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 … 
Full 2012-2013 TV Season Series Rankings 
TOLDJA! Paramount Pocketing $190M From Disney For Marvel … 
June 15-17 Weekend Actuals
1. Madagascar 3 (DreamWorks Anim/Paramount) Week 2 [4,263 Theaters] PG
Friday $10M, Saturday $13.3M, Sunday $10.7M, Weekend $34.0M (-44%), Cume $119.0M2. Prometheus (Fox) Week 2 [3,442 Theaters] R
Friday $5.8M, Saturday $7.8M, Sunday $7.2M Weekend $20.7M (-59%), Cume $89.4M3. Rock Of Ages (New Line/Warner Bros) NEW [3,470 Theaters] PG13
Friday $5.3M, Saturday $5.5M, Sunday $3.7M, Weekend $14.4M4. That’s My Boy (Columbia/Sony) NEW [3,030 Theaters] R
Friday $4.5M, Saturday $4.7M, Sunday $4.2M Weekend $13.5M5. Snow White & The Huntsman (Universal) Week 3 [3,701 Theaters] PG13
Friday $4.1M, Saturday $5.3M, Sunday $3.9M, Weekend $13.3M(-76%), Cume $122.0M6. Men in Black 3 (Columbia/Sony) Week 4 [3,135 Theaters] PG13
Friday $2.7M, Saturday $3.8M, Sunday $3.5M, Weekend $10M (-28%), Cume $152.7M7. The Avengers (Marvel/Disney) Week 7 [2,582 Theaters] PG13
Friday $2.2M, Saturday $3.3M, Sunday $3.4M, Weekend $8.9M (-21%), Cume $586.8M8. Best Exotic Marigold Hotel (Fox Searchlight) Week 7 [1,184 Theaters] PG13
Friday $625K, Saturday $957K, Sunday $693K, Weekend $2.3M (-30%), Cume $35.2M9. Moonrise Kingdom (Focus Features) Week 4 [178 Theaters] PG13
Friday $612K, Saturday $921K, Sunday $704K Weekend $2.2M (+44%), Cume $6.8M10. Battleship (Universal) Week 5 [942 Theaters] PG13
Friday $334K, Saturday $480K, Sunday $433K, Weekend $1.2M (-45%), Cume $62.2M
SATURDAY PM, 3RD UPDATE: My sources say everything is staying pretty much as forecast, with the only question whether anything will get a bump from Father’s Day. Summer 2012 is clearly suffering a serious case of seasickness due to the constant up and down, up and down, motion of the North American box office. After the tsunami that was Marvel’s The Avengers, five major studio movies disappointed. “One movie this summer has made any money. And a number have lost a fortune,” one studio mogul maintains to me. Then DreamWorks Animation’s Madagascar 3 and Fox’s Prometheus performed better than expected and are still easily holding #1 and #2 their second weekends with $35M (-42%) and $21M (-59%) respectively. (Though the Ridley Scott scifi thriller dropped a whopping -73% Friday to Friday because of all those gaping plot holes.)
Contrast that with this weekend’s newcomers which each should have earned over $20M because of their star power. But New Line/Warner Bros’ Rock Of Ages (3,470 theaters) fell to earth with a thud. Which Hollywood expected because the pic had been tracking poorly for weeks (and even went down at one point week to week). The studio felt the 1980s period piece was a hard sell to younger moviegoers. I suspect the problem was casting. Russell Brand has been repellant to moviegoers, while Tom Cruise as iconic rocker proved just too incredulous for audiences. The PG-13 musical is looking to open to only $15M this weekend after taking in just $5.3M Friday and $5.4M Saturday. Given that the pic was based on the Broadway warbler, it did worse than the studio expected and far worse than Mamma Mia which with the same pedigree opened to $27M. Warner Bros was holding out hope for this $75M-budget pic, thinking that a good CinemaScore could generate great word of mouth and therefore great legs for the film. It didn’t materialize: audiences only gave Rock Of Ages a mediocre ‘B’. There’s just no way to save this s(t)inker with hack director Adam Shankman at the helm: in fact, weekend gross may fall below $15M by Monday.
Columbia/Sony’s That’s My Boy (3,030 theaters) starring Adam Sandler also was bottoming. It will hurt further that audiences only gave it a ‘B-’ CinemaScore. (“But ‘B’s with everybody under 50,” a Sony exec emails me.) Hollywood didn’t expect Sandler to attract his usual family friendly audience with an ‘R’ rating. But an actor who reliably takes in $30M to $40M every opening weekend and then dropping to $13M after grossing only $4.5M Friday and $4.8M Saturday can’t go unchastized. Especially if he hurt his brand with his most recent pic, that execrable flop Jack & Jill. (How much you wanna bet Andy Samberg is rethinking that SNL exit now?) No one will be surprised if weekend gross falls below $13M by Monday.
I’m working on the autopsy reports. Overall moviegoing this weekend may be as dismal as $125M, which is -15% even compared to last year when Green Lantern bombed. Here are the Top Ten based on weekend estimates:
1. Madagascar 3 (DreamWorks Anim/Paramount) Week 2 [4,263 Theaters] PG
Friday $9.9M, Saturday $13.3M, Weekend $35.0M (-42%), Cume $120.0M
2. Prometheus (Fox) Week 2 [3,442 Theaters] R
Friday $5.8M, Saturday $8.0M, Weekend $21.0M (-59%), Cume $89.6M
3. Rock Of Ages (New Line/Warner Bros) NEW [3,470 Theaters] PG13
Friday $5.3M, Saturday $5.4M, Weekend $15.0M
4. That’s My Boy (Columbia/Sony) NEW [3,030 Theaters] R
Friday $4.5M, Saturday $4.7M, Weekend $13.0M
5. Snow White & The Huntsman (Universal) Week 3 [3,701 Theaters] PG13
Friday $4.0M, Saturday $4.8M, Weekend $13.0M, Cume $121.6M
6. Men In Black 3 (Columbia/Sony) Week 4 [3,135 Theaters] PG13
Friday $2.7M, Saturday $3.7M, Weekend $9.8M, Cume $152.4M
7. The Avengers (Marvel/Disney) Week 7 [2,582 Theaters] PG13
Friday $2.2M, Saturday $3.2M, Weekend $8.3M, Cume $586.2M
8. Best Exotic Marigold (Fox Searchlight) Week 7 [1,184 Theaters] PG13
Friday $625K, Saturday $975K, Weekend $2.3M, Cume $36.2M
9. Moonrise Kingdom (Focus Features) Week 4 [178 Theaters] PG13
Friday $611K, Saturday #975K, Weekend $2.3M, Cume $6.9M
10. What To Expect (Lionsgate) Week 5 [1,216 Theaters] PG13
Friday $450K, Saturday $525K, Weekend $1.3M, Cume $38.7M
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.
Loading ...
Sandler, Cruise and Will Smith all under delivering? What is the world coming to?
Cruise Sandler = washed up
Will Smith will bounce back ,he’s actually talented
Sandler jumped the shark with Jennifer Aniston. Seriously, she’s a death knell for anyone with any cred of any kind.
Yeah, somehow bring jennifer aniston into this — Just go with it made over 100 million domestically and 214 million worldwide == so eat that Aniston hater!
Please, don’t make the mistake of thinking that was due to Jen ‘box office poison’ Aniston. Her last movie that she headlined, wandersuck, grossed 7 mil opening weekend. I have nothing against her, but you might as well crown Brooklyn decker, Leslie Mann, and Courtney cox all ‘queens of the box office’ if the only criteria is being in a sandler film that grosses over 100k. lol
Lots of crap makes money in this world. McDonalds has been around a LONG time makes a huge profit. That doesn’t make the food gourmet or even any good.
You can throw out this weekend’s movies…..Can’t wait to see Pixar’s next masterpiece “BRAVE” on Friday!!
Jeez, the Aniston haters will just take any excuse to bash her, won’t they?
If only we could harness all the energy that goes into slagging the likes of Aniston, Kristen Stewart, Tom Cruise, et al. Just think of the unlimited power we could derive from all that stupid, pathetic passion.
Hate? I don’t hate her, I just think she’s in the wrong profession. Maybe a talk show on lifetime, where she can sell shampoo, perfume, bottled water… She’ll have to get a personality first…but I really do think that was her appeal: other women watching friends and going..’I want those jeans and that haircut and I’ll look 10x better than her.’ Relatable.
Hey @ragnar, leave Kristen outta this, she’s just a kid starting out. Tom’s a star, and has contributed some fine films and will again. Aniston is a tv hack basically, doesn’t really belong in a movie star grouping.
Yep. It’s fun.
@Nope – I’m only grouping Kristen Stewart with Cruise and Aniston as examples of famous actors who, for whatever reason, seem to inspire “haters” to make negative comments, blog posts, tweets, etc. People are entitled to dislike Aniston. But when some anti-Aniston extremist commenter asserts that she’s the Typhoid Mary of Adam Sandler’s career, it’s beyond ridiculous.
@michael — yes, looks like it. I saw “Just Go With It” specifically because Aniston was in it,not for Sandler, although I thought they had good chemistry. I really liked it.
To Ragner: I disagree. Kristen Stewart is one smart cookie. She has a very specific talent, and seems to only take roles that showcase it. She can look fragile, sullen, miserable, depressed, and disinterested unlike anyone else. Nearly all of her roles require her to stand around, look sad, then deliver depressing lines. This is her biggest success key and she will be even bigger than Tom Cruise or any of the other people you’ve mentioned.
