BOP Shop Talk
We're Simpsons fans. What a shock.
By BOP Staff
July 28, 2007
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Think Itchy and Scratchy: The Movie, but with more Maggie
Dan Krovich: Anyone here ever heard of this movie? I'm curious as to people's thoughts on the box office.
David Mumpower: To date, the most fascinating aspect of The Simpsons Movie has been watching the tracking bounce all over the place. As recently as three weeks ago, you could find a major movie tracker indicating this much anticipated movie was unlikely to gross over $30 million. Now, the bets seem to be hedged between $50 and $60 million. Effectively, everyone involved is throwing up their hands and saying, "Don't ask me. I know it's my job to tell you what this one should make, but it's anomalous to any title before it. So, you are asking the impossible out of me."
What is perhaps strangest about tracking for The Simpsons is that its score among the 6-12 group is roughly equivalent to what Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix and Ratatouille were. Similarly, teens apparently cannot wait to illegally download it...err, watch it in theaters this weekend. Meanwhile, adults seem largely enthusiastic about it, but they are much more cautious in this regard than younger consumers. I suspect that this is the effect that several members of our site will indicate in this discussion: for many adults, The Simpsons has run its course. People who feel that way simply cannot muster excitement to pay to see an extended episode of a show for which they are no longer passionate.
For myself, I remain a die-hard fan of the series and believe that it has maintained the highest level of quality of any six years or beyond series since Cheers. I will be there on opening night and I will probably see it multiple times in theaters, possibly many times if its quality is as good as early reviews have indicated.
Michael Bentley: I'm not as optimistic as David, but I can't imagine that it only makes $30-40 million opening. I'm currently thinking about $52 million. The people that still watch the show are diehards, and I would think most of them will be seeing the movie. The BIG question is how far it drops in later weeks. Do people see it multiple times, or does it drop like 70%?
Kim Hollis: The trailer has just killed in front of a couple of the recent blockbusters (the Spider-Pig bit in particular gets massive laughs). I really do think it's a $60+ million opener.
Dan Krovich: I just must not be paying attention. I haven't seen a single trailer or commercial for it. I have no idea what it's about other than obviously The Simpsons.
David Mumpower: You haven't seen the Spider-Pig commercials? That bit kills to an epic degree.
Kim Hollis: Wow, I've seen the trailer at least 17 times over the last few weeks.
Michael Bentley: I haven't seen the trailer on TV once yet (besides a couple times during The Simpsons episodes earlier this year). Though I suspect that's also partly because I haven't watched any primetime network tv in at least two months.
Kim Hollis: No, I'm talking about in front of movies. I saw probably four commercials last night while watching TiVo'd episodes of the Daily Show and Colbert (plus another for Who's Your Caddy?). Also, Matt Groening was a guest on The Daily Show, which was pretty fun.
Dan Krovich: I honestly don't think I've seen a frame of this movie, which is actually kind of nice. I did see the article in EW, but I haven't read it so thus far I'm going into the movie completely blind other than knowing the characters from the television show.
Anthony Bourdain gonna sue somebody
David Mumpower: Is there any cause for optimism with No Reservations?
Dan Krovich: This obviously is very formulaic and the trailer seems to give away every plot point, but I think it looks cute. I like the German movie it is based on, and even though it's unoriginal it looks to be well done. It has a good cast (I think Eckhart is hugely underrated) and a good director. I also think it will go over well with audiences.
Shane Jenkins: I was more interested in seeing this until I actually viewed the trailer. Abigail Breslin frightens me a little, after those Ultimate Gift previews. I now always expect her to dispense sage words of spiritual wisdom to troubled souls, which cuts down on the enjoyment in seeing Catherine Zeta-Jones and Aaron Eckhart trade culinary barbs. In just one year, she already has reached the Dakota Fanning status of "not believable as a real human child." Plus, the trailer makes this look "touching" rather than "funny," and my Sub-Zero heart prefers to stay unwarmed, thank you very much.
