SAG-AFTRA Sued For Witholding Foreign Residuals And … 
Zach Braff Ends $3+M Kickstarter Campaign 
Fox Unscripted TV Czar Mike Darnell To Exit 
FIRST BOX OFFICE: ‘Fast & Furious 6′ Easy … 
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 … 
Full 2012-2013 TV Season Series Rankings 
TOLDJA! Paramount Pocketing $190M From Disney For Marvel … 
‘Good Morning America’ Hits 19-Year Viewership … 
MGM Buys ‘Modern Family’ Producer Ben … 
‘Fashion Police’ Writers Chant On Picket Lines: … 
Universal Makes Seven-Figure Deal For ‘The School For … 
SATURDAY PM: This is shaping up as 2011′s lousiest box office weekend in North America with only $70M total grosses. Yes, even worse than Hurricane Irene’s. A lot of surprises in this weekend’s numbers and a fuller analysis is coming. But no surprise which new North American movie is No. 1:
1. With $8M Friday and +20% for $9.7M Saturday, it’s a $24M weekend for Warner Bros’ Contagion playing in 42% more theaters — 3,222 — than its nearest newcomer. This Participant Media-backed disease movie looked like yet another yikes-you’re-all-going-to-die formula pic. But I’m surprised it didn’t generate more appeal what with Oscar-winning Steven Soderbergh directing 6 Academy Award winners or nominees: Matt Damon, Kate Winslet, Marion Cotillard, Gwyneth Paltrow, Jude Law, and Laurence Fishburne. (Readers are urging me to include Oscar-honored John Hawke and Elliott Gould as well…) That added oomph to credited screenplay writer Scott Burns’ material. “Yes, it was important to be provocative and to scare people,” a Warner Bros exec tells me about the $60M-budget pic. “But both the print and trailer and TV campaign present a more well-rounded view of the mystery. We did sell the visceral experience — a smart and thrilling look at a killer virus, the science behind it, and the aftermath.” Warner Bros took the film to Venice to solid reviews and conducted an aggressive consumer campaign. Besides, adult movies are working at the box office.
2. Entering its 5th weekend in release, DreamWorks/Disney’s hit dramedy The Help which is also backed by Participant Media made $2.7M Friday and $4M Saturday going to $9.4M from 2,935 locations for the weekend. It’s estimated new cume of $137.8M by Monday.
3. This seemingly anticipated mixed martial arts drama Warrior starring Tom Hardy (Bane in the next Batman) and Joel Edgerton was only released for 1,869 runs. It opened with $1.8M Friday and $2.1M Saturday for what was just a dismal $4.8M weekend. Another very disappointing opening for Lionsgate which was very high on this actioner. Did last weekend’s sneaks let some wannasee steam escape? Will this hurt Hardy whom Hollywood execs consider a hot soon-to-be-star?
4. Focus Features’ adult holdover The Debt earned $1.4M Friday (-45% from a week ago) from 1,874 theaters and a projected $4.5M weekend for an estimated $21.6M cume by Monday.
5. Sony Pictures’ holdover Colombiana made $1.1M Friday and $1.9M Saturday from 2,354 runs for a $4M weekend and $29.8M cume.
But I have it on good authority that Sony execs were hiding out at the Toronto Film Festival (where better-than-expected Moneyball officially premiered Friday night) rather than get tagged by its Columbia Pictures’ R-rated Bucky Larson: Born To Be A Star which had one of the most annoying TV ad campaigns I’ve ever been assaulted by. Mercifully, its box office take was miniscule: $540K Friday and $570K Saturday for only a $1.2M weekend. That wasn’t even enough to make it into the Top 10 much less Sony’s hoped-for $4M. Fortunately the budget is purportedly just $10M. Usually Adam Sandler’s Happy Madison production banner gives Sony box office gold: stupid pics popular with audiences. But this was fool’s gold.
Before I give you the rest of the Top 10, you should know that Kevin Hart’s Laugh At My Pain was No. 10 Friday despite Hartbeat Productions and Codeblack Entertainment releasing it into only 99 theaters. It opened to $758K Friday and an estimated weekend of $2M. But it may ultimately be beaten by The Weinstein Co’s Spy Kids 4D. (I’ll know Sunday AM.) Hart’s fans turned out for this profanity-filled film version of his recent stand-up tour. It offers less than an hour of Hart onstage but also includes such bonus footage as Hart touring his old neighborhood in Philadelphia and faking a bank heist. Directed by Leslie Small, this 1-hour, 28-minute pic and its entry into the Top 10 now establishes Hart as a bonafide star beyond just his YouTube videos which have drawn tens of millions of views. Look for the major studios to take notice.
