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

Tony Scott=Real American Hero (who happens to be British)

Kim Hollis: Unstoppable, the latest Tony Scott/Denzel Washington collaboration, opened to $22.7 million. Do you consider this result good, bad or about right?

Josh Spiegel: This number is almost exactly what The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 made in its opening weekend, and Denzel Washington is a movie star, but this is just about what he brings in with his movies these days with only one or two exceptions. So, yeah, this seems pretty well in line with what the movie was going to make. I've heard some good word-of-mouth for the film, so it may hold up well over the holiday season and get solid legs. That said, I doubt this movie will top $100 million, as only three of Washington's films have ever done so (and The Pelican Brief only barely topped it). I would expect better numbers than what Pelham did, but this seems almost boringly expected.

Bruce Hall: Den-Z-Washing-Tone meets James T. Kirk - a serviceable opening weekend haul, if you want to look at it in a vacuum. The problem is that the film cost around $100 million to make. Even eventually taking the international gross into account, this one stands a good chance of ending up on the wrong side of its production budget. I don't know that there's a lot more you can draw from this right now; this is just one man's opinion but I think the jury is out on Unstoppable until we see how it performs second frame.

Luckily, I don't see anything significant opening next week except for some silly movie about a boy wizard and his friends. And come on, who the hell wants to see that?





Matthew Huntley: I think the result is both good and bad (which I guess is another way of saying it's about right). It's good because the movie was able to overcome its rather formulaic/"inspired by true events" story, proving once again audiences are willing to pay for product that still sells itself with this tag line, even though they can anticipate the story's overall direction. It's bad because the movie reportedly cost $100 million to produce, and even with good legs through the holidays, it will struggle to recoup its budget. I'm actually surprised Fox put up so much money for this one, since Scott and Washington haven't exactly been huge box office draws in a while.

Edwin Davies: I personally thought that it might have opened a teensy bit higher - not much so, but I didn't think that the $30 million mark was out of the question - based on the largely positive reviews, which, with the exception of Crimson Tide, have always eluded the Scott-Washington team-up, and a concept that sounded like it would appeal to action fans looking for some simple, undemanding fun. However, as everyone else has said, $22.7 million is very much within their wheelhouse based on their previous work, and whilst the reviews could give it decent legs over the coming weeks, I don't see this one making its budget back until foreign box office gets added into the equation.

So, to answer your question, Kim, it is about right as an opening, but they probably wanted a better start before Harry Potter starts Apparating into every available screen.

Continued:       1       2