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

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.

Continued:       1       2       3