New ‘Man Of Steel’ Television Spot #6 
UPDATE: At Least Seven Bidders For Hulu 
Hammond On Cannes: Suspense Builds To Sunday’s Palme … 
Record-Breaking Memorial Weekend 2013! ‘Fast & … 
Cannes: Un Certain Regard Winners Include ‘The … 
SAG-AFTRA Sued For Witholding Foreign Residuals And … 
Harvey Weinstein Closes Prolific Cannes With Deals For … 
Cannes: Competition Movies Divide Critics; How Much Do … 
Zach Braff Ends $3+M Kickstarter Campaign 
Fox Unscripted TV Czar Mike Darnell To Exit 
NBC Sets Oklahoma Tornado Benefit Concert For May 29 
Cannes: Directors’ Fortnight Honors ‘Les … 
SHOCKER: Tom Cruise Exits ‘Man From … 
A+E Rebuild: BBC’s Jana Bennett To Run Bio And LMN … 
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘Hannibal’ Hits Low, … 
‘Katie’ Shakeup: Rachel Miskowiec Replaces … 
Hammond On Cannes: French Hero Jerry Lewis On His Return To … 
Cannes: Another Jewelry Heist? $2.6M Necklace Missing After … 
Hammond On Cannes: Leo DiCaprio’s Moon Trip Tops … 
Specialty B.O. Preview: ‘Before Midnight’, … 
2012-2013 Season Network Rankings: CBS Sweeps In Final … 
SATURDAY PM/SUNDAY AM, 5TH UPDATE: Studios tell me this Easter Weekend began and ended with rain and storms in 2/3s of the U.S. and the first huge “up” weekend of $125M, which is +34% from last year. Twentieth Century Fox’s Rio 3D may be about a bird, but Friday and Saturday numbers showed “it’s holding like a rock,” a studio exec emailed me. Lionsgate’s latest in Tyler Perry’s franchise, Madea’s Big Happy Family, had the best per screen average of all the top-grossing pictures. This is, after all, Perry’s sixth cross-dressing film; still, the last one opened to a $41M weekend and the one before to $30M and this will be even lower by end of day Sunday. scoring an “A-” CinemaScore was Fox 2000′s Water For Elephants based on Sara Gruen’s best-selling book and written by 
Richard LaGravenese and directed by Francis Lawrence. Clearly, the classy ad campaign was intriguing for adults who don’t rush out to see films, and for Robert Pattinson’s Twi-hards who do. But this beautifully filmed but searing drama was considered a hard sell. It was also a fine weekend for Universal’s holdover Hop from Illumination Entertainment after passing $100M. And Disneynature’s African Cats narrated by Samuel Jackson played well for a niche nature movie that truly deserves to be seen, as evidenced by its “A-” CinemaScore. Full analysis coming. Here is the Top 10:
1. Rio 3D (Blue Sky Studio/Fox) Week 2 [3,842 Theaters]
Friday $10.6M, Saturday $10M, Easter Weekend $26.6M (-32%), Cume $81.1M
2. Madea’s Big Happy Family (Tyler Perry/Lionsgate) NEW [2,288 Theaters]
Friday $10.5M, Saturday $9.1M, Easter Weekend $25.7M
3. Water For Elephants (Fox 2000/Fox) NEW [2,817 Theaters]
Friday $7M, Saturday $6.5M, Easter Weekend $17.5M
4. Hop (Illumination Entertainment/Universal) Week 4 [3,616 Theaters]
Friday $4.8M, Saturday $4.5M, Easter Weekend $12.4M, Cume $100.4M
5. Scream 4 (Miramax/Dimension/Weinstein Co) Week 2 [3,314 Theaters]
Friday $2.7M, Saturday $2.7M, Easter Weekend $7.1M (-62%), Cume $31.1M
6. African Cats (Disneynature/Walt Disney Studios) NEW [1,220 Theaters]
Friday $3.3M, Saturday $1.6M, Easter Weekend $6.4M
7. Soul Surfer (FilmDistrict/Sony) Week 3 [2,240 Theaters]]
Friday $2.3M, Saturday $1.9M, Easter Weekend $5.6M, Cume $28.6M
8. Insidious (FilmDistrict) Week 4 [2,130 Theaters]
Friday $2.1M, Saturday $1.9M, Easter Weekend $5.3M, Cume $44.1M
9. Hanna (Focus Features) Week 3 [2,383 theaters]
Friday $1.8M, Saturday $2M, Easter Weekend $5.2M, Cume $31.7M
10. Source Code (Summit) Week 4 [2,363 Theaters]
Friday $1.8M, Saturday $1.9M, Easter Weekend $5M, Estimated Cume $44.6M
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.
Loading ...
Rio will win again. No big surprise.
What is a surprise is the Water For Elephants movie.
We took in the matinee, it was teh film that three generations of women could agree upon, and all of us really enjoyed it (which I didnt expect to). Christoph Waltz is a real treat to watch and the film was old school beautiful.
I recommend it.