6. Rise Of the Planet Of The Apes (Fox) Week 6 [2,887 Theaters]
Friday $1.1M, Saturday $1.8M, Weekend $4M, Estimated Cume $168M
7. Shark Night 3D (Relativity) Week 2 [2,848 Theaters]
Friday $1M, Saturday $1.6M, Weekend $3.6M, Estimated Cume $14.9M
8. Apollo 18 (Dimension/The Weinstein Co) Week 2 [3,330 Theaters]
Friday $875K, Saturday $1.4M, Weekend $3M, Estimated Cume $15.1M
9. Our Idiot Brother (The Weinstein Co) Week 3 [2,396 Theaters]
Friday $835K, Saturday $1.1M, Weekend $3M, Estimated Cume $21.7M
10. Laugh At My Pain (Hartbeat Prods/Codeblack Ent) NEW [99 Theaters]
Friday $758K, Estimated Weekend $2M
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.
Loading ...
Saw CONTAGION screened – it’s well researched. There are no zombies, or aliens. The more I thought about it the morning after, it was a good fast moving film. One thing is for sure,it makes you want to wash your hands all the time, and thumbs, which is a good thing.
Very well researched. Also, insanely boring.
Um, is Deadline getting paid to promote Warrior this weekend or what? Usually when a site says a film is number two in the headline it means it finished number two. Not that it’s the second highest grossing “newcomer”.
From what I can see Warrior – a film that was predicted to get at least 8-9 mil at the box office with many sites predicting it may go higher because of all the great reviews – is massively underperforming and about to get it’s butt kicked by a film that has been in theaters more than a month in The Help. “Hot” Tom Hardy isn’t showing much in terms of being able to open a movie which should scare the folks at Paramount who have staked so much on him being the star of the future for it’s Mission Impossible franchise. A franchise which by the way only made money in it’s first film. Mostly because of Tom Cruise’s gross point participation but also because of their incredibly bloated budgets.
Here’s a tip for Hollywood. Film fans make someone a star, not studios. See how people vote with their feet and then go from there. Just because a lot of film geeks loved Hardy in a film that almost no one ever saw (Bronson) and he had a bit part in a massive hit doesn’t mean anything.
My bad. I confused Tom Hardy for Jeremy Renner. Which is pretty easy to do since neither one is a star.
Some bizarre hate for Tom Hardy and Jeremy Renner here. Especially since the latter has had multiple Oscar nominations and is slated to take over the Mission Impossible franchise, the Bourne franchise, and is in The Avengers.
I think you just proved his point.
Thanks Bill, I mean David, or whatever you’re calling yourself.
How did he just “prove his point”?
I think you mean “refuted”. Both actors have done some phenomenal roles and are slated to appear in some major upcoming films and Bill is just pissing on them like he’s a jealous teenage girl.
Somebody isn’t a movie star and they’re bitter about it.
Why is anyone paying attention to this guy?!
A couple months ago he was ranting how Pirates 4 lost money…
…right after it topped a BILLION worldwide.
@Whoa Now
Um, don’t know who you are. But I never argued that the Pirates franchise loses money. Ever. That is a case of a film that they have to make because of fiduciary duty. The foreign pre-sales alone pay for the budget.
I love when people resort to false claims without proof to make their weak arguments, though. Very mature. Very 12 year old kind of thing. Must make you feel really good about yourself. Let’s see first the “hater” argument. Then the false claims. Next you’ll go to the standard name calling I’m sure.
Jeremy Renner
He’s a solid actor but not a lead. Good to see he got in serious shape for “The Avengers,” though unfortunately Chris Evans forgot the cardio.
But let’s state the truth: Jeremy Renner is a great actor and a gay man WHO TOM CRUISE LIKES.
IF TOM CRUISE LIKES YOU (ESP. IF YOU’RE GAY) YOU’RE IN THE GAY MAFIA (HELLOW BRYAN LOURD).
JEREMY RENNER WILL FOLLOW TC’S LEAD AND NOT COME OUT OF THE CLOSET THOUGH.
