New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Reading is fundamental

Kim Hollis: The Book of Eli, the Denzel Washington film about life after an apocalypse, earned $32.8 million from Friday-to-Sunday, making it the third biggest January opener of all-time; its four-day holiday estimate is $38.0 million. How did Warner Bros. accomplish such an impressive debut?

Josh Spiegel: Denzel Washington. That's the answer. Denzel, Denzel, Denzel. I realize that the movie is also religiously themed, but honestly, if I hadn't read reviews stating this, I'm not sure I'd know it. So, it's all about Denzel Washington, who can draw audiences if action's involved. Also, this is the first movie since Sherlock Holmes that may attract teenage audiences. Granted, Avatar took the weekend, but there's only so many times people can see that movie. Denzel reaps those rewards.

Michael Lynderey: That Book of Eli opening may have actually gone under some people's expectations, but it's absolutely incomprehensible to me. Washington's last movie, The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3, had a big name co-star (John Travolta), a comparatively catchy premise, better trailers, and a summer release date, and all it could muster up is a $23 million opening. On the other hand, The Book of Eli just looks like Denzel fighting off some goons in a dusty alley, and it opens with $31 million, bigger than all but one of his films? Okay. Maybe the January landscape is changing in a permanent way - morphing into a region where openings on the scale of this one don't look out of place at all. Movies with big name actors seem to be benefiting the most from this development.





Daron Aldridge: This opening is pure Denzel. I won't repeat his name three times in a row like Josh, out of fear that he will jump out of my mirror a la Bloody Mary or Candyman and give me a righteous, impassioned scolding. The man continues to be a consistent opener film after film, regardless of quality. I would also argue that the film benefited because it came at a time when the usual press promo destination of late night shows was spiking in viewership (thanks to the Irish-hating NBC). Gary Oldman appeared on The Tonight Show with Conan, Mila Kunis stopped by Craig Ferguson, and Mr. Washington visited David Letterman last Thursday AND Jay Leno in primetime on January 7th. So, it didn't hurt to have clips of the movie (which all prominently featured Denzel, of course) in front of more eyes than it would have been...say...in November. Just a idea.

Jason Lee: While I don't agree that Denzel was a huge part of this opening (can you imagine any other lead actor opening this film above $25 million?) I will say that dark, dystopic films tend to do well in January. I think that after the saccharine sweetness of the holidays, moviegoers were ready for a little anarchy.

Matthew Huntley: There are a few reasons for this debut: 1) The ever reliable Denzel Washington factor - the actor has a reputation for starring in consistently entertaining projects, even if they are sometimes underwhelming. But they're mostly solid and audiences will pay for solid; 2) Warner Bros. waited just long enough after the behemoth that continues to be Avatar and offered audiences a down and dirty alternative to the glossy Na'vi and friends; 3) It's Martin Luther King Jr. weekend, and the studio opened a movie starring one of the most popular African American actors of all time just as the country celebrates one of the greatest African Americans of all time. This doesn't seem like a coincidence.

Continued:       1       2