@nope Kristen Stewart is 22 that’s hardly a “kid” you p u t z.
Yeah, because Sandler didn’t suck BEFORE “hooking up” w/Aniston (Little Nicky, Mr. Deeds, Click, Spanglish, Grown Ups, etc.)- get a clue!
dont b stupid – Horrible Bosses did really well at boxoffice
Bahahaha! That wasn’t Aniston’s movie and you know it. Bosses was an ensemble movie about THREE GUYS, Bateman being one, who are fed up on the job. Movies, that SHE headlines, and tries to open FLOP.See WANDERSUCK, and her TOP BILLING. Bosses would have made the same little pot with Julie Bowen, or Elizabeth banks in her tiny role – not to mention made it better. Get off the pipe.
Sandler isn’t funny to be honest with you!
Cruise is on the decline
Just look at the movies though I could have predicted they’d flop and I did the 1st time I heard about them
Cruise has been around 30 years, 50 movies, and has generated 7.2 BILLION for the industry. Not many others follow this lead. MI-4 alone generated 700 Million world wide! Most… of his movies make over 100 Million. Not many can follow that. I have seen most of his films ( minus two) He has doen some unbelievable work as in: Born on the 4th of July, A Few Good Men, Jerry McGuire, Top Gun, Collateral, Magnolia,Interview with a Vampire… to name a few of his brilliant roles he played.
which 2 tom cruise movies didnt you see, marie? and whats stopping you?
Are you serious? Sandler’s association with Nick Swardson deserves to be blamed for his sucking in cinema. Although it’s not that Nick made Adam lose his funny. Adam’s association with Nick lets us know that he has zero ability to spot a bad comic.
Start the countdown for Adam Sandler promoting reverse mortgages.
Nick Swardson does suck. He broke my habit of watching Comedy Central.
He was great on Reno 911 I loved every time his character was on an episode.
I have seen Adam Sandler movies on TV. I have never seen one I would pay to see. As for Cruise, the last time he looked as a rock star was in restless and he used a hair brush.
This is not a cruise vehicle(and all reviews point to how great Cruise is), Sandler has had hit after hit for a long time and Will Smith has not underperformed — ummm 507 million worldwide and growing on its way to beating the first men in Black???
The first MIB did not cost more than $300 to make and another $240 to market. It’s not as clear a bomb as Sandler’s new movie but the loss is greater.
I have to agree with you on “MIB 3″, 507 million globally and counting, is not what i call underperforming. And it looks to have a good shot at reaching 600 million globally. And it’s probally going to finish around 170-180 domestically, while that would be the lowest take of the three MIB films in america, that’s stiil not that far off the previous film. It’s certainly not a film i would put in the failure flop catory of “Battleship”, “Dark Shadows” or what “Rock Of Ages” & “That’s My Boy” appear to be headed for.
I think you forgot to include ‘John Carter’ in that flop list.
Also left out Battleship, the Dictator, Wrath of the Titans, This Means War, Mirror Mirror and Ghost Rider.
I’m amazed studios stay in business… lol
Battleship may have flopped financially, but it was actually a good movie compared to the others mentioned.
It’s not a “Cruise vehicle,” huh? Yeah. That’s why he’s in all the promo materials, why his face appears in all the reviews, and why he was on Leno the other night flogging it.
It’s an ensemble. His appearances in the “promo materials” has been kept to a minimum, it’s not the studio that decides which publicity shots are run by the individual publications, and he was on Leno because he’s a biggest star in the cast.
If you’re going to be sarcastic, you should have more to stand on.
Hey Peter Sumptner – how can you say Cruise’s appearances in the promo materials have been kept to a minimum? He’s FRONT and CENTER on the movie poster? You can barely even make out some of the other actors. And if you think the studio decides which shots of Cruise to use, you are crazy!!! Tom’s people make sure he has absolute approval over EVERYTHING. If you see a shot of Cruise, his people approved it.
ROCK OF AGES was never a Tom Cruise movie — they cast him because he has fun with roles like this (remember Les Grossman in TROPIC THUNDER?) The whole marketing campaign for R of A changed after MISSION IMPOSSIBLE:GHOST PROTOCOL made a fortune and blew everyone away — it then seemed to make sense to hang this musical on Cruise. Ironically, he’s the best thing in it; the other characters are miscast. I mean, Alec Baldwin as a deadbeat club owner, in the worst wig since the Muppets?!? And Russell Brand? He’s nauseating at the best of times. At the end of the day, the truth is that with very few exceptions Broadway musicals no longer translate to the screen. The 15-year-old boys the Studios are trying to lure to the theaters don’t see Broadway shows, even if they live in NYC!! What the filmmakers should have done is make this movie for the audience that lived it, lived that music. Nikki Sixx or Sebastian Bach should have been cast as Stacee Jaxx. But the Studio brass doesn’t see the world as it is…only the way they would like it to be!
sandler has has hit after hit?????? What? When? Where(was I)?not on this planet.
MI4 made more than Men in Black 3 Bitch!!!!!!!!
You know, I think it was exclamation point #5 that really drove your point home.
Adam Sandler has been relying on the same old ‘shtick’ for the past several films, and his audience has been getting smaller.
It is unfair to suggest that Tom Cruise and his performance in Rock of Ages is the reason the film is not doing well. In fact, Cruise is the highlight in a film which does not translate under Shankman’s direction from stage to film. Maybe it cannot be done, but it is certainly failing so far under this interpretation.
It seems a bit unfair to make this a Tom Cruise film and its subsequent disappointing box office a burden on his shoulders. ‘Rock of Ages’ the film ii not cutting it. Cruise is not the star name over the title.
Sandler’s audience is getting smaller because their growing up. Too bad they actually tried to address that fact in the movie and it flopped like a flipping politician.
they’re…, damn where’s the edit button? Maybe I AM dumb enough to be a Sandler fan!
It’s funny how Cruise’s supporters are saying that he should not get any of the blame for ROA’s poor showing at the box office. We all know that if Rock of Ages had done well at the box office, Cruise’s supporters would be giving him ALL THE CREDIT and saying it was ALL because Cruise was in the movie and was the center of the promo! Well, you CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!
say what you will about this not being a Tom Cruise vehicle – if you ask most people who is the start of the movie, they will say Tom Cruise. He has been getting most of the press off the movie, and he seemed gleeful to get it. I think his vanity over his chiseled body and the fact that he was playing against type clouded his judgment. I don’t think this will wreck his career by any means, but it does show that he only works in certain movies.
I love going to the movies but wouldn’t waste my money on Sandler or Cruise. Will Smith is debatable.
You can’t trust the critics when it comes to Sandler’s movies. GRANDMA’S BOY got 18% on Rotten Tomatoes but me & everyone I know who saw it LAUGHED THEIR A$$ES OFF. It has a big cult following and really is a great movie.
Little Nicky was ravaged by the critics, but I remember seeing it and getting some solid belly laughs.
Critics notoriously love to hate Sandler movies. They just don’t get it. It’s slapstick, screwball comedy. It’s hit & miss. I’m going to rent That’s My Boy b/c I thought the trailer was pretty funny and Sandler looks totally out of control in it.
Chuck, I love how you defend Sandler and rip the critics… and then inadvertently admit that Sandler’s movie is at best a straight to video/rental piece of crap.
I say ‘at best’ because if as big a Sandler backer as you seem to be is only going to rent ‘That’s My Boy’… Then who the hell is going to see the damn thing in a theater?
“but me & everyone I know who saw it LAUGHED THEIR A$$ES OFF”
- Signed, Pauline Kael
Will Smith talented? Not even mildly watchable according to this movie goer.
Haha, I know. Will Smith will never be considered a great actor. Tom Cruise could be, and in the past has shown some range, but they’re both more interested in box office than stretching themselves; not that I necessarily blame them. But Cruise has it in him, so its sad to see him in crap like this.
The watchable actors are the human actors with whom I can connect. Those lie almost exclusively in the realm of Pixar. A delightful irony, no?
Six months ago Tom Cruise starred in Ghost Protocol and it earned 700 million worldwide against a budget of 145 million. Unfortunately in this business if you don’t knock it out of the park EVERY SINGLE TIME then you’re labeled a wash-up, has-been, no-talent a**clown and/or whore.
In the rest of the world we understand creative people have hits and misses and inbetweens and hot streaks and cold streaks. Hell, if you’re lucky enough to be a one-hit-wonder at least you had that! Most artist never even get the opportunity.
Personally, I’m thankful for the good ones they’ve given and root for more to come. That’s the best, baddest, most beautiful thing about Hollywood. You’re only one great story from turning everything around.
That’s how it is sometimes, being in show buisness you’ll have your up and downs. And Cruise has been in the game a long time, so a film that underperforms certainly isn’t going to hurt or really even make a dent in his overall stature. He’s certainly been in the game long enough and made enough movies to be considered a legend, rather you like him or not.
The Scientologists are always so quick to jump in and defend Cruise here….always.
Screw Scientology. So many posters here are snobs and haters, I just don’t understand. I go to see movies simply to be entertained. Sometimes I’m disappointed, sometimes I’m blown away, most of the time it’s somewhere in between. Looking at Cruise’s body of work, you’d have to just dislike the guy for some reason to say he sucks as an actor, or that he is “washed up”.
I avoid musicals for the most part, but went this weekend to see ROA with my missus. When Cruise was off screen, I found myself wishing he would come back on. He was spectacular in this role. It won’t surprise me if he gets a supporting actor nod for this one.
great post. I actually did see Rock of Ages (unlike most of the people posting here) and Tom Cruise was what was good about a film that I probably would not have cared about otherwise.
