Box Office Ten
Tuesday, September 17, 2013 at 12:48AM No, no. Not the top ten actual grosses from last weekend but ten things worth noting.
1. Any article about this weekend's movies that does not mention Short Term 12 is just a giant waste of time. Expanding into 30+ more cities, this awesome indie climbed the box office charts escalating its gross to a healthy ½ million to date. Congratulations to writer/director Destin Cretton and Brie Larson (interviewed right here at TFE) and everyone involved with this wonderful movie. But most of all let's thank Cinedigm and their publicity team for really getting behind this one. Securing distribution is only half the battle. Once you've got a distributor, you had better hope someone really believes in your movie. And several someones did.
2. Insidious Chapter 2 opened at #1 with a huge $40.2 million, making it Patrick Wilson's second smash hit horror movie of the year. He's found his niche, however different that niche is than I expected when I first fell for him.
3. The Family, Michelle Pfeiffer's pfirst leading role since Chéri (2009) and only her third in the past ten years (jesus!) opened in second place with $14 million. That's neither here nor there as openings go but at least she's in a movie again! We'll talk about that one soon.
seven more brief notations about current movies after the jump
4. Lee Daniels' The Butler crossed the $100 million mark. That's always a major feat for pure dramas in this day and age that don't feature superheroes. Okay, okay, you could argue that Oprah Winfrey is a superhero but the only flight-ready costume was that black and white crocheted pantsuit
5. Elysium still exists. I had forgotten all about it despite not hating it at first (it did not age well in the brain). And people bought $2.1 million worth of tickets to it. Who are these people and shouldn't they be at...
6. The World's End instead (which only took in 1.3 in its 4th week)? Despite all the geek hype it has been struggling with only 23.9 million in the till despite making its fan base very very happy. I didn't love it but I am not one of the Cornetto Trilogy cultists despite liking the other two a fair amount.
7. The Mortal Instruments City of Bones lost nearly 1000 theaters in its 4th weekend proving decisively that it is not the next Twilight/Hunger Games (and will be limping to a final gross somewhere in the 30 million range i.e. half its budget). Now everyone will move on to hoping that Divergent is. But there's no shortage of teen female dystopias awaiting adaptation if that one doesn't pan out either.
8. Mother of George won the best Per Screen Average for the weekend although it was only on 1 screen. I've only heard good word. Bradford Young shot it so you know, at the very least, that it'll be one of the most beautiful movies in theaters.
9. The Spectacular Now is still expanding but it's per screen average indicates it's probably about done with just under $6 million grossed. I was going to be all "i can't believe that didn't catch on" but then I realized that the best high school movies rarely do. They grow in fame later when people can rent and stream them.
10. I have not met one person who has seen We're The Millers and I haven't even overheard one casual mention of it in conversation (and I love to eavesdrop on movie talk from strangers in NYC) yet it has earned $131 million to date which only goes to show you that a) we live in bubbles and b) Jennifer Aniston will haunt us forever with one bad movie after another making bank. The world would be an infinitely better place if the general public had decided they were most interested in the creative output of Lisa Kudrow post-Friends.
What did you see this weekend?
Reader Comments (30)
I was really hoping I would have the chance to see Short Term 12 while in Toronto for TIFF, but it wasn't playing there yet. Now I'm back in the hellhole that is Atlantic Canada where there is no chance of the film playing in regular theatres. Guess I will have to wait to order the DVD online or rent it on iTunes.
The Family ... Kinda what I expected..
Pfeiffer was best part of movie
Will not be around for too long
I keep trying to imagine who could have possibly gone to We're The Millers and I just can't fathom. I grasp Aniston's popularity, but can't figure out quite who the fans are. Females (/Friends fans) in their 30s? (20s? 40s?) They really shelled out cash to watch a gross-out comedy about a drug deal-related road trip? It's not exactly Friends-ish.
Can anyone enlighten me?
Watched "And While We Were Here" (a beautiful film with a luminous performance by Kate Bosworth) and "The Bling Ring" (an okay movie that I got bored with 2/3rd of the way).