SORRY HOLLYWOOD – GAY MEN CAN CHOOSE YOUR “STARS” BUT ONLY PREDOMINENTLY STRAIGHT AUDS WILL GIVE THEM DESERVED BOX-OFFICE.
DON’T CHOOSE YOUR STARS BASED SO MUCH ON THEIR SEXUAL PREFERENCE AND YOURS – HAVE A GOOD STORY – AND MAYBE YOU’LL ACTUALLY MAKE MORE $$.
Lay off the caps. Oh and while you’re at it, lay off the crazy talk too.
Maybe lay off the pipe as well…
COCAINE IS A HELL OF A DRUG
Bill, Hardy has nothing at all to do with mission impossible
that would be Jeremy Renner
That’s why he said, “the latter”… means the last name on the list Jeremy Renner.
Tom Hardy’s in the new Mission: Impossible? That’s news to me…
Bill, once again you’re wrong and naive on so many points it’s exhausting to keep up.
For instance, your statement that only MI 1 made money. MI2 had a budget of 125 million. What did it make at theatres? 546 MILLION DOLLARS. That’s not counting any other formats. That’s not counting the soundtrack, which was released at a time when people still bought CD’s and Limp Bizkit was popular. I’m not going to get into MI 3, but it was also very profitable.
And Tom Hardy. He’s BANE in the next Batman and that is going to open big, big, big…
You get on this sight and continually post analysis and opinions that won’t pass the simplest fact-check.
Do everyone a favor and think before you post.
You don’t know anything about what you’re talking about. Why do think Paramount cut Tom Cruise loose for after MI3. Because he was making the studio big bucks? Do a simple Google search and you’ll find out that Tom got 20% of the gross receipts on those films which is part of the reason they didn’t make money.
Someday people on here will think before they post and realize that it’s the money you make not the money something grosses minus the money you spend, including production, publicity and yeas – gross percentages for the principals.
I’m guessing you’ve never actually run a business which is why you don’t know Jack, Jack.
Sorry Bill, but Jack’s right.
The MI films have all made a fuck-load of money.
Say what you want about Bill, but neither Tom Hardy or Jeremy Renner are going to be the stars the film industry thinks they’ll be–regardless of their respective talents.
There are six billion people out there. Just because you don’t think they won’t be stars, doesn’t necessarily mean they won’t.
Dan,
Please see Johnny Depp and Robert Downey Jr before they hit the big time after years of putting in solid performances.
Hate to break it to you, but MI 2 lost money despite a large worldwide gross. Check out George Lucas’ “Blockbusting.”
Hate to break it to you, but MI 2 lost money despite a significant world wide gross.
Seriously? With a worldwide gross of $546M and production budget of $125M? Wow the P&A must have been a bitch…or maybe you have no idea what you’re talking about.
Yeah. That must be it.
First off, you can look up the fact that MI 2 & 3 didn’t make money. But even if it wasn’t that easy just think about it. If the Mission Impossible movies made money Paramount could have been sued by it’s shareholders for letting him go after MI3 because they would have been breaching their fiduciary duty by doing so. Or do you really think they split with TC because he jumped on Oprah’s couch?
But in case you really need to figure it out here’s how it works. MI2 had an “announced” production budget of 125 mil. Publicity and distribution budget of probably around 60 mil worldwide (the 100 mil+ PR budgets of the last couple of years weren’t in effect back then) and then the real kicker – Tom Cruise’s 20% of the gross 100 mil plus (even though Cruise was getting gross participation there are some costs the studios are able to take off – Tommy Boy got a little over 100 mil and that you can also look up). That’s a total of 285+ million dollars in costs. Now then studios get about 55% of the gross BO office or about 270 mil and there you have it – a film that doesn’t make it’s money back. It probably creeped into the black with ancillaries but creeping into the black two or three years later isn’t what tentpole movies are meant to do. MI3 did even worse and Cruise still had his 20 and 20 deal in place for that one.
All of this can be found on various web-sites especially from back when Paramount cut Cruise loose. Studio heads may appear to be stupid at times but they don’t let people go when they are making the studio money.
Thanks for the math, bill. I’m sure that will fit neatly with my 9/11 conspiracy theories…
From an old-time Hollywood insider to a complete novice — They don’t make sequels if they don’t make money.