Water for Elephants is playing in over 500 more theaters than Madea but making much less. How is that ‘over-performing’? Was it estimated to completely bomb? Pattinson fans don’t flame me, I’m just asking. Today is Good-Friday. Tyler Perry’s audience are super religious. They are going to spend the weekend in church. Bad idea to release his movie easter weekend. Rio is going to win this weekend.
It’s because Madea was expected to win the weekend easily while WFE got lousy reviews and was expected to tank. Tyler Perry movies are widely regarded as utter dross but they definitely make money. WFE has an uphill battle, but apparently older people like it so it might end up having good legs.BTW, I agree that it’s too early to write off Pattinson. There’s no way David Cronenberg would have cast him in Cosmopolis if he didn’t think he had it in him. Give him time.
Madea seems to be doing ok.
Fox was low balling if they thought WfE would do $13 million. Now that $16 million looks fabulous, but it’s pretty much done as expected. Not really overperforming IMO.
Pattinson was given a chance in Remember Me and WfE and in both he doesn’t seem to have won anybody over. The kid’s 25, at this point, he either has it or he doesn’t. And he doesn’t. Same lukewarm, overly glazed brooding performance. If Cronenberg can get an actual performance out of him, he’ll certainly be the first.
Look again. It says that it will make $18 million. And if you don’t think that we won anyone over then you should look at the RT reviews. People liked him in it and he has the potential to be a great actor.
Couldn’t agree more.
His definition of ‘acting’ is painful.
i thought Rob did a fine job in Remember Me. He’s done more than just Twilight, but it seems that’s all anyone compares him with are those craptastic films.
It seems like you’ve seen neither film — because remember me is one of best performances by an actor that year. Seriously, i couldn’t watch the next twilight without noticing such a huge difference. He is a great actor.
He is very good actor! And he plays Jacob perfectly!
Wait, so Water for Elephants is playing on 500 screens more and cost double Madea’s Happy Family and you call the Tyler Perry movie “soft”? I assume you are using the fuzzy math that George W. Bush popularized. A Fox exec called and told you they would hit higher teens? Strange that a studio would be happy about that number for this kind of movie. Call a spade a spade. Deadline is doing some pandering here and it’s very obvious. Whores for Elephants indeed.
Tyler Perry’s movie is doing noticeably worse than his last movie. Meanwhile, Reese Witherspoon and Robert Pattinson’s movie is doing noticeably better than both of their last movies. Is it really that hard to understand?
It’s hardly pandering, it’s simply reporting the facts at hand. When Deadline talks about “overperforming” or “underperforming,” the word “expectations” is implied.
Madea is “soft” because this is an incredibly popular character with a built-in audience… that isn’t showing up in quite the numbers that they did for the last Madea movie. Yes, $30 million is not a soft number on it’s own, but when expectations are for it to do 33% more than that amount, then it’s a VERY soft number.
And while I agree that an $18 million weekend for WFE isn’t super impressive, it IS overperforming the expectations going into the weekend that it would do a number in the low teens… meaning the movie may grow throughout the weekend if the audience likes it, and meaning it may have longer legs at the box office than first expected (which is especially good since it’s geared to an older audience that isn’t as concerned with seeing movies on opening weekend).
since when has it become about the expectations and not the results, grosses, etc.? clearly, the studio had higher “expectations” for the patterson film because they invested more money into the project and it was screened in 500 more theaters than Madea. yet, when the white film underperforms or has a low gross at the box office, we justify poor performance by saying it did better than expectations and reviews? seriously?? please make up your minds! start taking notice of the numerous films with majority all white casts, directors, producers, writers, etc. releaesed this year that are TANKING at the box office. failure knows no race.
Well, could it be that some of the screens where Tyler’s movie was scheduled to show are no longer there due to the Tornados throughout Kentucky, Tennesee, Alabama and Georger =-) Blackouts, banks, ATMs and supermarkets are CLOSED. People are not thinking about seeing a movie right now in those areas when there house is the size of a soup can. Usually those areas support him 110% but considering the cirumstances, that movie is doing pretty ok I’d say
No Tyler Perry’s movies are often attacked by racist white film critics that don’t understand African American culture.
Just because some uppity white or black film critic doesn’t get the humor or jokes doesn’t mean Tyler’s movies aren’t good.
Tyler Perry’s movies are enterainment it is not for uppity film
snobs.
Tyler Perry makes movies for a specific audience which is religious Americans such as Christians. Tyler’s fan base has actually expanded beyond the African American community.
I believe it is deleterious that white people even review black films it doesn’t make sense to me. Why review films about a culture that you don’t understand?
Because films are art, and as such can be celebrated, analyzed, recommended, torn apart, loved and hated. It’s all fair game. Did you like it? That should be all that matters to you. If someone else disliked it, it’s fair for them to express their informed opinion too.
But, saying white people shouldn’t review “black films” is a horribly racist attitude, whether you realize it or not. You may think you’re supporting black filmmakers with that front, but that’s not the kind of help any filmmaker needs.
Perry has released previous films over Easter weekend to varying degrees of success. Last year, Why Did I Get Married Too was released Easter weekend to a $29 million opening weekend. In 2008, Meet the Browns was released over Easter weekend to $20 million. To me, I think it can be almost looked at as a family tradition…Oh, it’s Easter, it’s time for a Tyler Perry movie. (Reminds me of “Oh, it’s Thanksgiving…that means that Disney’s releasing something for the family.”)