I have no plans to see the film, but I have seen the musical. While I’m sure Tom Cruise was just fine, I (and probably most of the Broadway fans New Line/WB counted on showing up) couldn’t get over how the ENTIRE SCRIPT had been thrown out in favor of the stereotypical vanilla revamp more appropriate for a high school musical.
Maybe they should have just had Joss Whedon direct ROA too…
Agree. Saw Rock of Ages and Cruise was very good in it, in fact most of the actors did a great job in the film, even Russel Brand, who is not one of my favorites. The only one that looked like he was walking through the picture was Alec Baldwin, who, as I remember did not want to be in the film in the first place and tried to get out of it.
Actually, wasn’t Ghost Protocol the exception to a string of Tom Cruise flops?
@ Lighhope…. NO, not At All. Cruise, being in the biz for 30 years and 50 films has seen many, many of his films Generate over 100,000 million dollars. MI-4 grossed well over 700.000 Million world-wide. In all forms of artistry, Artist hit and miss. Whether they are Oil painters, Sculpture, Musicians, Poets, they All hit and miss. It’s the Point that they are there as Artists in the world. They are a Cut above the regular common man… ah like us. Those critiqing or Critizing .. should know better than to make less of them. Just how many here would even attempt to do what Cruise has done – just stunt wise for starters.
“just stunt wise for starters.”
I continue to feel bad for all of the stuntment who hear Cruise take so much credit for stunts they do for him. While he does what the insurance companies would allow, he by no means does the majority of his stunts. This has been a slap in the face to the hardworking and courageous men who do what Cruise would never “attempt to do.”
yes.. he has had a string of flops lately
IA 100%. It is a really strange habit we have developed, trying to judge people by one movie.
That might be so, @Jack, but I saw MI4 for the action and would have seen it even if Cruise had not been it.He was not the draw. I also won’t go see ROA because it looks like a mess and because I have no desire to see Cruise in this absurd-seeming rock star role. ROA might be good but it is completely unappealing – appears most of the movie-going public agrees.
@ Ticketbuyer…… I thought Cruise WAS the Action??? What Actor Do You know of would JUMP OUT of the tallest building in the world, 104 stories UP and Run down the side? LOL! You saw it for the Action and Not Cruise. He IS ACTION. No Seriously.
The stuntmen are action. Cruise was apart of the action.
Wow, online social media damage control is still a lasting gig. The damage control and online pr mechanisms are still an abundant source of income. Very sad.
Ghost Protocol was a success because it was a good film, not because it starred Tom Cruise. I almost didn’t go see it BECAUSE of Tom Cruise, but was persuaded by good word of mouth, none of which actually involved Cruise.
What do you mean Will Smith Under delivering?? I think MIBIII is going to be the highest grossing movie in the franchise worldwide.
Yes, but remember ticket prices have increased since the first two MIB films were released. Not to knock the film, I actually really enjoyed it.
“What is the world coming to?” reasonable. intelligent. aesthetically pleasing in their decisions
Excuse me)) I’m not hater, just realist. But Twilight saga can’t be qualified as “reasonable. intelligent. aesthetically pleasing”. Something is not working in your theory)
Well what this would has come to unfortunately is a land full of lackluster films with little to no substance worth wasting around 90 mins and $12. It is REALLY disappointing and irritating how it seems that 1 out of 5 new releases are in some way a re-make of a movie, or tv show from the past or musical turned into a movie. Are we REALLY out of new ideas? Come on HOLLYWOOD!!!
“there is nothing new under the sun”-Bible
“Shakespeare 1700s” ???
You are only off a couple of centuries, but then again, this is a movie site.
GG
Not a century but still far off
ya im glad this computer I’m typing on has been around for 400 years
The world is coming to a better intelligence. You can’t infinitely insult your target audience – eventually they’ll stop coming back.
Any “Rock of Ages bombed b/c the 80s” is crap. Just look at Robot Chicken. In general, the 80s are cycling into retro right now. That’s just how it goes…
Well, it sadly would have done better if it included Bieber/Katy/Rihanna/Maroon songs instead of bands who DON’T suck. My generation has no idea what good music is at all.
I’m sorry but all of you snarks are the problem — not only here on this board but with the state of the movie industry in general. You’re like all the talking heads in the talk and news shows that just spew nonsense except you’re not talented enough to have your own show. Your negativity is really such a downer. And that’s because you have forgotten, or maybe never learned, how to enjoy yourself. Nikki — you aren’t helping things either. You live off the movie industry yet you love to find missteps. You create self-fulfilling prophecies with your cynicism.
The majority of the world goes to the movies to have a good time. You guys look at the world and your first instinct is to pick things apart without ever giving things a chance or attempting to be creative yourself. If you were wounded as a child and don’t know how to love, or if you’re just boring and analytical, I feel sorry for you. I mean, you’re picking apart something you’ve only seen in 30 second ads! That is not analysis, it’s cheap opinion. Go see a movie and then try to parse box office results!
I bet only 10% of you saw Rock of Ages, for example. I saw it last night. It was a full house and everyone laughed THE ENTIRE TIME. They clapped after scenes. They sang at the end of the movie! I get that if you aren’t in on the joke you may hate it. But anyone who expects art from an 80′s rock musical is barking up the wrong tree — and apparently wasn’t at the screening, because the crowd LOVED IT.
So why did it open soft? Don’t tell me it’s because no one cares about rock or musicals, the broadway show is going gangbusters. It opened soft because the marketing sucked. Friday is determined by marketing. The rest of the weekend and it’s full run depends on word of mouth. I would be really surprised if it doesn’t pick up Saturday and Sunday and have long legs. Bridesmaids had a B+ Cinemascore, mind you. Even if it’s not a $100mm film domestically, I want all of you snarks to eat crow when it does $200mm or more overseas! Admit you are out of touch losers then, okay?? I’ll admit it if it doesn’t.
Now take Prometheus. It opened huge because it had an incredible concept but dropped hugely this week because it really didn’t deliver — but more so because it opened so big! Yet you focus on the drop. It is still a huge success and will crush when global box office is considered so look at the big picture, snarks.
I’m seeing That’s my Boy tonight and will report back. My guess is it delivers on its lowbrow premise. That said, it’s going to open low because it caters to a narrow subset — young males. They will love the movie, however, and go back to see his next one. It will probably have a cult following as well. It will make money! Adam Sandler is not going away and will continue to mint money for the studios.
Bottom Line: lose the snark and be a little more clearheaded and fun, people. You’re too smart for your own good.
p.s. — go ahead and say I’m a troll. Yes, I’m in the industry. I support movies in general. That is a good thing, why else do you follow this movie-centered site? What matters is I can call things as they are and have a good time in our imperfect world. A real troll is someone who can’t see the good things in life because they are so uptight and dried up inside that their only strength is cutting things down. Read some of the Dalai Lama’s work and get back to me in a few weeks, okay? You people disgust me!
My, my, but you DO go on . . .
First, if you’re such a high-minded piece of nobility, use your real name, coward. Second, you’re rationalizing movies that suck. They’re turds. Anyone with a spec of intuition and/or acumen would never have greenlit these hogs. Go hug yourself, “you guys are real losers,” because you need it.
Mr. Danish: Did you actually see any of these movies? If not, you’re kind of proving his point.
Uh, Tim. Rock of Ages is a Broadway hit. And Mamma Mia did $600MM. Sounds like a good bet. Not sure i agree with your greenlighting acumen.
Bottom line is: Prometheus looked great but was a letdown. Rock of Ages looked not so great and turned out to be really fun. So 1) don’t judge books by their covers/marketing and 2) if you’re going to comment with any sense of integrity or authority — go see the movie first! Or just comment on the marketing.
When you call a movie you havent seen a turd you have no idea what you’re talking about! That makes you a jackass.
To “i’m with the longwinded dude” and “you guys are real losers”: (probably the same guy, but that’s cool)
Yes, saw all mentioned movies. Yes, they’re complete turds. No, “Rock of Ages” is *not* a Broadway hit: It has pulled modest, sustainable, steady numbers for its duration. Not gangbusters, but respectable; not anemic, but not scintillating.
I never talk about a movie I haven’t seen.
Next, you have to be pretty dull about the picture business not to know that certain properties transcend their mediums, and certain properties do not. I have been to this table many times over the years, with excellent result. I’m sure you’ve probably seen a few of my pictures. I even had one based on a play that you might talk about from time to time, with your pals. I think my record (and my gold friends) probably tell me that I might know a few things about the entertainment business that, for example, you don’t. To wit, if you would have greenlit ROA at anything more than 30, if you’d have chose Cruise, if you’d have chosen that director, you’re pretty far from what I’d call an excellent tactician or competent leader.
Oh, yeah: Tim Danish is a bullshit name. You figure it out, if you can. Sure, I called you a coward for not using your real name. So what?
Sorry, does all that make your head hurt a little?
You advise everyone to “lose the snark” and you end your post with “You people disgust me.”
As Alanis Morisette once sang, “Isn’t it ironic.”
You harp on everyone else’s opinions, and yet you have one yourself that you wish others would adapt to their own. You are a part of the movie industry, you only want your opinion and never welcome others.
Spoken like a privileged honk.
I was thirty-one before I got a bite, and I spent years hearing “talent rises to the top” from people who only got their gig because they went to private school with the daughter of some gilded shitbrain.