Dan Krovich: I'm not sure if Abigail has reached Dakota Fanning levels yet. I still believe that Abigail is a child and I don't get the feeling that at any time she might unhinge her jaw and swallow me whole.
David Mumpower: Catherine Zeta-Jones, on the other hand, uses exactly this methodology in order to keep up the pretense of being born in the 20th century.
I understand she was the inspiration for the Michelle Pfeiffer character in Stardust.
Kim Hollis: It will probably see a (very) low teens opening because it's going to appeal to 30+ women, a demographic that hasn't been particularly well served in some time. It really does look dreadful, though.
David Mumpower: Aaron Eckhart is an actor I seem to enjoy a great deal more than mainstream movie-goers do. He starred in a wonderful little project called Conversations with Other Women and BOP voted his performance in Thank You for Smoking as the fourth best of 2006. I think he does a wonderful job of walking the fine line between cynically smarmy and just the right kind of bad boy bravado.
Having said all of that, his career cleanly divides between daring indie film work and transparent paycheck movies within the studio system...including Paycheck. You don't have to be Stephen Hawking to figure out under which category No Reservations falls. Catherine Zeta-Jones and him make for a handsome couple, but my expectations for the financial success of this title are best described as non-existent. Frankly, I'll be a bit disappointed in consumers if it does succeed. There is nothing unique or special demonstrated in the commercials. It's just a low-grade romantic comedy with a couple of pretty faces.
Michael Bentley: It has wait-until-DVD written all over it.
Calvin Trager: I was working on a restaurant romantic comedy script (but more of a broad wedding crashers kind of comedy) a while back when I first saw this trailer. So I'm a little biased in not thinking it looks very good.
Here's my question: has anyone ever seen Aaron Eckhart and Thomas Jane in the same room at the same time?
What, exactly, would be the driving factor in casting one over the other? Do they have the same agent that just rotates the offers between them?
Dan Krovich: Eckhart is the better actor. Jane is hotter.
Shane Jenkins: I would argue this point.
Dan Krovich: You're welcome to do so. Please provide pictorial evidence of the shirtless variety.
David Mumpower: Are we back on the rumors of his being a male prostitute when he was discovered now?
Jennifer Turnock: Heh. I almost mentioned that. Technically, I only meant that I think Eckhart is not only a better actor, I think he's got more name recognition as well.
David Mumpower: I've been debating who is more famous since this was first mentioned.
Eckhart has been a featured player in the biggest movie, Erin Brockovich. I doubt anyone recognizes him from that, though. Otherwise, he's the guy from The Core, The Black Dahlia and Paycheck. Until The Dark Knight comes out, I'm not sold on his celebrity.
I feel Eckhart still has Jane beat, however. I don't see the mediocrity of The Punisher as carrying Jane into the public consciousness. For that matter, the fact that he's been replaced for the sequel tells me that Lionsgate doesn't think he's popular, either.
Kim Hollis: Jane quit the sequel (and shocked the studio, given that he's not, you know doing much else). It almost put the movie out of production, so it's not like he was invited to leave.
I guess he figures he's okay with Patricia Arquette bringing home the bacon.
Dan Krovich: Jane does have the lead in The Mist. Of course the last Stephen King movie he did was Dreamcatcher. Of course this Stephen King movie is directed by Frank Darabont. Of course it's also being released by The Weinstein Company, which doesn't seem to know how to release movies.
David Mumpower: Of course.
Jennifer Turnock: Granted, this is based only on a biased sample of one, but without going back and checking IMDb, the only Thomas Jane movie I can name off the top of my head is Deep Blue Sea. (Hi, Dano!)
Eckhart probably isn't a lot more famous, but I think more people would at least recognize his picture, even if they weren't exactly sure of his name or what movies they've seen him in.
Shane Jenkins: I think Thank You For Smoking was high profile enough to garner Eckhart some additional name recognition, even if it wasn't gangbusters at the B.O. Anyway, being in The Dark Knight next summer should elevate him to at least the Cillian Murphy level of fame, whatever that might be.
Jerry Simpson: Shame on all of you for not mentioning that Thomas Jane was in Arrested Development!