That said, the theaters in our area (Mid-Atlantic) are typically sold out of these films, but by the end of the night, very few showings were sold out by checking on Fandango.
Something isn’t quite clicking with this revisit to Madea. Granted, the lower-budgeted film will certainly prove to be a financial success, but has the cross-dressing Tyler Perry run his course?
No. People will go see it on Sunday. Before or after Church. Then go out to eat. It’s what most people do for his movies. Hence the super early 10AM Sunday shows they have in most urban areas.
God I hope so.
I think it would have done a lot better if it had opened on more screens.
I think water for elephants will do very well overseas, if not in the us. remember me made over $56 mil so far and most of that in europe. pattinson is popular.
Yes, hes very popular in Europe and in Latin America. I dont know well about USA
Nice. Maybe, good news are no news. But they’re nice news. Happy Easter!
Considering that so much of Perry’s audience is likely religious, I wonder whether it was a good idea to open the film on Easter weekend and whether the movie will have a HUGE Saturday (and small Sunday.)
i just saw Madea and there was this great bit where about Madea getting to the fast food place at 10:31 but they stopped serving breakfast at 10:30…so original!!!
Yeah so totally not original. Adam Sandler did almost the same bit in Big Daddy. Instead of it being 1031 though he thought breakfast ended at 11.
Didn’t Michael Douglas do it in Falling Down. He cut up the place with a semi
first of all, i think george was being facetious.
second of all, it was also a MAJOR plot point of the Michael Douglas-has-a-meltdown movie “Falling Down”
Trust me, Madea will be just fine. Come Easter Sunday, after churches let out, the African-American audience will head to theaters in droves to see Madea.
In many Southern communities, church _doesn’t_ end on Easter. They go into J.O.T. – Jesus Overtime.
A few people may see the “Madea” picture on Sunday, but the day overall will likely be soft. Add to this the fact that “Rio” – and “Hop” – are better choices for families with small children.
How is Madea “soft” but ‘Elephants “over-performing”? I mean the latter’s losing to another Tyler Perry film, FFS. Not to mention another talking CG cartoon. It seems to me that Pattinson’s the one who should be sweating on any post-Twilight prospects here.
I think they are saying Water for Elephants is over performing because of the type of film it is, a period drama/lovestory. Whereas they are comparing Madea to the past openings in that franchise. But I do agree with the other commenter that Madea will see a big surge come post-church time on Sunday.
So this actually seems to bode well for Pattinson and even more so for Witherspoon who really needed to have success with the movie
Anyway, everyone was predicting that Rio would hold the top spot.
Twihards usually storm the box office opening day. Plus Good Friday should inflate things.
Water for Elephants will end up doing average box office.
Pattinson should be worried however, because the reviews for his acting were scathing. He’s horribly untalented and wooden and that’s not going to improve any.
The book is a longtime (and current) #1 bestseller. The movie’s potential audience isn’t only “twihards”.
It’ll do fine, and so will Pattinson. Reviews for his performance were mostly good, obviously not as good as the raves Waltz got, but that’s to be expected.
They weren’t really mostly good for Pattinson. At best most thought he can smile right and look pretty for the camera, at worst he was called woefully untalented, wooden and without range.
I would say the most universally loved actor in the movie by critics was the elephant.
Agreed. I hate Twilight, but I just finished reading Water for Elephants and I can’t wait to see the movie. The book was fantastic. Glad to hear it’s opening well.
I don’t have a problem with Pattinson…it’s Twilight I can’t stand. That’s not his fault.
I just went to Rotten Tomatoes for a break down. The vast majority of the reviews were brutally NEGATIVE about Pattinson’s acting in the role. Only a few were positive. Christoph Waltz and the elephant got most of the good acting reviews. Reese Witherspoon was seen as window dressing who had no chemistry with Robert Pattinson. I know you are a Pattinson super fan but you shouldn’t lie about things that we can all fact check easily.
^^
Bullshit about Rob’s negative reviews. Read again or buy yourself some glasses. The critics liked him.
If the book was such a big seller why did it only open with $18 million? Honestly, I don’t think $18 mil is over-performing at all. Given how many screens it’s playing on, the fact that everyone says Reese Witherspoon is an A-list movie star, and it features a guy from one of the biggest movie franchises in history, $18 mil is actually very, very soft. The studio was smart to low ball it on Friday and now the media is tricked into believing the film is actually over-performing. Why is the media always so gullible?
@Tam: Pattinson does have a lot of negative reviews. You need to take off your rose colored fan glasses to accept the truth. Or maybe you just don’t understand what the word ‘Negative’ means. Here a few of his reviews:
-the euphoniously named Jacob Jankowski, played by the woefully untalented Robert Pattinson.
-He has no discernible talent as an actor, beyond a bedroom gaze that seems to express very little of what’s on his mind. Or maybe there’s just so little there to express.
-And it all rests on the head of the sleepy-eyed Pattinson, an actor so lifeless that you keep expecting someone to put a mirror to his nostrils.