People are cynical because any moron with a tenuous connection has a better shot than even the most legit artist, and it’s becoming more and more apparent to more than just the cynics.
There is a culture shift happening, where mucho derision is being unfairly directed at individuals who are successful. But the positive to this is that many young folks are far less blindly accepting of the shit they’re asked to pay for, and they’re starting to ask themselves where it all comes from. WHY is this person successful? WHY was shit shit-show given the greenlight?
People are cynical because 1) movies S-U-C-K and 2) they could be better.
I love movies, too. Just not unconditionally. And your assertion that people are “too smart for their own good” is golden. Your solution is to get smarter, or get out.
Pvt Duke,
GOod comments, agree with what you said. Especially about moving sucking and we know they can be better.
I would only add that it’s not the 80s anymore so going ot the movies isn’t the last resort for weekend entertainment like it used to be.
Cable used to have, what, a dozen channels? Now I have 70 on basic. Also games sell incredible well and have replay value. SOmeone who just bought Diablo 3 doesn’t need to run out to see Battleship for entertainment. And websites like youtube, hulu, and netflix offers some good entertainment too. Hell, youtube is free and you can watch videos, and there is some funny stuff on their, like Key of Awesome and College Humor.
I think people who work in the entertainment industry think they can still offer us crap sandwichs and people will just run out and watch it because they have no options.
As a family man of 3 children (2 teens), I want to chime in with what I perceive as the problem with movies today.
I was a child of the 80s and remember that as being a decade of great movies that told real stories without resorting to intellectual cheapness such as gratuitous explosions, “reboots”, recycled premises etc. The industry appears to take the easy way out, in my opinion. I mean, a Spiderman reboot already? Really?
I will not take my family of 5 to the movies unless it has been out for a couple of weeks and has generated positive buzz about it’s entertainment value. I am not going to drop $100 for the evening on tickets and overpriced refreshments only to be served a crap sandwich. As a result, we see MAYBE 2 movies a year.
My thought: Work on story development and stop feeding us crap stories that are masked with big explosions and overpaid “stars”. It’s not my problem that you paid so-and-so a bazillion dollars to star in your film and that you need to recoup your investment. At the end of the day, I want a positive, fun experience and not to have my intelligence insulted.
This guy wins the internet today.
Okay, I’ll bite – maybe the marketing did suck. But the casting sucked too and that’s what kept me away. I’ll bet more people would have seen this without Cruise as Stacee Jaxx. Someone who had a more fun personality, maybe.
The marketing for Rock of Ages was great IMO. There was lots of it (TV, billboards, posters…) and portrayed a fun movie as you described. When movies bomb on opening Fridays it means the public could care less for it. Whether it’s lack of interest in subject matter or bad word of mouth, people were NOT itching to see this movie.
You may be right but I highly doubt it has legs to do well after doing THAT bad on last night.
Blaming it on the marketing is easy. Please elaborate on what problems you saw in the marketing.
Well said. Bravo! You are my new hero. These folks remind me of a bunch of cackling chickens, or sea gulls swarming a school of bait fish. Garbled noise – nothing important to say at all. Posting a comment about a film starring Tom C, Alec Baldwin, and Russell Brand is way off my list of things to do and should tell you how bored I am. But I couldn’t resist after reading your post and realizing that there is actually someone with a brain found here.
Debating the merits of any of these losers is like having a discussion about who is “hotter” – Wilma Flintstone or Betty Rubble? I got this far expecting to find that thread here though. And I may not be disappointed were I to carry-on with the read. Ahhhh… I think I’ll pass though?
By the way, Jane Jetson is far and away the hottest.
Y’all have a nice evening. Think I’ll go read something with content.
Sheesh!
Oh please. Rock Of Ages bombed because it looked dumb as a bag of hair. Those bands were a joke when they were popular, 25 years later, nobody wants to hear Poison, Starship or Night Ranger. They certainly don’t want to see a bunch of old farts warble medleys of them. Catherine Zeta Jones is starting to look like the creepy soccer moms in stretch pants, Alec Baldwin looked downright repulsive and the whole concept just looked like someone took the scripts for Showgirls, Glee and Burlesque, then got a bunch of 45 year-old men with mullets to shout them at you all at the same time.
There was no way to market a movie with a concept this bad. It might appeal to the same tourists who made “9 to 5 The Musical” and “Legally Blonde the Musical” hits on the stage.. you think those would be hits in theaters too?
This defensive post comes from either Shankman or Loeb. You two deserve each other. No one respects either of you.
@you guys are real losers
Well, we certainly know the “Industry” isn’t paying you to be a writer. LOL
yup and the box office represents your report on RoA…oh wait…
Is the “Cume” USA only or worldwide?
I’ve been asking for weeks who wants to see Cruise play Axl Rose? Apparently not many. The film looked OLD from the cast to the style of filmmaking.
And OLD is a very bad word for a film about ROCK.
Cruisesas a rocker and Alec Baldwin in a moronic wig? Who cast this monstrosity? Adam Sandler hasn’t made a decent or memorable movie in a long time. Isn’t he getting a little old for these adolescent stories. Pathetic
Hollywood is out of ideas. Better time spent with Indies and foreign made films. At least they still have some originality and talented writing.
Agreed. Just watched a trailer for the new movie “The Amazing Spider Man” and laughed. Again another Spider Man movie/franchise with new teeny-bob kids? Yeah, no thanks. I know at 41 yrs old, FWIW, that I’m not in the demographic they are targeting, but as a young person, would be annoyed that barely 10 years ago Spider Man was brought out (the beginning of these crap comic book movies of which I’ve seen none) with those old-timers Toby McGuire and Kirsten Dunst. I detest Russell Brand so won’t be seeing Rock of Ages and Tom Cruise is of no interest to me after his insane Oprah couch-jumping appearance (I compartmentalize Cruise as “before and after” Oprah—his films before were outstanding (The Firm, A Few Good Men, Top Gun, Even Risky Business) but he is desperate on-screen and you can see it now. Will go see Prometheus as Michael Fassbender (Centurion is outstanding) is in it and Noomi Rapace—2 very good new actors to the American scene. Adam Sandler was outstanding in Spanglish and The Wedding Singer, but as a peer, he’s starting to wear a little thin due to his age (see: Will Farrell and the endless 80s style remakes). I’ll wait for this new Sandler movie to hit the Sky movies channel that we already subscribe to (like HBO). My kids will go to the theater to Madagascar 3 on Wednesday and I look forward to that. As a parent, have enjoyed them but the Shrek series is still hands down our favorite.
“The Unsinkable Schecky Moskowitz” or as it’s known today, “Going Overboard” is the funniest and most emotionally charged epic by Adam Sandler… check it out.
I lived that period in 1980′s, I played at all those clubs & when I saw the trailer for this I wanted to throw up. Wanna really good, true to life movie about the rock scene in L.A? Somebody please get Penelope Spheris on the deal to write & direct. Then you’ll have a pretty good idea about the period. But Tom Cruise singing Def-leapoard covers??? give me an effin break. Bands back then in L.A only played their original songs to get showcased. They would throw in a cover or 2 just to show they could pull it off, allthough alot of bands then couldn’t really pull it off. I have alot of good nostalgia from the period, but I’m afraid if I waste my money & time to piece of crap this movie probably is, that nostalgia would turn into sadness.
Couldn’t have done any of it without the joeness. (inside deal)
Vulgar dad raises vulgar son- this is so friggin’ old Adam Sandler-go the frick away, and America can recover it’s decency.
cruise has a weird high voice,,obvious why his singing isnt shown in previews
I never reply to any columns but I went see this movie and it is exactly as I expected it would be …fun. Acting was ok but I didn’t expect much. If you grew up as a teenager in the 80s and listened to the music, just go and enjoy it. It has some funny scenes. You’ll be tapping your feet and smiling.
The Mooks are still in charge and producing multitudes of crap.
“Duuuuh, I’m AndySandberg. I ugly and do stupid internet videoz. I’m brilliant. ROOMMATE!”
Sandler used to make me laugh atleast. Back then, you didn’t have most of the people in television talking like morons. So, to make a film about morons is pointless. You have too many real morons on reality TV shows. They want to be big stars and they should be homeless.
I think the funniest thing is how Sandler and Sandberg went out on shows like Conan and Late Night to good audience response and acted like idiots so that they would get people to PAY them to act like idiots on the screen. HOw many idiot things are there out their to begin with? To much idiot stuff. They think ‘stupid’ = ‘funny’ = boxoffice. Nobody is going to see Ted because they already get stupid Family Guy stuff on television.
It’s amazing how good stuff like Naked Gun and Dumb and Dumber looks right now. They are so gold.
Rock of Ages underperformed but it had nothing to do with Tom Cruise who had a supporting part. If Tom Cruise had the lead the movie would have made more, and most musicals don’t make alot of money, Tom Cruise is one of the biggest box office stars in the world and always will be.
For some reason, Cruise seems to be trying too hard to become the icon of action movies. I enjoyed his early work more than his most recent “hero” stuff. I don’t know much about him and don’t want or like to know the personal lives of entertainers therefore, my criticism is about roles that he seems to want for a different audience. Stick to what you do best and don’t waste time and movie goer’s expensive ticket prices to watch your experiments!
No wonder rock is dead. Nobody, sadly, cares about movies based on rock songs. If it were a musical based on the awful top 40 of today it would be hit. Kids need to stop letting eMpTyV and Clear Channel tell them what’s “cool.”