I’m sure you’ll fit well in the Republican electorate machine: DENY DENY DENY!
I see your point, Bill. Chastened by the horrific losses on MI2, Paramount leapt into action and cut Cruise loose…well, six years later. But still, they did it!
That said, however, a few points. One, MI2 was released back when sliding scales were still common, and I very much doubt Paramount’s share on a front-loaded blockbuster was only the average, 55%. Second, those “ancillaries” included $34M of DVD sales plus whatever they received on TV and product placement. Third, Tommy C’s cut was $75M (I did check the interwebs, thanks), not $100M.
But whatever. On one hand we’re supposed to believe studios are highly sensitive to investor concerns about the net; on the other hand, we’re supposed to believe they kept him for another six years after he lost them money. Everybody’s got a story.
@ Paul
Man, it’s tough arguing with people who don’t want to believe anything. As myself and someone else on here has pointed out they have been articles on the Mission Impossible series. But whatever.
They kept Cruise on for another six years because he was the most bankable star in the world numnuts. They did another Mission Impossible because 1. Cruise wanted to do it. and 2. They pretty much broke even on number 2 so they figured they would tole the dice again. BUT Cruise was making less money on films because of his ridiculous 20 and 20 deal. Something that the studios have reined in to a degree but not as much as they should. If you read between the lines on the recent Lone Ranger news you will notice that they’re trying to trim the budget by reducing Depp and Bruckheimer’s “up front” salaries. That naturally means they both also have gross participation salaries as well. You’ll probably try and claim that maybe they have net points but if you know anything you would know that net points are for suckers.
Bottom line is that you’re not going to Google the Mission Impossible series. You’re not going to believe that 2 & 3 didn’t make money. And you probably still believe that Hardy and Renner will be stars. Or you work for an agency and you’re trying to pick some more pockets on Monday.
Bill — are you nuts, or just trying to start arguments?
You say “then then studios get about 55% of the gross BO office or about 270 ” — then the next sentence: “there you go, a film that didn’t make it’s money back.”
so — that 270 million that the studio MADE BACK… What do you mean? It made 270 million by your own math? Is a movie supposed to make.. extra money, other than… the money than it, uh… made for the studio?
wtf are you talking about?
Dude. I’m not the one who said MI2 lost money. The studio accountants did. Look, if you want to look it up and find out why those films lost money when all is said and done it is easy to do. I’m not gonna bother because I know people like you believe what you believe. Whether it is true or not.
The problem with Warrior is that its geared pretty much solely to the MMA audience and anyone not into will instantly assume, “Oh, that’s not something I would be into”
Agreed, no one is mentioning that. Mixed martial arts, ultimate fighting, or whatever you call it has certainly grown in popularity, but it’s hardly a mainstream sport, especially as a setting for a movie. Boxing, for instance, isn’t for everyone, but it’s something classic and familiar that people can connect to.
@ Bill – re: “Film fans make someone a star, not studios.” Don’t you think that there were actually some “Stars” that were created by the Studios – I mean, it would explain someone like a “Robert Redford”, who plays the same part in every role he’s ever had, and has the acting range of a micron. Oh well, I could be wrong, because if he’s really that bad, only the fans could save him.
CONTAGION is boring, suffers from it’s deatached nature and ultimately feels like a second-rate European mini series. Word of mouth will sink this. Ugh.
Jensen:
I’m sorry Steven Soderbergh didn’t give you the boobs and bombs you were looking for.
I really liked Contagion. It was thought-provoking and well-acted. It actually had a point of view. Wow, what a concept. I agree it isn’t an action thriller. But I knew that going in, having read several reviews. Wow, what a concept.
Both CONTAGION and THE HELP are PARTICIPANT FILMS…good for them!
Saw Warrior tonight… freaking awesome. The plot is so preposterously manipulative I was embarrassed to go (“The two men fighting for the championship… ARE BROTHERS!!!” urghhh) but the movie was an absolutely blast, totally immersive, went by in what felt like half the time. And Edgarton, Hardy, and Nolte are all terrific. Just a slam dunk of a movie. I want to see it again.
when was the last time the top five at the box office were actually all good movies? as film-goers we should be happy. maybe it’s a good omen for the fall.
To be fair though Warrior isn’t showing on as many screens as Contagion and Help. That was always the disadvantage.