-Getting the perpetually glazed Pattinson to exhibit any kind of deep emotion is no mean feat. Best known as the brooding undead lover from the Twilight vampire series, he has an unfortunate habit of mimicking a corpse even in movies where blood and garlic aren’t at stake.
-Witherspoon and Pattinson are a three-ring snooze-fest together, bringing little passion to a love story supposedly so fiery, it blows the roof off the big top.
Pattinson HAS a talant. He IS a big actor. Just look at him! Everyone has his own eyes and soul…
@Good Goode
Should I now post good reviews that say the complete opposite and does it not matter? Take even a look at the reviews you chose. Was Rob sleepy or like a corpse while he treated Rosie?
Yeah, if he’s not careful, he could have Keanu reeves career. What’s that you say? Keanu’s a kajillionaire and at 47 has been a successful a-lister for half his life? Um, never mind.
Money doesn’t equal talent. And while Keanu isn’t much of any actor, Pattinson is WORSE.
STFUHater: Um, Keanu’s got a following outside of tentpole movies. Pattinson doesn’t even compare.
Keanu is a lot better at picking out movies that suit his range, and that range is extremely box office friendly.
i agree with sally. keanu reeves seemingly knows his range is limited and has only really strayed out of this comfort zone a handful of times. pattinson should take note.
18M on almost 3K screens is not a good opening. it’s the same numbers catherine hardwicke (the first twilight director) got for red riding hood. which seems to be the upper threshold for anyone connected to the twilight franchise.
i read the reviews. while there are negative ones about him, there are also plenty of positive ones about him. i went and saw the movie, and i’m not a “twihard.” i’m also pretty sure the eldery couples that i saw weren’t “twihards” either.
Sure there were some positives, but the vast majority thought both Pattinson and Witherspoon were a mess.
Reese REALLY needs to rethink the scripts she takes. She’s not having a good year.
Pattinson will never improve. It’s just not happening. No chemistry with his costars and appears lazy and ill prepared to actually flesh out a character. There’s no there there.
Yep, critical flop.
Sing it. Yeah we all read Rotten Tomatoes. Aside from the “No Chemistry” line that all reviewers seem to be regurgitating… even many of the bad reviews don’t cite Pattinson as a bad actor.
The blind hatred is a little… sad.
Twi hards aren’t turning out in big numbers to see this movie. It’s older people and older women. The twi hards generally don’t support their leading actors projects enough to influence the box office and believe it or not Pattinson has fans that aren’t into twilight. He’s a charismati funny guy. Watch his interviews. Having said that he needs to work on the acting but he did get a lot of good reviews. He wasn’t panned. Most of the problem seemed to be lack of chemistry and the story dragging at points. Overall it’s gotten mixed reviews and will probably have good legs.
Having no chemistry with another actor has nothing to do with the performance of Rob or Reese. Either there is chemistry or there isn’t. That’s the only thing that the critics disliked and the movie is at 54% on RT. Surely not a flop.
OK Pattinson super fans. Take a breath and let it out.
It’s fine if you like him and you like his, um, acting. That’s your right. But for most CRITICS, his performance in this movie was just awful. RT has them all there for you to read and most are not favorable to downright scathing and extremely negative. Wooden, untalented, over indicating, stiff, prone to nothing but reaction and no ability to create the inner life of the character. These are what most of the critics had to say.
Just calling a spade a spade. That’s the breakdown, whether you like it or not.
We can all read. When you go to Rotten Tomatoes you can clearly see that the critics are split on Water For Elephants. It is not panned. It has not failed.
I don’t pay attention to critics to begin with but a lot of you seem to so it’s the only reason I bring it up. Unfortunately, a lot of you seem to be reading the reviews with one eye. More than half of the critics liked and some even loved the movie. Even the most of the negative don’t call out Robert Pattinson for bringing the whole thing, they talk about “lack of chemistry” which seems to be the regurgitated line the critics are “borrowing” from each other while pretending to be the first to think of it. Pattinson is not going to win any Oscars yet but he’s very good in the movie. If you actually see it, you might agree.
Who cares what the critics say or said? Either you (as in yourself with no one holding your hand to tell you what you should or shouldn’t like) liked the movie or not. End of story.
poor panned twilight. gosh made $1.8 billion so far. if pattinson had been so bad twilight would have tanked in a week. pattinson is charismatic and talented and he has a huge fan base overseas. lets wait and see what the final grosses are.
I agree. I can’t understand why he keeps getting cast. I get the Twi-hard fanbase, but he has absolutely no talent. I don’t we’ll be seeing much of him once he’s not wearing glitter.
Not everyone was predicting “Rio” would hold the top spot. Rope of Silicon, Bob Office Mojo and Box Office Guru’s The Derby were all predicting a No. 1 finish for “Madea.”
Reese Witherspoon took more hits from critics than Robert Pattinson. She should be just as worried. The ten million and more paydays are over for her. None of these films are doing as well as they should be. Rio is in 3D. Number should be bigger. The Tyler Perry movie likely didn’t cost much so it’s opening well. Water for Elephants is a flop critically and commercially. Fox is trying to spin it, but you can’t honestly tell me a bestselling book with two Academy Award winners and more on staff was expected to open between twelve and fifteen million. The only bright spot for Hollywood is the international markets. Four months gone, huge marketing costs, and not one substantial box office hit. The big boys are sweating bullets.
