Monday Morning Quarterback Part IV
By BOP Staff
October 18, 2012
BoxOfficeProphets.com
Kim Hollis: CBS Films' Seven Psychopaths, a film that reunites In Bruges' director Martin McDonagh and star Colin Farrell, opened to $4.2 million this weekend. What do you think about this debut?
Edwin Davies: It's lower than the film probably deserves considering the people involved and its quality, but at the same time it's not a film that was ever going to break out in a huge way. (I'm kind of perplexed that it opened so widely to begin with considering that it's exactly the sort of film that would benefit from a platform release.) It's a dark comedy about screenwriting, both of which are things that mainstream audiences never seem to latch on to, and much like In Bruges it will probably develop a bigger following on home media. The main upside is that it didn't cost much, so it should make much of its production budget back before it leaves theaters. Admittedly, that's a slightly small victory.
Felix Quinonez: Although it seems a bit disappointing it's right in line with my expectations. I think it looks great but I just don't think this ever had the appeal to become a hit. I think it has "cult classic" written all over it. But it has a pretty small budget so it should wind up fine. And when you throw in the secondary markets, it might even be somewhat of a hit, relatively speaking.
Jason Barney: The $15 million budget seems a high number to match based on the low opening numbers, but we will see how the daily numbers look as we get into the week. This doesn't come across as a film that was designed to be big anyway, but those involved are probably looking around and wondering why the numbers were not a little higher. I will probably see this film. Christopher Walken will hopefully earn another Saturday Night Live hosting gig from this, which would be great.
Bruce Hall: In Bruges was far better than its box office would lead you to believe. Seven Psychopaths has the same audience (the coveted 18-35 demographic), and indications are that like its predecessor, it reached and resonated with them. Regardless of how wide the release of Seven Psychopaths is eventually expanded, I expect it to continue to do the same. With a $15 million budget, an appealing cast and a cushy hipster pedigree, it should turn out to be something Martin McDonagh can build on.
Max Braden: The trailer didn't sell it. Sure you have seven crazy guys, but I still want to know what happens when they get together, and I didn't get any sense of plot from the advertising other than maybe it's a one-crazy-night kind of movie. Then it starts to look a little like Snatch, but Snatch had style. This looked like RED but with a third of the jokes. Why should the audience bother? And that's how the box office turned out.
Kim Hollis: Max, I disagree. I was excited for this film based on the trailer (as well as McDonagh's involvement), and though I didn't see it over the weekend, I am seeing it on Friday. I do think this movie would have been better off in limited release, like In Bruges. With the positive reception it's receiving, I expect its theatrical release to play out like an advertisement for its video debut.
That's...slightly less money than Hermione usually makes in a movie.
Kim Hollis: The Perks of Being a Wallflower expanded to 726 locations and managed a $2.2 million weekend. It has a running total so far of $6.1 million. How should Summit Entertainment feel about this release?
Edwin Davies: This is nice story of a little film that could since the film has been performing very well in limited release, but I get the feeling that this result might not be good enough to carry the film into more theaters. As such, it'll probably not become the kind of hit that by all accounts it deserves to be, but it might be enough to make it a surprise contender during awards season.
Felix Quinonez: I think they should feel rather good about this performance. I don't know what the budget is on this but I can't imagine it's anything out of this world. I think this still has some life in it and a wider expansion still seems like a legit option.
Max Braden: That's right in line with Paul Dano's romantic comedy Ruby Sparks from late this summer. Both are small projects appealing to small groups but will probably continue to earn a little money from rentals. They're not making anybody rich, but nobody's suffering either.
Kim Hollis: I think this is an appealing small project that is doing just fine in limited theaters. It's probably true that Perks has hit its limit with regard to earning power, but that's okay. The film has made more than $6 million so far, and it's another one that is likely to do very well once it's available for home viewing.
No Impact
Kim Hollis: Atlas Shrugged: Part II opened in 1,012 locations with trailers that wondered whether it would impact the upcoming election. It debuted with $1.7 million, good for a $1,680 venue average. What do you think about this?
Edwin Davies: I guess this is what happens when you defy the will of the free market. Truly, the irony is delicious.
This is a pretty awful result considering that the film made roughly the same as its predecessor despite being released in over three times as many theaters. This suggests the audience was pretty much solely the Randian acolytes since the first film failed to find a big audience either in theaters of on DVD, so there was no additional demand for this one. And that's before the poisonous reviews (the film currently holds a rare 0% on Rotten Tomatoes) started filtering through. It was a film no one was interested in seeing, a follow-up to a film no one saw, burdened with a ludicrous self-importance that was not supported by its content or quality.
Jason Barney: I have mixed feelings about this result. Atlas Shrugged is one of my favorite books, and ever since I read it in college I have wished it would make it onto the big screen. I know a lot of people tend to detest the message of Rand's books, but they hold a special place in my reading history. That said, I think this is an awful marketing situation, needlessly politicized, and I hope it fails.
I saw Atlas Shrugged Part I, hoping that it was going to be better than it was. In my view it didn't suck, it was just good to see the story on screen. However, the idea that Part II of the film might be enough to influence the outcome of the presidential election is really sad. As has been reported, there does not appear to be any improvement over the take of the first film, so I don't think the aim of the creative team involved will be realized.
This will end up being a footnote for a week, maybe two, then it will be gone.
Felix Quinonez: I think this is pretty hilarious. They clearly didn't understand, or care, how audiences felt about the first part. It's almost like they think if they just ignore audience reaction they can will it in to becoming a hit. I kind of hope they go ahead with the third part.
Bruce Hall: I actually enjoy The Fountainhead, but Atlas Shrugged is a book that will fight you tooth and nail to keep you from finishing it. I am no exception and I still bear the psychological scars of forcing myself to finish something that considers itself essential reading, but never stops looking down on the reader. It's that kind of self importance that makes Rand a niche player even among her core audience of hard-line Objectivists and closet Libertarians. The irony Rand seemed not to notice is that for a person who put so much faith in the Market, she had a tremendous ability to overlook the fact that the Market unequivocally rejects that which it does not find useful.
In other words, considering yourself a genius is not what makes you a genius. On the lighter side, Rand's philosophy is the driving force behind most of Rush's best albums, so I guess I can't knock her completely.
Tim Briody: So you're saying audiences...shrugged? I'll see myself out.
Max Braden: I don't blame the advertising for trying to tie into the election to boost sales. It was about the only play they had. I think the tough sell here is unlike politically-tinged documentaries like An Inconvenient Truth or even Kirk Cameron's religious movies, there's no build up of evidence or testimonials to produce an argumentative philosophy. Atlas Shrugged starts with the philosophy and says, here, let me translate it for you so it's more palatable. I think audiences feel that and don't want to be force fed and made to join the cult. Movies like The Master draw audiences because they want to see the downfall of an overly charismatic but detached-from-reality cult leader. Atlas Shrugged is the kind of movie that even its own cheerleaders feel a little guilty about trying to get others to watch.
Kim Hollis: I'm honestly surprised they decided to go ahead with the second film. I guess the producers were passionate about it. They raised the money they needed and I honestly don't really think that releasing Atlas Shrugged is about the box office. It's just about getting the story put to screen. I do wonder how Rand followers feel about the movies.