I agree, but even rock fans will avoid Rock of Ages because there is nothing “rock” about it.
I know right? I mean, as if Tom Cruise playing a ‘rock God,’ didn’t require a suspension of belief in all things realistic (I mean this is a guy who was going after Brooke Shields for taking ‘drugs,’ to combat post partum, yet we’re supposed to believe him in a hedonistic rock star role?? Doesn’t matter if he ‘looks’ the part – his persona just won’t allow us to enjoy it) — also seeing Catherine Zeta ‘I’m a hoofer from way back,’ Jones and the mormon Dancing w/ the Stars chick who’s dating/bearding Ryan Seacrest in it – and seriously, it was like a cruise ship version of what they thought a Rock play should look like. Come on. LOL
WTF are you going on about “suspension of belief” when it comes to Tom Cruise playing roles that don’t match his “persona”. He was high-larious as a foul, fat, balding , RAPPING studio mogul in “Tropic Thunder”. A super spy, a paraplegic Vietnam vet, a sports agent – how do they match his “persona”?
Cruise is a movie star and the only good thing in “Rock of Ages”.
Uh, I’m not sure Cruise was “high-larious” as the stereotypical, anti-Semite’s wet dream producer in Tropic Thunder. I have no doubt HE thought was hilarious, though.
Um, I think that was the point.
It’s SUPPOSED to be a cheesy send-up of a shlock musical, but it out-ironiced it own pretensions.
Thank you! I was thinking the same thing about Cruise, and especially about Julianne “Brigham Young” Hough! Cruise is just way too clean cut, anti drug, and conservative in real life to be believable in this role, even allowing for suspension of disbelief, and Hough, though pretty, has zero sex appeal. I can understand casting her in the Footloose remake, but which idiot thought that she could play the Hot 80′s Rocker Chick role? Throw in Alec Baldwin in an obvious wig, and a crappy marketing campaign, and this weekend’s results should come as no surprise.
@Pistol Pete, Cruise was good in Tropic Thunder because it’s not much of a stretch to imagine him as a loud mouthed asshole. And I say this as someone who enjoyed that, and most of his other performances.
Exactly. This isn’t rock. This is bubblegum pop horsesh*t with a side of GLEE.
I saw a matinee today, and all of Cruise’s scene were the highlight of the picture. His character is the most interesting and what he does with the character is interesting to watch. It’s not knock out style like Johnny Depp’s Jack Sparrow, but it’s close.
Everything else was meh, safe and pretty forgettable. And there’s no f*cking story!
No idea who this audience is for. It’s too nostalgic for teens and too squeaky clean pop for adults. No dude is gonna see this willingly. There is no edge. This movie takes place in 1987 during the hair metal craze, but there is not a hint of decadence, controversy or danger. It’s all too safe.
In the end, it just felt like glorified celebrity karaoke.
that’s probably why I liked the movie– I was a 15 yr. old girl who loved hairbands in the late 80′s, and it’s not surprising there isn’t a large portion of the demographic who fits that description. And you’re spot on about Cruise. His performance was great and he was what was good about the film.
Oh please, I’m in my fckin 40s, and I’d rather listen to Bieber and Rihanna on a loop til my end days rather than the atrocious Poison, Rat, or any of the other goddawful hairband metal poseurs of the 80s – which is what this lame asss movie is about. How are you gonna make a movie about hair bands and rock, when if you look at the billboard and top 20 from back in the day, they comprised a very small percentage that really wasn’t listened to by mainstream.
Amen GTFO,
Although it’s not “cool” to admit it – the real bands of the 9-’s (with music people actually listened to, and still do) were bands like Air Supply, Journey and Chicago. Only stoners, smokers and wanna-be’s listened to the hard rock crap that posed as music.
If you think that MTV and radio are where kids get there music these days, you really are behind the times.
the LA Times reviewer is really lame. Check out most of the other reviews – they are horrendous. I actually bought the soundtrack because I love the music, but it is the most sanitized, Glee-like, rendition of those rock songs. Fans of that kind of raucous, raunchy movie will hate this. The studio thinks it got an all-Star cast, but it comes off like a weird hodge-podge of people who shouldn’t be in the same movie. Yes, Tom Cruise is a movie-star, and Zeta-Jones kinda is, but Alec Baldwin, Paul Giamatti, Russell Brand, Julianna Hough, and the kid from the CW are not stars.
Alex Baldwin is not a star? What planet are you from again?
Baldwin is not a movie star. We can see him everyweek (everyday) on tv. He means nothing in a movie – especially singing badly in a terrible wig. The point is, the filmmakers thought were were going to say “wow, what a great cast,” when it’s really not. It feels like some weird indie ensemble.
We can’t ignore one of the main reasons that Rock of Ages is bad and bombing. The director, Adam Shankman. He often pops up on those lists of comedy hacks like Dennis Dugan, Brian Robbins, Raja Gosnell, Shawn Levy, Andy Fickman, steve Carr, etc. They all go for the lowest common denominator and direct with a sledge hammer. Shankman’s persona is also just too gay and too gay – and that’s what gets up on the screen. There’s no grit or realism, not real emotions or emotions. All he knows how to do is make things bright light and flashy. That worked with Hairspray which had a strong story, but don’t forget Cheaper by the Dozen 2, Bringing Down the House, Bedtime Stories, the Pacifier, a Walk to Remember, the wedding planner. Yes, some were hits, but none of these films has a shred of grace or anything clever or real. He should be put in director jail. Maybe he should spend less time judging So You Think You Can Dance.
Shankman is not “too gay.” That’s like saying Ridley Scott is “too straight.” However, the latter is a talented director, the former is not, I’ll grant you that.
I like Shankman myself but I have to admit, he wasn’t the right filmmaker. Just not dark and daring enough
Why is it a surprise that a film as dumb as “rock of ages” flopped? It’s a stupid premise and America doesn’t care about musicals! Of all the fresh material(books) waiting to be adapted this mess gets a green light. HOllywood is dying… One flop at a time. The monsters like avengers and dark knight rises can only float the losers for so long.
How is it that “Moneyball” can open with 20 million and be considered a hit while Rock of Ages opens around the same and is considered a dud. They both had similar budgets and Rock had far more competition. Can someone explain?
Thank-you, Mike. (For making a logical point that’s hard to argue against.)
1) They didn’t have similar budgets. RoA cost $75m; MB cost $50m.
2) Moneyball was released in September, when debuts are smaller and longevity greater. This is the summer, when smaller debuts traditionally result in a speedy demise.
3) Although Moneyball had its fair share of stars, it was nowhere near the ensemble package that is RoA. The bigger the cast, the harder the fall.
Someone said RoA could hang on, and yeah, there’s an outside chance it becomes a Hairspray-like hit, but Hairspray got good reviews, whereas word on RoA says it’s even more cliched and monotonous than the trailers would suggest.
By the way, I saw That’s My Boy. It sucked.
Moneyball cost $50mil ROA $75, also ROA is a popular musical with popular stars, Moneyball is baseball movie that opened in September, baseball movies typically dont do well(go check boxofficemojo) not to mention ROA is out in 3400 and MB out in 2999 also predictions never had MB doing 30mil meanwhile ROA was predicted to make around 27-30mil
For one, ROCK OF AGES is a piece of garbage that people did for money. Idiots wrote the script, actors collected paychecks.
MONEYBALL is something everyone involved can be proud of. Allan Loeb isn’t a pimple on Aaron Sorkin’s butt. One writes poetry, the other is synonymous with crap.
Does that help?
That’s enough Jen Aniston. You’re proving you’re as dumb as everyone says. You do have a helluva PR flack – congrats on teaching your new rent a date a few tricks of the PR trade that has sustained YOU for so long. New hairdo (dude you cannot be showing no big ol bald spot and be with Rachel Green of Hairdos), new orange spray tan, and pimping your relaysh for the arranged papz strategically placed at the Eiffel Tower on an awkward uncomfortable ‘Please Pay Attention to us Foreign Markets who don’t care’ tour — all so your second godawful FLOP in a row can be be deflected – so what else is new, eh? lol. I’m sure there’s more to come, will we get a ‘beach,’ romp Jen? Hahaha.
ROCK OF AGES has a budget that is 50% higher than MONEYBALL’S. Not 10%, but 50%.
Yeah, but Pitt took home a MUCH LARGER backend as the star than Cruise will in his supporting role. That will pretty much make up the difference when the studio figures out how much money they actually made. Anyway, I frequently use Moneyball as a comparison, not just with films that had larger budgets, but smaller budgets too. For example.
Worldwide Gross for Bounty Hunter $136 Million.
Worldwide Gross for Moneyball $110 Million.
Moneyball is called a hit and Bounty Hunter is called a flop, even though it made more money and cost $10 million LESS to produce. Explain that to me.
Although Bounty Hunter cost less then Moneyball to produce, they spend far more money on advertising Bounty Hunter then they did on Moneyball. Bounty Hunter is a flop because it was promised to finish with over $100 million stateside, and it didn’t even come close to $100 million overseas either. Moneyball was only promised to be a good movie/oscar contender, which it was.
What is this got to do with MB or any other movie?
I have never heard of Bounty Hunter, and I watch a lot of movies.