To be logical, Warrior is playing on 0.58X the theaters, but brought in 0.25X the money. So Warrior did considerably worse on a per-theater basis than Contagion. Then again, it probably cost far less than half of Contagion, so maybe it did a lot better. . .all depends on who you are in the chain.
All due respect, it’s also due to the fact that there are NO stars and the film attempts to legitimize a fringe sport that the masses (thankfully) haven’t caught on to. I’m sure it’s a well-made film, but there are several factors at play re: why it’s not making the money it should.
to be fair, a movie like warrior would never open on 3,000 screens, so whining about it is just stupid
Still trying to figure out why Bucky Larson got a theatrical release. If it didn’t star Sandler’s boy, it would have went straight to that DVD bin. I know you gotta look out for your peeps, but good Lord.
You’re being generous. If it didn’t star Sandler’s boy… it wouldn’t have been made.
Wait, didn’t Participant also make BUCKY LARSON? Social action!
U.S office box office is only a tiny factor in a movie’s success. Its a global market. James Bond is one of the world’s most successful movie franchises and brings in around 700 million worldwide a movie, but still only takes 160 million in the U.S.
Tom Hardy is big in the U.K. (and other countries) and Warrior will take 50 million plus in the U.K. The film will do well worldwide even if it fails in the U.S.
I doubt the movie Help will take much worldwide — as the movies is a U.S. orientated market. The news today should be that Contagion with so many A-List movie stars and playing in 3,300 theaters only had a 8M opening!
The North American box office is becoming less important, but it’s still by far the most important and profitable market. Big dumb superhero action movies or James Bond films do make more money overseas lately, perhaps because American audiences are tiring of CGI, 3D, awful plots etc, not to mention outrageously high ticket prices.
Films like the “Blind Side”, “The Help” etc. might not have appeal overseas but they can still make plenty of money here. IMO the “internationalization” of Hollywood is a bad thing as it means bland, cookie-cutter movies with faceless, boring stars designed to offend no one.
You think WARRIOR will do $50+ million at the box office in the U.K.? I think you’re way high on that guesstimate. Just scanning the current British rankings shows movies like Kung Fu Panda 2, Cars, X-Men: First Class, and Transformers 3 all raking in well under $50 million. Tom Hardy or no, I very much doubt WARRIOR will break out like that.
Yeah. It will surely make over 50 mil in the UK. Because Bronson made 1.3 mil in the UK two years ago. Which shows that Hardy is friggin HUGE over there.
The 3 big hitters at the UK box office this year are all coincidently British films. They are Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2, The King’s Speech and The Inbetweeners Movie.
Meanwhile The Fighter never really set the UK box office alight.
Plus with competition from I Don’t Know How She Does It, Tinker Tailer Soldier Spy, Jane Eyre and Friends with Benefits, Warrior’s B.O chances are pretty slim in the UK.
The Help (the book) has been a bestseller in the UK, though, so you never know
WARRIOR was incredible. People cheering in the theater and crying at the end. What happened?
Perhaps the clapping and tears was only in your head. The have pills for that, amigo.
“Warriors” is a primal fable of fathers and sons, brothers estranged, finding their way to love, forgiveness, and redemption in the bankuptcy and despair of working class America. The audience cheered repeatedly during the Friday night show. I cheered, cried, cringed at the vulnerablity of these stranded, angry men wrestling their way back to love. Tom Hardy, Joel Edgerton and Nick Nolte could not have been more compelling, It’s been a long time since a film had such a visceral impact on me. Bravo to Participant for backing this film. I think word-of-mouth will be very good.
“Warriors” is actually about a gang trying to get back to their turf on Coney Island after falsely being blamed for the murder of Cyrus, leader of the Riffs.
“Warrior” on the other hand is a touching story about an estranged family brought back together by MMA.
This one made me laugh.
A job well done by the studio intern that wrote this…
It’s not just 6 Oscar nominees/winners starring in Contagion, it’s 8. You forgot John Hawkes and Elliott Gould.
Wow. Even though I found “The Help” to be “meh” I can’t help but applaud the success of that movie, which along with “Contagion” spells dual successes for Participant Films.
Participant is such a smart ensemble of good-hearted folks that you can’t help but root for their unqualified triumph. A production company with its head — and heart– in the right place. So good on ‘em!