That’s true. Witherspoon was wrong for the part and wrong for Pattinson. The movie was cast in an executive’s office, not based on what worked best for the movie. That much was obvious.
the is movie is not a flop critically. the reviews are about dead even with each other. it’s mixed reviews, that doesn’t mean it flopped. as for commerically the thing just came out today, and according to box office mojo has a budget of 40 million.
The Water for Elephants is forty million, and calculate the money they spent to market this thing. It may do fourteen during the holiday. That’s a very soft opening. The next weekend drop off will likely be fifty percent or above. It is a domestic commercial failure. Fox knew it wouldn’t be well received and held off on letting reviews be made public until the last minute. I looked up the critical responses for Robert Pattinson’s Twilight films and it’s about the same as this one. I don’t blame him for this failure, but it is a failure. It’s time for him to reevaluate his options.
anon: Actually, the bright spot for Elephants is its budget appears to be under $40 million, so there’s no way they’ll go broke on it.
Why in the world is everyone trashing Water for Elephant’s opening weekend? Research romantic dramas and see what they tend to do opening weekend. Only three have opened to over $20M OW.
High teens is respectable for this type of film. Does anyone think if you took Pattinson out and put in some other actor that it would have broken out? Unlikely.
@don: don’t you think that’s reason why both witherspoon and patterson (“a-listers”) were both casted for this film?
Traditionally, do a lot of people go to the movies on Easter weekend?
If there’s an Easter-themed animated movie, will they load up the kids and head there instead of the local cathedral?
If there is a movie good enough to see on Easter, and given there is time to see it, yes, they will.
Which is why RIO is expected to win the weekend. Based on reviews, this is the type of movie someone would be willing to take the family to see on Easter.
It is going to be so strange to see a cross-dressing… Alex Cross? Surely he HAS to be wearing a dress in that movie, right? Eat your heart out, Morgan Freeman!
i saw water for elephants, and its a wonderful movie. there were a mixture of ages from young to old. i liked the cast, and i thought they did a great job. christoph was amazing, and rob pattinson was actually pretty good.
If you were some real, theater-going fan, you would not be referring to them as “Christoph” and “Rob.”
The movie was crap. Reese Witherspoon looked weird in it, Pattinson can’t act. The only money it made was because of people who read the book.
People are starved for real movies, though. That’s the only thing it had going for it.
well thanks for sharing your opinion. others have their own.
I’m white and went to see madea with my black friends. It was FILLED! like sold out filled and the next three shows were too. All the minorities now have a movie to watch. Big numbers.
Never underestimate the economic power of 41 million African-Americans…and their friends.
Interestingly, the movie is family-friendly to a certain degree(PG-13). So that also factors into the success of Perry’s films.
No, the whites and the blacks now have a movie to watch. For Asians and Latinos, they have to sit through the horrendously racist, cringe-worthy HOP, where the only minority characters are a scheming, fat, subordinate and a nasty adopted girl who thinks she can sing.
I guess to Universal, the only good people are white people, and the only good holiday icons are British, and hispanics should learn to stay in their places and be happy with their laborer station in life serving the mas’as (or rather, the master race.)
I’m white and I found it stomach turning. This is a movie aimed at children! You could not come up with one positive portrayal of anyone who wasn’t totally anglo?
U$11M for Rio?? An increase over last Friday? I’m amazed some people are dismissing the film’s numbers as “not surprising”. I don’t expect estimates to hold up this way, but still, the movie is holding extremely well!
I think by “non surprising” people mean the film is actually very good and should even do better. The era of Pixar is over.
Dumbest comment in this thread. You can’t base a long-term outlook of “Blue Sky vs. Pixar” on a few breakout films from the former. Pixar has been out-earning this studio for over a decade.
Stop hating on Pattinson — I’d watch him read the phone book!
You and me both. Don’t worry the only ones ating on pattinson, are these scary hagulas jealous he’s got kstew as a girlfriend, or bitter guys whose significant others obsess about him online. Normal people think he’s quite charismatic and talented. Anyone who can sing like he can, and is such an excellent musician, doesn’t have to prove sh*t to anyone.
Oh, the “you’re just jealous” card. How original.
twitards are scarily stupid
And so are haters….
I don’t give a crap about his girlfriend, and I am not ‘jealous’, I simply think he’s an awful actor who shouldn’t be cast in movies over talented actors. And I’m 21, in case you were wondering.
For those who are unaware, Pattinson has a very active obsessed stalker hater non-fan base. These are young to middlin’ aged women who once adored him, but take it extremely personally, that he actually has a life and a romantic relationship IRL. They do things like threaten his girlfriend, plan attack strategies for his premieres, and bully both he and Stewart all over the ‘internets.’ It’s pathetic and scary. I feel sorry for the guy that he has to be followed by these rabid dogs for the rest of his young life due to the Twilight phenom and embodying the Edward Cullen role. You can always tell the angry embittered Rob Pattinson obsessives who are commenting….there’s a nasty viciousness there that wouldn’t be present if they didn’t care so fcking much. It reminds me of the b*tchy horrid comments that Angelina might get on this or that messag board, and you always have a sneaking suspicion that it’s some lady with 20 cats wearing a ‘Team Aniston’ t-shirt. Same thing.