I have seen "We're the Millers". I think many young women would enjoy it. It is not as gross out as many comedies. It is raunchy but rarely offensive or derogatory to women. The male to female sexuality is not really aggresive or threatening. In many ways it is quite sweet. I had no idea of how they were going to end it but I think it worked.
I am female but not young and I was given a free ticket.
You're rirght, Patrick Wilson's niche should be wearing tight 70s pants in all his movies regardless of genre or actual period.;)
@Jake D Acccording to BoxOfficeMojo, in the opening weekend:
"The movie's audience was 51 percent male and 61 percent over the age of 25. It received a good "A-" CinemaScore, and its good hold throughout the five-day start suggests that word-of-mouth is strong."
Not that that tells you very much.
I've seen Blue Jasmin yesterday in NYC and i'm looking forward to see The Family.
We saw "The Family"--everything you've heard about the uncertain mish-mash of tones is true, and it wraps up way too quickly. And it probably would've benefitted from about 2 minutes of trims on the most explicit violence, just to keep it more or less in the "black comedy" milieu instead of tipping into hardcore brutality. However, the acting is very good, and some of the lines and situations have real zing.
"Short Term 12" should be on everyone's "must" list right now, for the next 10+ days until "Don Jon" opens. It's a sensational film, and if there's any justice (and there rarely is), Brie Larson will be sitting with the other Best Actress nominees on Oscar night, alongside front runners Sandra Bullock, Nicole Kidman, Cate Blanchett, and Naomi Watts.
I saw Vanya on 42nd Street - wow. Those actors - Moore, Brooke Smith (who knew she had THAT in her after Silence of the Lambs?), Wallace Shawn. I'm not sure the setting/costumes/overall approach really worked for me, but I guess it did help to strip away the aesthetics that could distance you from the characters and make their situation more immediate and relatable (although what does it say about me that I need to strip away the surface details to relate to the characters? I'm not sure I like that about myself).
The director of Mother of George just signed on to the Fela Kuti biopic that Steve McQueen was supposed to do with Chiwetel Ejiofor. I'm really happy for him. Whether Ejiofor remains or not, it's going to be a big step forward.
I really need to see this one now, but there's no Canadian release as far as I know.
Lovelace
Peter Saarsgard is superb in it.
The Family - Malavita
Pfeiffer is great in it and the black comedy characteristics function very well.
I saw the other Brie Larson indie film that's out right now... SPECTACULAR NOW. Probably should've made it a double feature with SHORT TERM 12. My bad.
I finally got around to Short Term 12. I liked it a lot, I just don't know why our theater was so dusty. *Wipes away another tear* I'm going to recommend it to almost everyone I know.
"(although what does it say about me that I need to strip away the surface details to relate to the characters? I'm not sure I like that about myself)"
It's human nature: the more detailed something is, the more specific our own situations have to be to relate to it. That's why Snow White is a universal story and Do the Right Thing isn't, even though the latter has truths underlying it as universal as any.
This is also why cartoon characters are so relatable: Mickey Mouse, Bugs Bunny, Charlie Brown -- just a few lines and simple shapes. The more detailed and photoreal a cartoon character, the least universally relatable it is. Without specific details, we're free to impose upon a character our own details
Just human nature.
I'm not saying this to undermine your article or anyone's achievements, but when is the $100 million mark not going to be considered a huge feat anymore? It certainly means a lot less than it did ten or even five years ago. It's still an enormous accomplishment for a movie like The Butler to reach it since it's an adult drama, but if you recalculate the grosses to see how much these movies would have made 10 years ago, none of the movies in the top 10 (including We're the Millers) have crossed the $100 million mark yet. I'm not saying $100 million isn't a big deal, but I am saying that in a 2 or 3 years, we're probably going to have to increase our idea of a box office hit to $150 million. It used to be that $200 million was a box office smash and $300 million was a phenomenon. Now Iron Man 3 made over $400 million, and it wasn't even much of a big deal (for the record, going readjusting the gross to 2003-level ticket prices, it made just under $300 million, which is still what it FEELS like it made to me).