Why on earth are you comparing a niche sports film to a romantic comedy/action film? That makes zero sense. Moneyball was a hard sell from the get go. A movie about baseball statistics, devalued people and a franchise that hasn’t contended in over a decade? You REALLY compare that to a lightweight romcom? Are you kidding me? Moneyball as a win for everyone concerned because they actually made a good movie out of a subject that’s as interesting as a box of dead crickets. Moneyball ended up breaking even for Sony and that’s more than they even hoped it would do. Films like the Bounty Hunter, lowbrow so-called “romantic comedy” is supposed to appeal to a broader audience, isn’t it? At the very least you could compare apples to apples and not repeatedly bash Moneyball for illogical reasons.
You make a good point Mike, people are very inconsistent when it comes to deciding whether movies are hits or misses. I also use Moneyball as a reference for topics involving box office success. For example, Moneyball is considered to be a hit, while In Time (Timberlake/Seyfried movie from 2011) was considered to be a dud, or at least a disappointment. In Time made over $173 million worldwide on a $40 million budget, while Moneyball made $110 million worldwide on a $50 million budget, so how can In Time be a dud if Moneyball was a success?
There are plenty of examples like this, and it’s safe to say that personal prejudices for or against certain movies influence how those movies are perceived to have performed. That’s not to say that I think Rock of Ages will make Moneyball type money. Moneyball had strong legs, while it looks like ROA will fade rapidly from it’s poor domestic opening, and won’t make much internationally. My guess is that ROA will end up with around $45 domestically and a worldwide total of $75-$80 million.
@Oh Please, we are only talking about box office grosses here, not critical success or expectations. The reason Mike is using Moneyball as an example is because it is considered to have been a box office success, and yet movies that have grossed, and even netted more money are considered to be failures. I’m not bashing Moneyball, and I don’t think he is either, it’s just being used a measuring stick. By the way, Moneyball was not an art house movie. It was intended to be a mainstream movie from the beginning, albeit a somewhat high brow one.
Moneyballs estimated budget was $50m while Rock of Ages estimated budget was $75m. A $25m difference is pretty significant. Also, Moneyball was released in September when expectations are much lower for films openings. Rock of Ages is being released in the middle of June which is supposed to be the time for prime box office numbers. Comparing the 2 films is like comparing apples to oranges.
Making such an odd comparison, it doesn’t really sound like you genuinely WANT an explanation. However, I’ll try to oblige — but here’s the thing, of all the ‘LIKE-movies,’ you could have picked that may have opened to roughly 20 mil or so, and you decide that a film in a completely different genre, ‘Moneyball,’ a BASEBALL drama that racked up Oscar nods is your comparable film, to…a COMEDY/musical? Mkay. Someone seems weirdly preoccupied with a certain someone.
But enuf about your personal issues, here goes: baseball is notoriously ‘niche,’ and tend to only reach a certain segment, even with Brad Pitt in the lead. That said, ‘Moneyball,’ is considered to be one of the most successful ‘baseball,’ movies of all time. High profile comedies like Rock of Lames marketed itself as, tend to do better at the box office. In a way, your comparison is kind of like comparing ‘We Need to Talk About Kevin,’ to ‘Twilight.’ Capiche?
You’d do better COMPARING Rock of Ages to 2011′s Footloose, which grossed in the high teens as well, and had NO big stars to speak of (it was also another Julianne Hough vehicle) – it was also considered a FLOP.
Chicago, however, which also started Zeta Jones, and like Rock of Ages came from Broadwat, was a HIT, scoring a gross of over 170 mil. Just an example of what a movie of this type could have done, if it was a better film, with a better cast, and better script/film adaptation.
You’re missing the entire point of this thread. We are discussing this weekend’s box office grosses, and only grosses. Bringing Moneyball in for comparison to ROA is valid, as long as the discussion is solely about grosses. Oscar nominations, genre, release dates, and expectations are meaningless when discussing box office performance. Box office grosses and negative costs are the factors germane to this discussion.
I liked Moneyball, but it doesn’t matter that it was the little baseball movie that could (though I’m not sure how little a $50 million dollar movie starring Brad Pitt can be). What matters is that it made $110 million worldwide against a $50 million production budget. That having been said, the point is probably moot since ROA is unlikely to make more than $80 million worldwide, and it did cost more to produce than Moneyball. Despite that, it’s still an interesting comparison.
Also, Rock of Ages was positioned as a big summer movie (with all the marketing costs that entails), whereas Moneyball was positioned as a quieter awards contender that opened in the fall. In terms of opening weekend expectations, release dates matter a LOT.
Money Ball had a $50 million budget, Rock of Ages was $70 million. I have to wonder of Rock of Ages didn’t under report their budget, hoping to stave off some of the criticism.
Instead of studios racing to through $200 million at anything they think may be a tent pole, why don’t the each do ONE great tent pole film per year that they spend a lot of dough on, that does tremendous business and makes them seem like geniuses. Just ONE. Because there aren’t enough geniuses in Hollywood able to produce any more of that type of stuff.
With the money they save, they can make 20 more great films with great writing, great characters that are well developed and, by the way, TELL A STORY.
But keep using those Brit actors. To them acting is really a profession that talented people LEARNED to do!
Here’s something else to chew on…
Initially, Moneyball had dubious press due to Soderbergh leaving the film. Bloggers went crazy saying that studios weren’t willing to invest in star vehicles, although it seems that it was less about Brad Pitt and more about indulging Soderbergh’s overinflated ‘vision’.
Versus Rock of Ages, which had plenty of goodwill due to it being ‘star-studded’ and the fact that there was a market for re-visiting the 80s. Plus, there is Justin Theroux, who, for some reason, was given marquee presentation as writer in the TV ads, something that didn’t happen before his hookup with Aniston. And yes, while I can’t stand Aniston and HW’s compulsion to indulge her and her current lover’s projects, which are usually lacking, I have to take stronger issue with Theroux who accused other actors for opting for money grabs instead of art when he just did the same thing and he did it with the vocation he claimed to treasure more: writing.
Sadly (or happily for him, if he continues with the laziness), he will get the usual toddler treatment his girlfriend enjoys – empty, disingenuous compliments and no consequences for failing to deliver. Hell, I doubt that this failure will be acknowledged at all.
a lot of it has to do with hype. Even though Moneyball had Brad Pit, it was also a drama about baseball and statistics. It didn’t have a huge cast that could hit every talk show and magazine cover. It did as well as it did based on good reviews and word of mouth. RoA on the other hand came out of the gate screaming, “Look how great we are. Look at this cast. This is so much fun. You are going to love it.”
Also, Moneyball broke out of its perceived demographic which seemed mostly male and adult. RoA thought it had all it’s bases covered – over and under 25, men, women, boys, girls… what they forgot to do was make a good movie.
Lastly, Moneyball cost $50 million and made $75 million domestically. RoA, however, cost $75 million and will be lucky to make $50 million at this rate. I’m not a math wiz, but that seems to say to me that Moneyball did pretty well, but RoF won’t. In addition, Moneyball opened in September, which is traditionally a slow movie month, in fact, it’s the time they used to just dump movies.
So, as a big “star-driven” Hollywood Summer block-buster, I do think it’s fair to call Rof a bomb.
Are you kidding? BP’s mug was EVERYWHERE promoting Moneyball! You didn’t need supporting cast interviews – his face was all over the internet and every newspaper and magazine, including Sports Illustrated! I was sick to death of MB before it even opened. And don’t forget, BP decided to bash his ex-wife in an interview to make sure he got plenty of publicity over THAT old chestnut.
LOL. Man, you Aniston fans are still bitter that Pitt alluded to how bad his marriage was even though Aniston has dogged him out for 7 solid years, repeatedly coattailing him by name dropping him not only in every interview but on set when trying to impress much younger co-stars who had to tell her that they didn’t know she’d ever been married to Pitt and didn’t care. All of that without him lowering himself to her standards. He wasn’t even talking about Aniston anyway. He was talking about himself and the media ASSUMED he was talking about Aniston. That has nothing to do with the fact that the movie written by Aniston’s CURRENT boyfriend sucks and is a dud at the box office just like the recent film he co-starred in with Aniston. Get over it already and move on.
How could $75mil be an honest budget estimate for ROA? The A/L talent costs, music rights, and story rights had to add up to something close to $50mil. Did they produce the rest of movie for $25mil? I doubt it. My guess is the budget is closer to $100mil or $110mil.
Americans like the occasional musical. HAIRSPRAY and MAMMA MIA both made over $100M domestic, and let’s not forget GLEE, AMERICAN IDOL, and THE VOICE have millions of fans. On paper, a star-studded “jukebox musical” sounds like something that could pop in the marketplace. Annnnnd, looks like that green-light isn’t paying off. But it’s still a good idea on paper. Maybe.
glee,american idol, and the voice are all crap. thats why this crappy movie flopped, because its crap
Look at some of the people involved:
Adam Sandler makes garbage films. Yes, he makes money, yes, this is rated R. But people are starving out there, and he steals money from people. Great, he entertains idiots. He also has the worse IMDB in cinema history for an A-list name.
Rock of Ages is a money grab with no script. Allan Loeb writes garbage films. Tom Cruise all of a sudden got on everyone’s good side again because KNIGHT AND DAY made money overseas. Because MI4 made money overseas. He’s still kind of weird, and does nothing for young people.
Heck, PROMETHUS has a terrible script, but it looks pretty, and folks are curious.
The product is crap. Time and time again. Anyone with a shred of talent in this business anymore? Doesn’t look like it.