Wow. Ladies and Gentlemen, look at the person above me. She belongs to a group named Robstens. They would like to get into Kristen Stewart’s pants but also like Rob because he’s her speculated boyfriend. They hate everyone that treatens their relationship. They even hated Reese for doing WFE. You don’t want to read the names they called her when we got pictures of them smiling on set. Btw that’s a reason why they thought that Rob broke up with Kristen. He talked with a woman. You know a woman with female parts. But after seeing a new Twilight movie they’re happy again because Rob and Kristen admitted their relationship by filming a Twilight movie. Yuhu.
lol your life
So many insider, studio-planted comments on this site (and probably a whole bunch of people on Witherspoon’s PR payroll). But as one of those insiders, I can attest that WATER FOR ELEPHANTS is a big disappointment, not based on this week’s lowered expectations, but from what they were expecting for the last six months. HOW DO YOU KNOW showed that audiences don’t like the bitchy horse-faced girl anymore and the lack of chemistry with the uncharismatic vampire doesn’t help. It may hit 40-50 million once it’s played out. That doesn’t come close to break even for the studio.
Ever heard of overseas theaters? Or of DVD money, etc? Of course 40-50 million means breakeven, and in fact, it means probably making money. Unless by 40-50 million, you were talking of worldwide total, in which case you underestimate by a lot.
well it is hard for some to understand that the united states isn’t the only country in the world.
Yeah, but Fox keeps more of the money made from domestic gross than that of the overseas.
Of course they keep less of the overseas dollars. So the money from overseas doesn’t count at all…right? Please.
That’s the difference between a Madea movie (which will have little to *zero* overseas box office) and Water for Elephants. Pattinson pulls in some decent numbers overseas. His Remember Me did $36M overseas with very little promotion in those markets. Not bad for a $16M indie that had hideous reviews.
Water for Elephants should end up at $50M or more in the U.S. Throw in overseas box office and Fox will be just fine.
You really must be a twihard or a delusional fox executive if you think this movie will pull in 50 million domestically.If the numbers stand up, it will make only between 15-18 million for easter weekend, with an almost guaranteed 50% or more drop next week.As for overseas numbers, 36 million for this film will not cut it.Beside the fact that if I’m not mistaken, studios get less of the profits from foreign theaters,and you will have to subtract P&A cost.
@redmenace
Remember Me made $37 million in the foreign market. It had a worse rating and a way smaller promo. WFE will make more.
The Time Traveler’s Wife had a drop of 50% but still made over $60 million. What’s your point? Why are you bashing a movie which has a good box office start?
The Time Traveler’s Wife also was in more theaters and had a slighty bigger opening.As for Remember Me, it was Pattinson first wide release movie after his Twilight fame and it only did 36 million in foreign and 19 million domestically;which said something about his ability to draw in crowds.Throw in the fact that Reese Witherspoon hasn’t been a box office draw in years, you can assume that this movie will have little to no legs when the female oriented film competition comes in the coming weeks.Not to mention, what if Water For Elephants drop is in the 60% to 70% range?
“Why are you bashing a movie which has a good box office start”
I’m not bashing, I simple pointing out that 18 million opening on a 40 million dollar production budget isn’t a good start, especially for a movie base on a best selling novel.
Oh, redmenace – WFE already got 56 millions in USA and the same overseas!
US gross: $50 million
Foreign gross: $75 million (60% of total gross)
DVD Sales: $20 million
————————
TOTAL: $145 million
Looks good to me
Don’t get me wrong. The numbers are only a guess based on the possible gross which one poster said.
Where are you pulling the $20M DVD estimates from? Also, are you factoring in rentals as well as sell-through?
Pattinson’s Remember Me pulled in nearly $12M worth of US DVD sales on a film that made about $19M in the U.S.
I think a $20M guess on Water for Elephants is well in line.
Factor in foreign DVD sales and television rights and the film will make a profit.
May, 19:
Total Lifetime GrossesDomestic: $50,277,574 58.1%
+ Foreign: $36,300,000 41.9%
= Worldwide: $86,577,574
Domestic SummaryOpening Weekend: $16,842,353
(#3 rank, 2,817 theaters, $5,979 average)
% of Total Gross: 33.5%
That sounds like somebody doesn’t like these 2 actors. But don’t worry, WFE has long legs and will more than break even just with the domestic cume. It’s got an A- cinemascore and will do well for the genre.
Reese will do just fine. Even if WFE is not a big hit, she will still get her usual $15 million fees for movies that really cater to her core audience. She single-handedly made hits out of Legally Blonde 1 & 2, Sweet Home Alabama, as well as Four Christmases and for good measure, Just Like Heaven. How Do You Know is not the usual comedy that she does that’s why it tanked. But surely This Means War, and specially The Pioneer Woman will be huge hits. It’s funny that Russell Brand had a huge flop and Warner Bros states that they haven’t lost faith in him and actually invested in developing projects for him and then when it comes to women having flops, a lot would say that they’re over. Reese has single-handedly carried more hits than a lot of “hot” actors these days! Please!
