Paramount & Dreamworks Animation Open Cannes: Sacha … 
Cannes: Hot Film Titles For U.S. Buyers 
Bill Block’s QED Gets Cash Infusion From Media … 
Aaron Sorkin To Script ‘Steve Jobs,’ Based On … 
Warner Bros Tops $1B At Global Box Office 
Waterstone Enlists Chris Pine And Pals For Indie Comedy … 
Jimmy Kimmel Skewers ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox & The … 
Steve Jobs Biopic Starring Ashton Kutcher To Cannes: … 
Alexander Payne Wants Bruce Dern And Will Forte To … 
Amy Adams In Talks To Venture Into ‘Dark 
ABC’s ‘Mistresses’ Summer-Bound, … 
Alec Baldwin And James Toback Team On Cannes Docu … 
RATINGS RAT RACE: No Howard Stern Surge For ‘America’s … 
CBS Films Acquires ‘Ends Of The Earth’ At 
Student Academy Award Winners Announced 
Can Cannes Make A Major Mark On The Oscar Race Two Years In … 
Single-Camera Comedy Mayhem: ABC, NBC & Fox To Clash … 
2012-13 ABC Schedule: Comedy Block On Friday, … 
2012-13 New Series Leads: Strong Year For Black Actors, … 
Rebekah Brooks First Person To Be Charged In News Corp … 
David Yates Confirms His Exit From ‘Your Voice In My … 
SUNDAY AM: I heard Tom Cruise did Lions For Lambs for “virtually nothing” to help kick-start his revival of United Artists. Without that, the R-rated movie starring Cruise, Meryl Streep and Robert Redford, who also directed, never would have gotten off the ground. Maybe that would have been kinder. Because even with a very moderate budget of $35 million, the political polemic was killed by moviegoers and reviewers alike this weekend, opening to a paltry $6.5 million from 2,215 theaters with an anemic per screen average as well. Even with only a 92-minute running time, the pic even fell far short of the studio’s rock-bottom expectations of $8 million.
Jerry Seinfeld’s Bee Movie was the weekend’s big winner since the PG toon continues to attract both young and old alike. Saturday kiddie matinees made the big difference, and the DreamWorks Animation holdover distributed wide by Paramount raked in $26 million from 3,944 venues ($6.2 mil Friday and $11.3 mil on Saturday) for a fat new cume of $72.2 mil. 
Note that it is very rare for a film to jump to the No. 1 spot after opening at No. 2 its first week in release. (2005′s The Wedding Crashers and 2003′s Elf both did it.)
In second place, R-rated American Gangster continues to heavily draw adult and urban audiences its 2nd weekend out, making $24.2 million (down 44%) from 3,059 dates for a hefty new cume of $80.6 mil. The Imagine/Universal biopic starring Oscar-nodded Denzel Washington and Russell Crowe and directed by Ridley Scott, looks to have the same legs as Academy Award winner The Departed. Could Best Picture also be in American Gangster‘s future?
Taking the 3rd spot, Warner’s Vince Vaughn laugher Fred Claus tried to market itself as Elf 2. But it wasn’t as funny nor as sweet, and potential audiences sensed that. I’m told tracking showed that even though kids wanted to see the PG pic, their parents weren’t sure it was suitable for children. And it does seem kinda early for a Christmas-themed release. Studios varied wildly on the Fred Claus wide debut, with Warner’s claiming it made $20 mil from 3,603 plays, others saying $19.2M, still more estimating $18.2M, and a few maintaining only $17.7M. We’ll know for sure on Monday.
UA/MGM’s Lions For Lambs placed 4th. But the question Hollywood is asking today is what sank the movie: its star Tom Cruise or its controversial Iraq War subject matter? Judging from the exit polling, I’d have to say the latter, 
because the attendance for this film split straight down political lines already sharply drawn in this country. It was stronger on both coasts than in the middle of the country, and it played better in Blue states than Red states, and it appealed to older, more upscale, and educated audiences. United Artists noted that Lions For Lambs “performed much better” than other anti-war themed movies In The Valley Of Elah and Rendition but that’s not saying much — all focused on the war and flopped at the box office. The film got some of the worst reviews ever for a prestige project like this — only 27% positive according to Rotten Tomatoes, and Redford’s direction was roundly criticized as was the talky script that played like a stage production. If it weren’t for the marketing campaign claiming it was presenting both sides, the pic might have tanked even worse. 