>>Tom Cruise all of a sudden got on everyone’s good side again because KNIGHT AND DAY made money overseas. Because MI4 made money overseas. He’s still kind of weird, and does nothing for young people.<<
Exactly. MI4 did well because people always go for good action movies (they are few and far between) and it did well despite Cruise, not because of him. The scenes in that movie with Cruise's over-serious, constipated expressions were the worst things about it. Let's face it: he's a weird little man. And the Rock of Ages role only emphasized that – you could tell that Cruise really thought he looked good and thought he was rock-star cool. He's not.
Russell Brand was not the one the promo for Rock of Ages centered on, it was much more centered on Cruise. So they have to share the blame.
Also Russell Brand is NOT box office poison, he’s been in six movies with wide releases before this movie, only one of which made LESS than $60m domestic.
That’s just a fact.
And Cruise is widely regarded to be the best part of the movie.
People seem to enjoy the movie, it’s the marketing department who should take the fall on this one.
One of the commenters above had it right: the movie wasn’t for anyone — too cheesy for adults, with songs too old for teens. I don’t know if that’s a problem the marketing could fix.
But dude, of the six wide releases Russell Brand has been in that you mentioned, two were voice roles. The two he actually starred in — Get Him to the Greek and Arthur — both underperformed. He was funny in Forgetting Sarah Marshall, but that didn’t mean audiences suddenly wanted to watch whole movies about his one persona.
I would not pay a penny to see the dirty looking little weasel Russel Brand. Add Alec “Fats” Baldwin and you have a truly grusome twosome.
How the heck is Cruise getting all the blame for DOA, er, ROA when biggest focus of promotion was that no-actress from DWTS?
That Rock of Ages trailer made me cringe with embarrassment every single time I saw it.
Yeah, I agree. I couldn’t get past Alec Baldwin in that wig.
Alec Baldwin in the wig reminded me of episodes of Dragnet when Jack Webb arrested “hippies.” ROA is not a hip movie.
And the indies this week. Daryl Wein and Zoe Lister-Jones blaming critics and everyone but themselves for LOLA VERSUS bombing. They tried to say male critics bashed GIRLS as well, but critics adore GIRLS. Guys love it as well. It’s women who are against it. But that’s a serious bush league move to blame critics for your terrible movie. Your first one didn’t get good reviews either, and now this one is even worse. Good luck finding financing in the future when you reveal yourselves to be whiny and untalented.
Musicals are not normally big openers and Rock of Ages is not exactly a very popular musical. They seem to have tried to court the male audience but having a rock movie and then saying it’s from the great director of Hairspray seems to be a bit of a divide. I’m still looking forward to seeing it tomorrow. Really not sure what happened with That’s my Boy — funny trailer — is it really the R rating??? Great, now studios will go back to insisting on pg-13 comedies. Glad Prometheus held up.
It’s not just the R rating, it’s the R rating on what looks like Sandler at his most juvenile. I actually still like him, generally speaking, but I can’t imagine wanting to see That’s My Boy past maybe fifteen years old.
‘Rock of Ages’ was a ‘hit’ on Broadway because it was aimed at straight males. To then get a gay director for the movie who proceeds to up the ‘camp’ factor was a mistake. Also the cast was too old, “Alec Baldwin, etc.” and the young people are nobodies, get a clue – if the person is famous because they’ve been on TV or reality shows, they suck.
Have to say I was not interested in seeing anything this weekend. but I am going to enjoy reading the comments.
so let the analysis begin.. I got my popcorn
Early Friday I went to see AVENGERS. After weeks and weeks, it’s now in the smallest unit of the local cineplex. But the morning show was reasonably full, mix of adults and kids, mix of women and men, boys and girls. And the kids were REALLY into the movie, the kids were cheering for the action no matter how forced and trivial it seemed to me, the kids were laughing at the wise-cracks and banter no matter how lame it sounded to me. Watching the kids enjoy themselves so much at a movie was more fun for me than the movie. So the weekend isn’t a total write-off. Kids still have AVENGERS.
Avengers is a great movie. Best comic book movie ever, even better than Iron Man. I’ve seen it five times and I’m not a kid. It’s doing well with kids, but it’s doing well with Gex X and older Gen Y too.
So Promtheus drops only ~54%, not bad for a genre pic which was expected to be fronloaded anyways. Drops from here on should be much closer to 50% perhaps even much lower so the movie is going to do solid business. I was expecting a Cloverfield like ~65% drop considering all the negativity on the internet about the lack of answers.
Yeah, it now looks like “Prometheus” is a lock to finish no.#2 again this weekend with 23 million, putting it around 91-92 million by sunday. It should stablelize from then on, and with no other films like it in theters it could play pretty well through june and carry over some to july possibly. I can see “Prometheus” possibly finishing around 150-160 million domestically.
Thats my BOY looks horrible just like Sandler’s last 5 films. I think Andy Samberg my have jumped ship too soon at SNL
I admit, I’m a Sandler fan (and I’m a girl), but That’s My Boy looks downright horrendous. No surprise it’s failing at the box office.
Cruise is a weirdo. Baldwin is douchebag. Hough is a talentless twit. Shankman is the king of cheese. Yeah, I’m not really surprised America skipped Rock of Ages.
Hough was amazing in Footloose and people didn’t skip Rock of Ages — it’s still gonna make money.
Cruise apeal in action only. Sandler has his fan base but they must tired of him too.
I’m not sure that was in English but I agree with you.
Shankman = poppy dancer dude (I personally remember) who has convinced Hollywood he understands how to shoot dance. The guy doesn’t have a lot of depth. So don’t expect him to be able to deliver on rock. He gives an early 90′s Paula Abdul styled rendition on everything. This movie could have been edgy and worked.
You mean Adam Shankman’s Rock of Ages? Why is this guy identifying a movie by supporting cast?
Seeing it tomorrow. Also want to say That’s My Boy shouldn’t even make 10m. Sigh.
SAVE YOUR MONEY and yourself. ROCK OF AGES sucks worse than Showgirls. By far the worst movie I’ve seen in a long, long time. Cruise isn’t awful, but the film is.
Cruise is the ONLY good thing in this dull, disappointing mess. (Mary J. Blige tries her best, but hers is a terrible part.)
I like movie musicals a lot, I still watch GLEE, and this thing was a colossal disappointment. Dreadful staging, phoned-in performances from Alec Baldwin, Paul Giamatti, and Russell Brand, and a performance by Catherine Zeta-Jones that is only good for one outfit she wears in the final scene.
Diego Boneta and Julianne Hough do nothing here, all the musical performances (except Cruise’s) are staged without an ounce of rock-and-roll energy, and there’s a subplot with Bryan Cranston that could have been removed without changing a single element of the film.
So much talent wasted here. Glad that audiences seem to have been able to sense the lousiness without bothering to go.
Ditto. She’s right IS RIGHT. Very well said.
Has it occurred to anyone that Hollywood has pissed off the 1%? It cost 40-50$ for a movie night. Those of us who can afford it don’t want to spend our money on those who berate and make fun of us,(tea baggers) while they make millions off of us. I, for one will never set foot into another theatre until those making the movies apologize to us. In the meantime, they’ll just have to reap what they sow and rely on the 99% playing video games in their mommies basement to buy the tickets.
Why do you supremely wealthy 1% folks have to be so incendiary and quick to offense? You have nothing to be this unhappy about. Very few Hollywood movies are overtly political, so chill. And the rest of us 99% just want the opportunity to make a decent living and be treated fairly by banks, credit card companies and corporations. If we can tone down some of the rhetoric here, we can avert more economic problems.
Perhaps you missed What to Expect when you are expecting or Mr Bean’s Holiday, one for the money, the artist, the happening, the village or Battleship……
“The Happening” is a really misunderstood film. The innocence of the perfomances, the deceptive elegance of the villain as concept, etc. No one gets that movie.
haha – you’re being ironic, right? Did you type that with a straight face? That movie should have been called The Crappening!
You forgot to mention it sucked BIG TIME.
“Mr. Bean’s Holiday” is a really misunderstood film. The innocence of the perfomances, the deceptive elegance of the villain as concept, etc. No one gets that movie.
Yeah, even Mark Wahlberg dissed the happening.
Hi M. Night!
“It’s Pat” is a really misunderstood film. The innocence of the perfomances, the deceptive elegance of the villain as concept, etc. No one gets that movie.
You do know Tom Cruise is not the star of the film right? Its a supporting role/ensemble dumbass!!!
Saw Rock of Ages today in an empty cinema. Cruise doesn’t show up for quite a while, but he’s in a lot of the rest of it. It isn’t true at all to say that it isn’t a starring role.
Cruise is only in the film for about 35mins. that not a lead?
Cruise has been the center of the marketing campaign whether he likes it or not – he’s been getting all the press. And he is FRONT and CENTER on the movie poster. I’m glad it bombed, not just because it sucks, but because they put Cruise in a fur coat. I don’t care that it’s vintage and the animals died years ago, it’s in terrible taste and sends the wrong message.
Rock of Ages will play out over months, not just one weekend. It’s a movie audiences will find because it is both funny and filled with the most contagious music – you can’t stop singing for days or even weeks after seeing it. Cruise will also earn a Globe nomination. Look for worldwide grosses to exceed 200m as well. This story is still unfolding…
Are you a relative of someone connected to this movie? Or Toby Emmeric’s mom? It SUCKS and no one is getting any kind of nomination for anything on this piece of steaming crap. Seriously…audiences are staying away in droves. Good luck to you and your son Mrs. Shankman, but this film is a flop.
I REALLY HATE THAT ANYONE WHO GIVES A POSITIVE COMMENT ON HERE IS SOMEHOW STUDIO PLANTS OR RELATED TO THE FILMMAKERS — not everyone agrees on movies, so just because someone likes it doesn’t make them a plant.