Honey, most of those movies are almost 10 years old. She can’t keep on riding on movies made in 2002.
I’m just trying to point out that some people are so sexist even with the box-office power of hollywood actors. Take for example, Matt Damon, outside of the Bourne series, he has not carried a single certified hit, in fact (save for True Grit which was a support role), his films since 2007 have been commercial bombs and dissapointed critically but nobody says that he’s a box-office poison blah blah blah. But if it were women then pretty much everyone write them off
nl you are delusional. Reese is over IMO. She, and her handful of fans (not to mention PR team) have to stop living in the past.
She hasn’t had a hit since 2003? 2005? She’s probably had only five hit movies in her entire career. Whenever people bring up her “hits” they’re always talking about films that came out YEARS earlier.
Matt Damon didn’t have a film come out between 2007 and 2009 at all. Then he had those two Clint Eastwood films (the rugby movie being a pretty big hit outside the US — Damon also took a huge paycut for both keeping costs way down), that Steven Soderberg movie (The Informant) which was a small budget movie and was never expected to do well, True Grit (huge hit), The Adjustment Bureau (a decent hit).
Stop playing the woman card, it makes you sound like Sarah Palin.
matt, is that you?
1.) the adjustment bureau was a flop
2.) that damn rugby film played horribly worldwide
3.) matt damon was unrecognizable in true grit. which is probably why it did well.
4. minus true grit, we have to go back to 2007 to a bourne film to find a matt damon film that’s made over 35M. although i will acknowledge that the adjustment bureau did 62M in the u.s.
He just carried the superb The adjustment bureau with rising star emily blunt.
I thought I would never see the words “superb” and “The Adjustment Bureau” together in a sentence. Amazing the things you read here on Deadline Hollywood.
I agree with what nl says. The level of sexism in the critical community has become utterly ghastly. If a woman stars in a rom-com, it’s automatically called a s*** chick flick, sight unseen. If men star in a rom-com, then it’s called a “dramedy” and not nearly as destroyed by critics and the actors are still given due respect. If a female has a few bombs, her career is over. With a male, nothing is said. If a woman demands professionalism on the set, she is called a diva. If a man has a total breakdown ala Christian Bale, he gets an Oscar.
So sick of the rampant sexism in Hollywood, the critics, and amongst readers of this blog.
I think you’re reading what YOU want to see into the situation you describe. Men are also given shit for starring in rom-coms over and over (see Justin Long) and their careers do suffer for it.
Also, there are plenty of women who have been called “divas” that have won Oscars. I don’t need to give you examples of that as I’m sure you know of several off hand.
Your post just sounds like some sort of agenda or theory you have some strange compulsion to validate. In short, you are a conspiracy theorist.
JUSTIN LONG an actor? Well, that’s news to me. I thought he was the Dell guy who got lucky by dating Drew Barrymore. Does anyone say, “Oh poor Justin Long, he could have been in the next Goodfellas, but those romantic-comedies derailed his career!” Give me a break. You obviously don’t have a single valid point to make and are talking out your ass. The original poster==for the win.
so with you on the christian bale tip. and charlie sheen will be forgiven in about 18 months.
Reese will not do fine. Her career was over after that epic How Do You Know flop. Water for Elephants just makes it official. That’s why she was over promoting it like crazy and even staged her wedding for the promotion time. I can’t believe at producers who hire her and pay money. Those Legally Blonde movies were basically her only big superhits. Four Christmases made it’s money only because she was playing furniture alongside famous comic like Aniston always does.
This Means War most probably will bomb too. I like Tom Hardy and Chris Pine but let’s face it – they are not big enough starts to bring people to movie just by their name. Reese can not bring people too.
Reese was miscast here big time. That Oscar confusing those producers. They think she can act. But in reality never before and never after that Oscar she showed any acting talent. She just looks the same in every movie. You can’t distance Reese the Actress from character she is playing. Not to mention Pattinson who looks like her son instead of love interest.
Reese’s $15 million paydays are coming to an end.
Nikki Finke doesn’t like Tyler Perry so why doesn’t this woman just be honest? I remember in November 2010, Finke was not pleased Tyler was the director for Colored Girls.
For Finke to suggest that $10 million on Friday alone is soft illustrates her negativity towards Tyler perry.
But then again Finke is white she’s NOT Tyler Perry’s target audience.
I think it is really lame for white Hollywood insiders to just bash Perry a black man that is making movies for black people. Mainstream white Hollywood ignores the black audience since they are so stupid and racist to realize it is a powerful market.
Perry reached a market white Hollywood ignores and he is simply giving his audience what they want more madea.
I think it is not only pathetic but pretentious of Finke to say Tyler Perry’s movie isn’t doing well. She should know as a Hollywood insider that Perry’s movies are made with a low budget. Second, I doubt Tyler cares if his movie is not number one. I think Tyler[s movie will definitely make a lot of money.
Come now, the only racist statements here are yours. Finke called the film soft because Perry’s last film “opened to a $41M weekend and the one before to $30M,” and this one’s opened to a lot less. If that’s a basis for name-calling, then this world’s not as grown up and I’d hoped.