As for “Warrior” what a head scratcher. I thought for sure with MMF and Ultimate Fighting being so huge in this country that this movie, buoyed by phenomenal reviews, would skyrocket. Smart script. Good word of mouth. Decent acting. Hmmmm… maybe folks behind “Warrior” should have taken a page from “The Fighter” by having a slow roll out building to a momentous crescendo of box office and critical acclaim. I also guess what they say about Hollywood is true: Nobody knows nothin’ ! It’s all a roll of the dice!
I wouldn’t call the script smart so much as semi-ridiculous and insanely manipulative, but the movie is actually very entertaining and you want good things to happen for the characters. re: the MMA thing, it’s still very much a niche sport and they missed the real bubble – if this movie had come out four years ago when MMA became the coolest thing ever almost overnight, the box office prospects would have been better. It’s kind of gone the way of the World Series of Poker – it’s still out there, and lots of people still like it, but it’s not white hot like it was.
I saw contagion and I was disappointed. For millions of people apparently dying in a movie, it had hardly any emotion. Every character’s screen time was too brief to like any of them and ended up being like a bad version of traffic with side plots which served no purpose. Also the more I thought of the movie the more I realized it was just and elaborate infomercial for the cdc. Take your flu shot everyone! This movie is supposed to be good with the great cast and director but fails to deliver.
How embarrassing for anyone on that 500k that did go see Bucky Larson. I was actually certain it would open below a million. Then again, it still has two days to underperform to my expectations.
Lionsgate should be ashamed of themselves for the piss poor distribution of WARRIOR. CONTAGION hits more quadrants and has a notable cast that should make it the clear cut number one, but THE HELP should not have beaten out WARRIOR.
Agreed, the marketing was job was just horrendous on this one.
I don’t believe Apes dropped that much.
That marvelous little overachiever that no one expected to even work, much less play for more than 2 weekends, just keeps chugging along…
Contagion was highly anticipated. Not much competition..Why in that case is 22+ million a good thing. I would have thought the film should have done over 30 million.. Considering the “all Star” cast. If none of them can’t generate at least 5 million in BO.. how is this a hit. I don’t care if it is a great film or not, but it being in over 3000 theaters and only bringing in 20+ for the weekend; up against a film in its 4th week and another with untested actors.
I don’t see a hit.. but maybe hits are categorized differently now. Several films with big named stars that made near the same amount were called Bombs. How many names are in this one.
I personally did not see them advertising this as a Tom Hardy film — nor did posters remind me that he was in Inception, so I think it’s rather unfair to compare or to say that this is proof of his box office pull.
You’re joking, right? Even if they had promoted him, Warrior wouldn’t have opened better. He’s not a draw yet–and whether he is in the future is still up in the air.
Had no idea WARRIOR would be so good. Saw it with a crowd that applauded at the end of every victory. When the credits rolled, there were sniffles from both the men and women followed by hearty applause. It floored us. Low expectations did have a part in it though, but that was only because it was marketed with the IDENTICAL trailer and similar logo to THE FIGHTER. I think that hurt the film in trying to appeal to mainstream audiences. It just made Warrior look like a knock off of The Fighter. But it’s not! Unfortunately, that’s the hurdle Lionsgate has to get over now; convincing people it’s not The Fighter. If they had just marketed it as it’s own thing, then it could’ve been avoided. If good word of mouth spreads, this could be a major sleeper hit/film with legs. Everyone I know who has seen this, on the west coast and the east, has LOVED it. My guy friends AND their girlfriends. They’ve come out thrilled and have posted their reactions on Facebook. Tom Hardy gives a dedication to the role rivaled only by DeNiro in RAGING BULL. Nolte delivers the most tragic and compelling version of his ‘craggly GRRR character’ ever. Joel Edgerton is the perfect balance to his eccentric co-stars. You want him to win from the get go thanks to a natural, sympathetic presence. The film has a great structure that builds and builds emotionally so that by the end, you’re biting your fingernails and your eyes are glued to the screen. The last ten minutes of the film, if you’re not at least a little choked up, you’re not human. The tears were streaming down my face. Such a great ending. Such a great picture. Gavin O’Connor is the man.
Looks like most of the marketing budget for “Warrior” was to hire plants to post here.
Nope! I gush because it’s a movie that deserves to be seen.
Can’t someone give a positive review about a movie without being called a plant? Have you even seen the movie?