Yes, but sometimes those positive comments sound so weirdly stilted and phony that you have to wonder. That whole “you can’t stop singing for days or even weeks” part seems a little forced, as does the Golden Globes ref. What’s up with that?! I’m not saying Filmfan is a plant. I’m just saying Filmman *seems* like a plant.
A plant, or a huge fan of someone in the movie. I remember reading a comment on a thread about Snow White and the Huntsman where someone said that people clapped at the end of the movie. I saw it at a midnight release and no one clapped, no one looked happy walking out. Obvious studio employee posting.
That’s enough Grandpa Shankman.
All true, but if you write a comment like you’d write a press release, you’re going to get made fun of.
Honey, that didn’t just sound like a paid-for shill post, it sounded like a *parody* of a paid-for shill post.
A) I am just a guy who saw the movie. I’m still singing those fucking songs. I was never a fan of those songs. But now they are stuck in my head like a continuous loop. It makes me laugh when I find myself singing them.
B) while reviews have been a mixed bag for Cruise, Ken Turan loved the movie and I suspect the HFP will as well. He will get nominated. You’ll see.
C) the international markets are a bunch of Kareoke obsessed maniacs. They can’t get enough of our iconic stars, a club to which Cruise undeniably belongs. Thus, my assertion that the film will ultimately perform abroad is clearly a comment based on whole cloth. So drop your slanted bias and allow room for someone else’s opinion.
And…
D) who brow beat you people into being such a hate-filled bunch of snivlers? Is the movie a classic? Fuck no. Is it a “great” film? Nope again. But is it good fun? Does it make you smile?
Sorry gang. Gotta go. My son Adam S. is calling (laugh).
Filmfan
And give yourself a reward if you had the first desperate studio shill chiming in before midnight Friday EST on this turd of a movie.
Never mind the unanswerable question of why the studios keep making dreck. Someone answer for me the question of why the studios keep thinking they can game the internet to prevent the web from blowing up about the dreck the studios put out.
At least you had the decency to refer to that pageanty horseshit you’ve been belting out for weeks as something other than “rock.”
Really… “WEEKS” after seeing it?
you saw this movie weeks ago?
It opened last night, Einstein.
How can you ‘not stop singing for weeks’ if you just saw the movie Friday?
The turn off for ROA is the Scientologist King himself along with 2 lead actor/actress who cannot act. People say it is based on Bret Michaels. Then they should have cast him in it. Would have been better or cheaper. Definitely campier.
Another dog from Sandler with just average marketing and little or no publicity.
I can recall funny moments from the marketing of THE DICTATOR and TEDDY. I can’t remember a single thing about that I might have seen in the campaign for THAT’S MY BOY.
Let’s not blame Tom Cruise for this. He’s one of the best things about ROCK OF AGES (he wipes the floor with the bland leads), and MI4 proves that audiences (U.S. and overseas, “truth”) will go see him in the right vehicle. It may well be as some critics have said: After a decade of AMERICAN IDOL and GLEE on TV, audiences may not be willing to spend movie-theater prices to watch people sing covers of hit ’80s songs.
THAT’S MY BOY seems to prove it’s kids driving the box office of Sandler’s lazy, careless excuses for movies these days. But don’t anyone tell him it’s the rating; maybe this will inspire him to make movies that are actually movies, not incoherent, indulgent vehicles for him and his pals.
I don’t get the hate on Tom Cruise in Rock of the Ages. He was absolutely FANTASTIC in it. I was a cynical as anyone else in Hollywood, but the minute he pops up as Stacee Jaxx, the film sudddenly starts to suck a whole lot less. Julianne Hough and Diego Boneta were horribly miscast. They just don’t have the gravitas to carry a storyline. IMHO, Tom saved the film.
Fun performances by Paul Giamatti and Zeta Jones as well.
“Gravitas” and “IMHO” in one post. Argh.
Those of you who keep claiming “Cruise was the best thing in ROA” are missing the freaking point of this post and conversation. YOU obviously SAW the damn movie, this debate is regarding WHY most have avoided it. I can tell you that I personally skipped this one specifically because of Tom Cruise. I see his posturing and hear his warbling in the trailer and wonder why the powers that be in Hollywood still think they can market this guy as “cool”. I’m sorry, that ship has sailed and it’s as embarrassing as watching Madonna flash wrinkled body parts to get attention these days. I know i’m not alone in this opinion and the box office failure is on Cruise, pure & simple. He was front & center in all the promos and obviously no longer has the power to open a movie. For those that want to claim the failure is due to the film being a “musical”, just get back to me in December, after Les Miserables opens.
True, and true. I couldn’t get used to Cruise in this role, so I didn’t see the movie. I might have seen it with Johnny Depp as Stacie Jaxx. And yeah, Les Mis will rule in December, along with The Hobbit.
Young people don’t even know who Tom Cruise is.
And older people, who do know him, tend to have negative opinions about him because he comes across so fake and crazy.
MI4 did well because it was very well written and produced. And that good an action pic hadn’t be released in a while. It was a very entertaining movie. It did well in spite of Cruise, whose wooden acting was the weakest thing in it.
Really?? Young people don’t know who Tom Cruise is??? How young are they? Toddlers?
Bomb & Bomb next..
Are you really blaming Cruise and Brand for Rock of Ages’ failure? Brand has six wide releases under his belt and all but one have reached 60m. Cruise just had his biggest movie EVER. Instead, blame the marketing campaign for highlighting the supporting cast more than Cruise himself, or the idea that an cheesy 80s rock musical may not have mass appeal.
Sandler should never have left his family-friendly wheelhouse. Didn’t work for Funny People, won’t work for this one.
I don’t know about Brand, I think audiences are mostly indifferent to him, but we do need to face reality re: Cruise. I like Tom, but his reputation was permanently tarnished during his meltdown in 05. Some of us have forgiven him, but to the average moviegoer, it’s impossible to watch him without thinking of the couch. I applaud him for trying to bring it back with Valkyrie, but now he’s in the position where he can do nothing but be a parody. Tropic Thunder, Knight & Day, Rock of Ages, etc. It’s too bad he has been reduced to this, but such is the business of publicity.
Yep, too bad that he hasn’t, for example, been the central star of a massive worldwide hit within the last six months or so.
Puh-lease!
Two were animated so not really a Russell Brand film. Do you go to animated movies for the voice talent??
The biggest success was, ironically, an Adam Sandler movie that Russell was in.
Two barely topped $60 mil that he was a supporting player in.
The ONE movie that Brand starred in BOMBED! BAD. But that also goes with Hollywood scraping the bottom of the barrel with remakes that aren’t needed, warranted or clamored for.
$60 million is no longer much of a success story in Hollywood, I’d think. Not with average ticket prices what they are. That means, what, maybe 6-8 million people saw the movie?
So the main character in the movie is blaming it on others now? Cruise apeal is action at the best.
I feel Bad. I’m saving my Singles for Magic Mike. Sorry Cruise and Sandler.
Really!? I saw the movie poster for Magic Mike when I went to see Prometheus, and felt embarrassed FOR the actors. Everyone looked tired and worn out, as if they should have been set out to pasture.
That could have been done deliberately, but it’s an odd choice.
That’s not to say that the film won’t do well (it probably won’t), but this is a bit niche in that most guys won’t admit to wanting to see it (hetero or homo), and I am not entirely sure that it will be the draw for women that some expect either.
Plus, Channing Tatum doesn’t appear to be built that well. He’s tall, but lacks definition (which, if you’re going to parade around in your skivies, is not a great thing).
Channing Tatum is a hunk and a half.
And you are a blind moron.
I read the script for Magic Mike. it’s pretty Good. It got some good reviews from some critics in the UK screening.
Magic mike is an independent film. Finance by Tatum and Soderbergh themselves. Budget is 5 million. That is boxoffice money ready to happen. Im sure it will make it on friday alone. Boxoffice.com predict 24 Mil OW. We will have to see.
One of my guilty pleasures is a good musical but I can pinpoint the exact point my interest in rock of ages shrivelled up and died. It was in the trailer when Cruise was flailing about on stage (Shirtless!) singing bon jovi while the most fake crowd ever goes nuts at the imaginary brilliance of Tom Cruise. Sorry, but that’s a solid pass from me.
hahahahahahHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHA and HA!
YES!
I cringed when that trailer first aired and I still cringe when it runs on tv.
Cruise as a rock god/mega-star is just ridiculously laughable!
Yeah, I love it when bad movies bomb and the good ones actually become hits which is all too rare anymore
This film could have been great with proper casting but Tom Cruise??? What a horrible choice for this film. I saw the play, it was great and I was looking so forward to the film until I saw Cruise was in it. What a mistake.
Ya, don’t go to watch it. I was Raised on every muical around. That’s what our family went to see. I will see ROA today and especially because Cruise has taken on YET another differnt role. Who knew he could sing?? According to many… he pulls it off. Def Leppard thought he was great and watched his practice.
Cruise said he had to practive 5 hours a day to train his voice. All the other actors could not believe his work ethic and diligence day in and day out. They were inspired. Listen to the reports.
You know, Actors are Actors. You don’t have to love/like them. But they are our Artists in the world and at least doing some thing to give entertainment. Cruise has definitly done his share for over 30 years and 50 awesome films. I have never walked out of a movie Cruise was in. I can’t wiat to see ROA later today. Just sayin’.