Sadly, that's the only thing I can remember him from.
Aaron has Thank You for Smoking and has a considerably higher quote. He's the much bigger star at this point. He's also much more talented, in my book.
Those aren't her pants, but that is her ankle bracelet
David Mumpower: I Know Who Killed Me is not going to prove Lindsay Lohan to be the same kind of draw that Mean Girls did, is it?
[Editor's Note: This portion of the discussion took place starting on Monday night, just before Ms. Lohan found herself atop the headlines again.)
Dan Krovich: This definitely seems to be getting dumped. I'm wondering if it's just bad or whether they decided that Lindsay Lohan is just PR poison and that there was no way to promote it without using her so they gave up on it. I almost didn't notice that it was opening this weekend.
David Mumpower: I have yet to see a single commercial for this. The only place where I have seen it advertised is (oddly) Yahoo! Movies. There for a while, it was their featured title, which I guess was a cheap way for Sony to act like they support it a little bit.
In addition, the tracking on it clearly reads as an indictment on Lindsay Lohan. Teens and adults, men and women alike agree that they know about this movie but they will not see it. That's almost an accomplishment in its own way. She's gotten the negative attention she wants, but it's not going to help her career any. Frankly, she's radioactive at this point, the Hollywood equivalent to Michael Vick if you will.
Kim Hollis: In no way do I see this doing well. Initially, I thought a move like this was a good idea for Lindsay Lohan - move to some projects out of her comfort zone that could establish her acting skills. Unfortunately, she seems determined to continue on a path to self-destruction. I think it's many years, if ever, before we see a comeback for her.
Michael Bentley: Lohan is such a train wreck right now, that I'm surprised they don't dump it straight to video.
David Mumpower: Generally, there are contract agreements in place preventing larger titles such as this from going straight to the home video market. A theatrical dump these days is generally done in 1,200-1,500 venues. Alternately, a release strategy akin to another Lohan title, Georgia Rule, sees a moderately wide release (in this example, 2,531 exhibitions), but it comes with little to no advertising. Given the venue count of 1,320 for I Know Who Killed Me, it's going to be buried even worse. That's a scary thought considering that Georgia Rule wound up with only $18.9 million worth of domestic receipts.
Les Winan: Lohan's career is nearly dead. The only people who don't know it are the paparazzi.
Kim Hollis: And now (seriously, this is being reported as we discuss this) she's been arrested for yet another DUI (and it appears as though she was carrying cocaine). This movie is dead in the water.
Les Winan: How do they not send her to jail after they sent Paris Hilton away?
David Mumpower: This sounds like someone (paparazzi?) was tracking her and reported her drunk driving to the cops.
Was Drew Barrymore this messed up as a teen?
Reagen Sulewski: If I may claim the rather obvious waggish comment: I Know Who Killed My Career.
Which is likely to do worse - this movie or Michelle Wie?
Dan Krovich: Please don't all write a 20 page thesis about this movie.
David Mumpower: See, the title is word play. It's like Who's Your Daddy, but it substitutes in golf terminology as well.
Frankly, if the rest of the film demonstrates as much wit and vision as the title, we skip awards season and go ahead and give it a dozen Oscars.
Susan Ward's best hope for a career at this point is for a series of The In Crowd sequels made exclusively for Playboy TV.
Kim Hollis: I have, um, actually seen several commercials for this movie, which completely throws me for a loop. Naturally it looks awful, but I don't think you can discount it making $5 million or so. I'm stunned it's not a straight-to-DVD title. I mean, it's Big Boi, not Andre 3000.
Shane Jenkins: At least Jeffrey Jones is getting some post-molestation work. Nice going Jeff! See you in Jeepers Creepers 3!
Tim Briody: Actually, until the Simpsons advertising kicked into high gear two weeks ago, this was the upcoming release I'd seen the most advertising for. I need to watch better channels.
Michael Bentley: I'm not sure I've even heard of this movie until now.
Calvin Trager: How did Ice Cube not make it into this one?
I like that they even updated the classic Caddyshack tagline "This summer it's the Street vs the Elite".