As for Cruise’s career as a movie star, I believe the real test of his appeal will come the next time he stars in an action thriller, his speciality. If that pic tanks, then even Tom will know he’s toast.
The only other newcomer to the Top 10 was P2 which is the first release by the recently created production and distribution entity Summit Entertainment. It gave this Christmas Eve-themed thriller a soft launch because the R-rated pic was made and financed before Summit’s cash infusion via Merrill Lynch and its transition from a leading foreign sales company that took equity in select films. Placing only 9th, Summit said P2 debuted with $2.2 mil from 2,131 runs (that number of theaters showed exhibition’s willingness to embrace a new distributor). The small take was expected, but Summit’s only exposure is a limited P&A spend because international sales more than covered the film’s budget.
The rest of the Top 10 were familiar titles: 1. Bee Movie [wkd $26M], (cume $72.1M); 2. American Gangster [wkd $24.2M], (cume $80.6M); 3. Fred Claus [wkd [$19.2M], (cume $19.2M); 4. Lions For Lambs [wkd $6.5M], (cume $6.5M); 5. Dan In Real Life [wkd $5.8M], (cume $30.6M); 6. Saw IV [wkd $5M], (cume $58M); 7. The Game Plan [wkd $2.4M], (cume $85.4M); 8. P2 [wkd $2.2M], (cume $2.2M); 9. 30 Days Of Night [wkd $2.1M], (cume $37.3M); 10. Martian Child [wkd $1.7M], (cume $6M).
As for this weekend’s other debuts, Miramax’s R-rated No Country For Old Men from the Coen Brothers starring Tommy Lee Jones and Javier Bardem had the best per screen average — $17,219 on Saturday — of all the films in release. It opened with $1.2 mil from just 28 theaters — an incredible feat. And Sony’s PG newcomer Saawariya debuted in 85 venues and took in $600K.
This was the first “down” weekend after 1 “up” weekend following 6 “down” weekends compared to last year.
NOTE: For the first time, I have opened my weekly box office reports to comments. Monitored comments. Please confine your remarks to the movies at hand, especially when it involves your general political comments. This is a film, not a political, forum.
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.
Loading ...
Where is Warren Beatty? Where is Robert Redford? Where is Ben Affleck and Matt Damon? Where is Kevin Costner and Mel Gibson? Where is Sean Penn and Jodie Foster? We need them to get out and support the WGA and picket. Even if it’s for just 10 mins. That’s about how long Kevin Bacon and Tim Robbins walked with us in NYC on Friday. At least they were there. Come on George Clooney get your ass out here. Your all WGA members.
So, Warner Bros. last 2 releases were male led films and both films floundered.
Guess they should ban male led films.
(Michael Clayton, Fred Claus)
Maybe the film tanked because the rest of America that isn’t Hollywood is sick of anti-America movies?
Note to the WGA: you would be doing yourselves a HUGE service, if you started actively promoting the fact that the studios are trying to rollback your health care and pension benefits…I mean, if you want any widespread public support, that is. Because the backlash from anti-America films is sucking your strike in with it, which is unfortunate because you aren’t wrong.
Your PR machine isn’t doing you any favors.
Nikki, thanks for your reporting on the writers strike, and other columns I have enjoyed over the years. I am frustrated, though by the lack of hard information about the writers strike. What do the writers currently earn and producers pay for writers? What if anything prevents a highly regarded writer from writing his/her own ticket, pay wise? Thanks
Why do they cherrypick the bad for movie subjects when there are acres of positive stories?
Putting Fred Claus out in early November was one of the worst studio decisions of the year. If that isn’t a December release, I don’t know what is. Idiotic move.