I agree this is not a racist comment, i too expected this to open much bigger, but i’m surprised at the theater count being so low. the last madea film made 41 million opening weekend.
I’m an African-American.
I do not like the character of “Madea.” I do not like Tyler Perry. He is not making movies for me.
i like tyler perry as well, but i just don’t like his madea movies. to me if you’ve see madea movie, you’ve seen them all.
Well, i am NOT african american and the previews may not be that great, but going to his movies is always a great experience. His movies have the appeal to all races. His best being Diary of a mad black woman– which will have you hooked in the first 10 minutes emotionally –, the why did i get married series, and the family that preys (with kathy bates). I dare each and everyone of you who don’t think his movies are for you to check out any of them. He is a brilliant filmmaker.
Saw “Water For Elephants” and enjoyed it very much. The two leads were OK, though I wasn’t really sold on Reese Witherspoon in the role even before I saw it. She still comes across as a girl on-screen instead of as a woman. I don’t mean that disrespectfully. Maybe it’s her delicate features.
Christoph Waltz was excellent and I couldn’t imagine Sean Penn, who at one time was up for the role, coming anywhere near Waltz’s performance. Not that Penn isn’t good. It’s just that Waltz brings that European flavor to the role, intentionally or not.
And it was great to see a different world revealed to us, the circus with all its secrets. I’m so tired of all the super heroes and car chases. A story about people battling hard times and finding love was a welcome respite.
rob pattinson will never improve? he improved a lot in water for elephants vs what he was in remember me. since you are so gung ho on reading reviews then you would now what they said about him this time vs with remember me. sott mantz tore him apart the last time, but this time actually gave a nice review. he’s a not the only critic to do this. of course, there are still the critics that didn’t like him, but there are also the critics that have a different tune now with him in this movie. i always thought that rob is the type actor that would get better then more experience he has, and i saw that in water for elephants.
i didn’t know that hop had that high of theater count.
Every box office forecasting site was predicting that Medea would EASILY win the weekend by going low 30′s minimum. It’s no big deal that it’s not winning the weekend; the problem is that Tyler Perry’s movies don’t have strong legs. They drop at least 50 percent or more on the second weekend, which doesn’t bode well if the opening weekend ends up being low/mid 20′s.
I agree with the people that feel the root of Water For Elephants problems are in the casting. Reese Witherspoon and Robert Pattinson seems very far fetched. And the fact is that Pattinson can’t act. He should enjoy the Twilight thing while it lasts, he won the lottery there, god knows how but he did. At least he can take solace in the fact that he’s Robert DeNiro as a performer when compared to Tyler Lautner. That kid is even worse, I mean DREADFUL. So at least there’s that.
That hold for Rio is crazy good. It’s looking like a very strong performer if today’s numbers are accurate. Also, very nice for African Cats. Disney Nature is usually of a solid quality, and I expect this film to play into very strong profitability over the next few weeks.
Where’s Scream 4? Disappearing almost as fast as Sucker Punch.
here is my view about rob pattinson. he did a lot better in water for elephants then he did in remember me. he’s still not the greatest actor, but there is something there. i think he gets better with the more experience her gets. he needs a strong director, and i hope that director is cronenberg. i like rob, and it has nothing to with twilight. i liked some of his pre-twilight movies like how to be. he won the strasbourg film festival award for that movie.
Rob is a good actor and Cronenberg chose him for Cosmopolis. Why would he do it if he’s so dreadful like you said?
So, looks like Scream 4 took a big drop and proves that it will have no legs. Confirmed a dud just like Bob Weinstein’s Dimension’s post Disney career.
I personally think opening a movie during easter weekend is the worst. You have good Friday — religious services in the mid afternoon. And you have easter services either at 8P at night for 2 hours or sunday morning masses which end at 1P. Then you have your easter dinner gathering — when is there time to watch a movie? Didn’t Tyler Perry’s movie open last year on easter weekend as well? If it wasn’t, then this was a big mistake.
robert pattinson is actually a very good actor — everyone should check out Remember Me — after seeing that movie, I just couldn’t watch the twilight movies anymore without noticing the difference in acting.
Why did madea open in such few theaters? Given that the last one opened at 41 million == i would think they could book more theaters.
Limited release is always the way to go with Tyler Perry movies, since his audience is so niche. You expand as the film overperforms per screen. Seems like this one might not do that, so probably a smart move by Lionsgate.
Meanwhile, further down the chart…how ’bout that INSIDIOUS? Another great hold and it’s gonna outgross SCREAM 4! So much for the legs some people were insisting S4 was gonna have last week.
I don’t know of madea’s looking too soft. we’re talking less screens as usual and a way better per screen average then most of the top ten pics. Not to mention 26 mil, probably more. That’s called a hit. Water for Elephants has 2,817 screens. Don’t know if that is something they should be impressed by. Good money for both pics though. is all I’m sayin. If we compared everybody movies from their last BO take, then there would be softy’s coming out every week then.
ummm, isn’t that what this site does? It’s all based on box office, no matter the quality of the film.