I think people are assuming that there a lot of plants on the board because right now the film is coming in at less than 3,000 a screen for the opening weekend. Those are darn near straight to video numbers and no film recovers from that. The idea that there is some groundswell for the movie or that it will have legs is simply ludicrous. Those kinds of opening weekend numbers mean that theaters will be looking to get out of showing Warrior by week three and it will be lucky to get much past 12 or 13 mil for it’s entire run.
No, not every positive review is a plant, but when they’re written like THAT, in studio PR speak, and in a way NO REGULAR PERSON would ever write, it’s obviously a plant.
But you’d know that if you weren’t a complete idiot.
Thank you!
Exactly.
I read this and leapt to my feet, yelling “yes! A post for the common message board reviewer!” Then I printed a copy and hung it in my window, and was immediately greeted by a resounding chorus of honks and shouted huzzahs from the street below. Moments later the doorbell rang and a quiet, unassuming man from the restaurant across the street brought me a free sushi platter. We hugged, cried a little, and I tipped him generously.
Word of mouth will guarantee your post future fame.
Not when they say things like “the audience applauded at the end of EVERY victory.”
That’s just complete horseshit and you know it is.
I’ve been going to movies for 25+ years and the audience doesn’t clap because it’s not a live-fucking-performance. There were cheers when StarWars Episode 1 came on the screen but that was about it.
It’s so obvious when they lie.
Wow. This response is very entertaining. I’m really not a plant. I’m a normal filmgoer that genuinely loved the film. I don’t go on blogs to hate and complain. I wrote the initial post that way because that’s how the film made me feel. How rare is that? You see a movie that lifts you and excites you and you tell everyone you know to go see it. I posted my thoughts here because this is a known industry website and I Jack, try going to a midnight show.
@bfagoa
I’m surprised you had to tell people to go see it since “Everyone I know who has seen this, on the west coast and the east, has LOVED it. My guy friends AND their girlfriends. They’ve come out thrilled and have posted their reactions on Facebook.”
Let’s face it, your account of the film is DRIPPIING in PR-speak. The worst offense:
“When the credits rolled, there were sniffles from both the men and women followed by hearty applause.”
C’mon bfagoa. It wasn’t Schindler’s List, okay. You are CLEARLY a plant. Just tone it down next time…
Anytime I see a good film, especially if it’s something that people aren’t aware of, I like to let them know about it. It’s as simple as that. It’s actually very sad. We’ve gotten to the point where most movies leave us with a shoulder shrug or worse. When a genuinely good film comes along, I want everyone to know about it. I want to tell them “Yes, spend your hard earned fifteen bucks and see that movie. For once you won’t feel ripped off or let down!” Rarely do you have a grand emotional experience at the movies. When that happens, I put the word out to my friends and family. I’m a filmmaker myself and I feel it’s my duty to become an advocate for a film like that. It doesn’t make me a plant. I’m not a cynic like you, trying to figure out who’s an insider here and who isn’t. It ain’t gonna happen buddy. There are plenty of folks on here who moan and complain about the industry. All I’m doing is putting some positive word of mouth out there for a worthy film. You might be able to understand what I’m talking about if you’d just stop bitching and actually see the movie.
I agree. It is a great movie, far better than the Fighter and the two leads are yummy.
Saw Contagion yesterday. A very good film, but not a great one. Jennifer Ehle was the best thing about it–I wish she had more screen time. And that this movie gives her career a well-deserved boost.
I’m happy that CONTAGION is number one for Marion Cotillard’s sake. Love her. Definitely the best actress working today. Then I saw the $60 million price tag. WTF? Why does Soderberg and the Hollywood media keeping trying to tell us that his films are cheap indie flicks when they cost $60 million even before marketing? That price tag truly is stunning after reading Soderberg’s interviews in which he talks like he’s making a far cheaper film and having to call in all sorts of favors with the actors only working ten days each according to him so where the hell is the $60 million going except in Soderberg’s or some producer’s back pocket?
I’d cut off the pinkie-finger on my left hand to spend a night with Marion Cotillard.
Warrior is a damn good movie.
Hey Nikki, when you’re doing the autopsy on Warrior are you going to talk about the fact that a Mixed martial arts movie supposedly targeting young males had one of the gayest marketing campaigns of the decade? Whoever was behind the materials had no idea what he/she was selling. Laughable.