I can not remember when my wife and I saw a movie lately. They all seem to contain mouse driven digital effects and blow up sounding audio that must appeal to 30 somethings and younger. I subscribe to a on line movie rental company. Quite frankly, most of what we view is from the Turner library and 30′s European fare. We are very tired of these new age actors and their immature political realities. Most of them are not intellectual giants, far from it, in my opinion.
UA made a big mistake by opening it on over 2,000 screens. A movie like LIONS FOR LAMBS isn’t a blockbuster, it needs to grow. I’m very curious to see how it plays overseas.
The same people who made these bombs were astonished at the success of Forrest Gump. They no longer understand their audience. People like me watch classics on home theater screens and ignore the weepy “America is awful” tripe being put on the big screen. I’ll probably see American Gangster because I like Denzel so much but, even there, I may wait for the DVD.
Hey, Wow…people I agree with. That’s a pretty strange
occurrence on this site.
Thanks Steve & Ted.
I wouldn’t necessarily blame the Clintons for actors activism. Jane Fonda, Woody Harrelson, Sally Field, Jessica Lange – even John Wayne was politcal in his fashion. The problem is that the actors seem to have flooded the media and the widespread range of the new media seems to keep them in our faces 24/7. Frankly, I don’t care what an actor thinks about any subject anymore than I care what my plumber thinks. Shut up, do your job and if I’m interested in your opinion I’ll ask. Most actors are excellent parrots, but aren’t very original on their own…just watch any interview.
The topic isn’t why America isn’t going to see the movie – it’s the negative bias and subtle bashing. The movie was written by Hollywood for Hollywood – with the group involved, why bother seeing the movie? We assumed we knew the contents.
We’re tired of Tom Cruise’s opinions. We’re tired of Robert Redford’s opinions. And both are extremely talented individuals. Hollywood in general is way off track for those of us who love movies. Entertain us well. Uplift America. Keep your political opinions to yourself. Then collect a big fat check.
Bashing anybody has becoming very boring.
I think you are being oblivious or revisionist. By the time the “Sting” was released it was obvious what Paul Newman’s politics were. He’d already marched with Martin Luther King Jr. and been given a place of honor on Nixon’s enemies list.
To this day, Hollywood has yet to produce any artist more political than Brando, Beatty or Fonda. At the peaks of their creative and earning power, they were all at there most politically active.
Taking his roles as an activist/citizen/artist seriously hasn’t seemed to hurt George Clooney’s career at all.
The last golden age of Hollywood ( roughly btwn. the release of Bonnie and Clyde to Star Wars) was heavily populated with vocal conservatives, liberals, radicals and moderates. They made some pretty cool flicks too.
I agree it seems crazy for big stars to embrace controversial causes. I like George Clooney as an actor, but I can’t look at him without thinking of all the times he’s publicly insulted my friends and family.
If he quietly lent support and money to his favored causes, I would never know … and he would still get my money.
There are good movies and bad movies.
The public has showed that it doesn’t mind good films that dabble in politics and messages (e.g., Platoon, Saving Private Ryan, All The President’s Men, Wall Street, and lots of others,etc.)
This just isn’t a good film.
Holywood would do well to remember also this quote from Walt Disney:”I never called my work an ‘art.’ It’s part of show business, the business of building entertainment.” ENTERTAIN the audiences first…
And this gem from the legendary Samuel Goldwyn: “Pictures are for entertainment, messages should be delivered by Western Union.”
For some unfathomable reason, today’s movie stars consider themselves politicians first and entertainers second. They come off looking foolish. Perhaps they’ll eventually figure out that people don’t flock to the theaters to be lectured at.
But then, you have the reverse problem on the political side: politicians who fancy themselves to be movie stars – preening for the cameras and living in a perpetual fantasy world.
A pox on them all, I say.
Any word on the After Dark Horrorfest?
Nikki – is this an old post on the AMPTP website’s homepage or has it just been posted?:
“When the WGA went on strike, an offer to pay writers for Internet streaming was on the table.”
Meh?
Sorry if it’s old news and Internet Streaming is summat else. Either way, doesn’t look like they’re interested in negotiating to me. That website’s nasty stuff.
