave those who read Scott's blog with this thought: are you a constructor or a destructor? And what makes you feel just in being part of that grouping?

- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA

At 3:26 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Now I often agree that some of what E.C. says is mind-blowing in a "you can't possibly mean that" kind of way.


For all you Pixar lovers (and there is nothing wrong with that), let's take a closer look at their storytelling.

I'll give you two examples. "Toy Story" is a rip-off of Jim Henson's "The Christmas Toy". If you haven't seen it, check it out. Disney owns it so of course, nothing was said. But everything was there - an old toy jealous by a new toy, both space age in fact who don't even realize they are toys, etc. This is more than a toys come to life story ala "The Velveteen Rabbit". This was a rip-off. And personally, I like Henson's better for little kids, as the toys aren't complete jackasses.

Secondly, "A Bug's Life". This is a remake of "The Three Amigos". Seriously, think about it. (And no, I don't think "The Three Amigos" is a great film; I'm just saying it has the exact same plot.)

Now, it has often been said that there are no fresh stories in Hollywood, so take this as you will. I'm just saying their storytelling abilities could use a little more scrutiny. But most important to remember is Pixar has a style, just like anyone else. And that means it will not appeal to everyone. Nothing can.

At 9:33 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Looks like Scott doesn't bother to read this crap anymore either. He's deleted less offensive stuff than that "faggot" crack in the past.


Post a Comment

<< Home