Anyway, that aside, Blue Jasmine is probably going to end up with just under $40 million, which doesn't put it in Midnight in Paris territory, but it's still pretty damn good for a Woody Allen movie. However, I don't hear people talking about it as much as they talked about Midnight in Paris 2 years ago, so I'm not sure if it's beloved enough to carry over into a big awards season.
@Sam - thanks! I feel better already.
I saw Short Term 12 and was floored by it! I am really hoping that Brie Larson can get the Oscar nod cause she has in my opinion the best role male or female so far this year. This is the type of film that EVERYONE should be supporting right now.
You've met me and I've seen "Millers" which I loved. I personally thought it was the funniest mainstream comedy of the year and I enjoyed it in the same way I did "Horrible Bosses" a few years ago. I think Aniston is terrific when she does something beyond the Rachel and actually lets herself be sexual and even vulgar. It also helps that, Jesus Christ, she looked fantastic!
Like Vaus pointed out the movie turns out to be actually quite sweet and my fave thing about it was that the trailer did not give away ALL the jokes. I laughed every second of it. I'm definitely not saying it'll be everyone's cup of tea, but I've only heard awful comments from people who haven't actually seen it, which I find to be quite baffling.
The first "Insidious" was surprisingly scary - but it's one of the movie that really did not need a sequel.
I saw Wadjda, a sweet little film that I imagine is a contender for an Oscar nom in Foreign Language Film. New Yorkers, see it!
Patrick Wilson has found a run of good luck in horror, not necessarily a niche. I would think having a niche would require skill in that niche. Patrick Wilson is, to me, just blah and lifeless in these horror films. His performance in Chapter 2 was awkward and verging on laughable. The actual character as written in the original film suited him. This new version was so out of type for him that you could see the gears turning in his head in every not-nice-daddy scene.
Sam -- beautifully stated! And for this reason, bring back hand-drawn animation :)
Evan -- i've been meaning to see that. Lots of press.
Eli -- i'm so glad people are seeing this. I am hoping my constant blabbering sold a few of its tickets.
"Riddick".
Sometimes you just have to let the missus pick the film (though it was much better than I expected.)
Nathaniel- "lots of press" is right. Also of interest to you: lots of actresses!
(I'm guessing that the film's female-dominated cast was not just a creative decision, but also because it was easier socially to direct a film of mostly women than a film with a more even gender split.)
@Evan I'm afraid Wadjda won't be eligible. The film must be theatrically released in its home country to be eligible for the foreign language award and Saudi Arabia has no movie theatres.
Edwin, I think the buzz for "Blue Jasmine" is largely around Cate Blanchett's performance, which is interesting, as I think Jasmine is the most problematic element in the film. No diss on Blanchett, who gives her all, but I was kind of left at sea at the end--how was I supposed to feel about this woman? She has Blanche Dubois echoes, but no "kind strangers" are going to help her (notice how the final person conspicuously moves away from her?). Is she pathetic, awful, phony, tragic, touching, what? I'm not sure Woody Allen thought it all the way through, mostly choosing to focus on the conflict/contrast with her sister and the surrounding characters caught in Jasmine's web of lies.
Oscar movies tend to be either be really "feel good" or dramatic sucker-punches in the gut; "Midnight in Paris" was the feel-good option, but this is just kind of vaguely "well, wasn't this a shame?" It'll probably score nods for Blanchett, Sally Hawkins, and script, and maybe--just maybe--director, but I'd be surprised if it breaks into the Best Picture category, which looks already to be notching "12 Years a Slave" "The Butler" "Fruitvale Station" "Gravity" "August: Osage County" and "Saving Mr. Banks" as front-runners based on critical reaction and buzz; if any art-house movie might sneak in there, I'd put money on "Before Midnight," which has some of the most rapturous reviews of the year and has proven lightning can strike three times.
@Dback - " Is she pathetic, awful, phony, tragic, touching, what?"
Can't she be all those things?
I need Short Term 12 to open near me. NEED. But instead, BOTH local art houses are STILL devoting two of their four-each screens to Blue Jasmine.
Patrick- yes, I know that's the rule. But if the FL branch is anything, it's inconsistent. Given that it's had some private screenings in spite of the law, I won't be surprised either way regarding its eligibility.