Movies that reek of castor oil nearly always flop; it’s not so much the antiwar material. Look at Oprah Winfrey’s “Beloved,” which was sold as canon so incessantly that people gave up on it. We’re adults, we don’t want to pay to sit through a high school class again, thanks.
More than half the country wants this war to end. Two-thirds of this country feel like George W. Bush is doing a piss-poor job. Half of this country voted against Bush twice…and still “Lions for Lambs” tanked? You have to lay the blame on how this film was marketed and promoted…first weekends are almost always about marketing.
How the hell can you release a film with a liberal viewpoint into this kind of environment and STILL blow it? Plus, look, I admire Redford and Streep. But they’re not box office draws. Cruise has severely damaged his reputation. That kind of thing HAS to be considered when you’re marketing this kind of film.
People want answers. We’re getting facile arguments and finger-pointing and swift-boating all over talk radio and cable “news” channels. It’s all white noise anymore. We don’t want preaching, we want someone to help us channel our frustration and helplessness and anxiety. The right film can help us do that. But Hollywood yet to figure that out.
Not all the reviews were bad. Scott Hollowhead of Daily Box Office gave LAMBS a great review, right along with his own Follywood liberal comments. At the same time, his review of Denzel’s film was awful. These folks are locked in their own world do not see the light, and never will!
Who needs to see Hollywood movies when television is producing such excellence? The writing, acting, and direction of the current crop of shows is amazing.
I grew up in the 70′s when everyone watched Love Boat and Charlie’s Angels, and we knew we were getting crap but that was all we had. I thought I was in heaven in the 90′s when X-Files and Buffy came out, but now I can’t DVR these great shows fast enough — Chuck, Reaper, the CSIs, Supernatural, My Name is Earl, Bones, House, and the ever-better NCIS. Then you’ve got Discovery with Mythbusters, Future Weapons, and Dirty Jobs. History Channel for amazing shows on historical events.
Who needs a two hour movie in a sticky theater when my HD gives me such dazzling fare?
It’s all too obvious that audiences don’t want to embrace a Middle-East themed film: The Kingdom, In the Valley of Elah (both pretty good films), and now this one. I saw Lions for Lambs on Friday, and it’s not bad, but yes, it’s almost like a play, intercut with a bit of “action”.
Before the film, they played a trailer for STOP-LOSS, Kimbeely Peirce’s anti-Iraq War diatribe. Another Paramount flop.
And who’s the audience for Brian DePalma’s upcoming REDACTED?
After LAMBS I walked into FRED CLAUS, and ten minutes was all I could take…Crap!
“If I want to send a message I’ll call Western Union.”
Samuel Goldwyn
Actors have every right to speak out on their beliefs, and to make projects they feel are worthy. However, they have to realize that there is a segment of the audience that they will be alienating when they do this. As a movie consumer, I find myself unable to suspend my disbelief for a story when the actors involved are very public and outspoken on current political topics (or are overexposed via tabloid press). Its just a reality, and the actors shouldn’t complain when these types of projects or even their whole careers are affected. The Dixie Chicks are a prime example. They had every right to say what they wanted, however their main audience was very turned off by the comments and they have felt the results. This wasn’t George Bush’s fault, its just the marketplace, plain and simple.
To all of you rabid commenters who rage against Hollywood, what are you doing reading a trade blog about the industry?
Shouldn’t you be out watching your dog “take a shit” or watching “Fox News” as you eloquently state you prefer over Hollywood?
Fact is, for all the cartoonish rantings about liberal Hollywood, Bush and Co. took a thriving superpower in surplus and singlehandedly drove us into staggering debt over a b.s. war, they dismantled the Constitution, they destroyed diplomatic relations globally, oil is skyrocketing, the housing and stock markets are crashing, they created such a dark dark period (look at all the misdirected rage on this site.)
People simply need an escape from the truth about our current reality, so it’s poor timing for this film release.
Why don’t those of you Hollywood haters write a letter to Rupert Murdoch and ask for a pro-Bush film, or pro-Iraq war film? You don’t see Murdoch making one because there’s no market for it!! It would be a joke. Don’t blame Hollywood for voicing truths about this admin’s historic disasters.