free counter with statistics Box Office Results September 7, 2009 | Pajiba - Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

fd4pic2big.jpg
3-D: It Makes Our Eyes Feel Like Two Friends on a Camping Trip


The Weekend Box-Office Round-Up / William Goss

Box Office Round-Ups | September 8, 2009 | Comments (33)


For the longest while, Sandra Bullock stalker pic All About Steve was scheduled to open the first week of March, as counter-programming to the epic, violent and male-skewing likes of Watchmen, but Fox decided to bump it back a couple of weeks prior in favor of a TBD fall slot. Cut to this fall, and it would seem that the summertime successes of both Bullock (The Proposal) and co-star Bradley Cooper (The Hangover) would make an even bigger hit out of Steve yet. Cut to this weekend, and the smart move for one dumb movie garnered about $13.9 million over the four-day weekend and a third-place finish behind week two of The Final Destination (number one, with $15.4 million) and week three of Inglourious Basterds (number three, with $15 million, making it a likely candidate to overtake Pulp Fiction as Quentin Tarantino’s biggest box office grosser to date).

Opening this week in fourth place was Gerard Butler action outing Gamer, whose $11.2 million will just barely make it the biggest opening weekend that Crank helmers Neveldine/Taylor have had yet. District 9 brought in a $9 million weekend in fifth place; more importantly, it passed the $100 million mark, and has probably been the cheapest film to do so in a good while (who would’ve predicted that would best a Christian Bale/Johnny Depp gangster flick when the summer started?). Halloween II tumbled to sixth place with $7 million, while Julie & Julia stuck around in seventh place with an identical amount. If only Rob Zombie’s extreme re-imagining had consisted of a knife-wielding Julia Child terrorizing Haddonfield …

G.I. Joe ranked eighth with $6.7 million, The Time Traveler’s Wife claimed ninth place with $5.4 million, and poor Mike Judge saw his widely-opened Extract just barely crack the top ten with $5.3 million. Granted, it only opened on 1,600 screens (as compared to the 2,200 to Steve’s name, or the 3,300 that Basterds has held onto), but so did Office Space over a decade back to similar numbers, while his Idiocracy was all but dumped in ten towns on this weekend three years ago. Let’s hope that he doesn’t hold off for another decade while the Extract love builds up on DVD; I simply don’t see that panning out for the best.


Enter the Zone by Barry Sears | Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans Movie Poster



Comments

What a bland movie week. (With the exception of Extract).

Posted by: io at September 7, 2009 8:27 PM

Man, I would have loved to bump Extract up by an extra $6.50, but those 1600 screens sure as fuck don't include my tiny-ass town. Fuckers.

Posted by: the_wakeful at September 7, 2009 8:44 PM

You can see movies for $6.50? That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard all week! It costs me $10 here!

Posted by: esme at September 7, 2009 8:51 PM

my roomie finally saw D9 today and DIDN'T like it.

*waiting for his ambien to kick in*

Posted by: gp at September 7, 2009 9:04 PM

Once again, thank Jesopus for On-Demand Same Day as Theaters. We had a fun evening with I Sell the Dead.

Posted by: Cindy at September 7, 2009 9:32 PM

*sigh* esme, student price in a fairly small town. Spread the word.

Posted by: the_wakeful at September 7, 2009 9:38 PM

Where the hell are the rest of today's articles?

Posted by: Chugga at September 7, 2009 9:43 PM

cindy, you bitch, i wanna see that!

it's labor day in america, Chugga.
which means nobody labors.

Posted by: gp at September 7, 2009 9:48 PM

Lazy Americans, I want my time wasting!

Posted by: Chugga at September 7, 2009 10:02 PM

where are you from, Chugga?

Posted by: gp at September 7, 2009 10:09 PM

Australia, where nobody is lazy ever.

Posted by: Chugga at September 7, 2009 10:13 PM

esme> Inglorious Basterds cost me $17 a ticket. I swear it wasn't that much the last time I went to the movies, but now I'm about ready to burn down a cinema.

Chugga> I'm with you. Lazy americans. Don't you people realise I can't avoid work on my own?

Posted by: ScienceGeek at September 7, 2009 10:14 PM

I don't have work for several hours, and there's only so much time you can spend playing World of Warcraft in a day... I can't even find a group for the Heroic daily.

Posted by: Chugga at September 7, 2009 10:16 PM

Chugga> Yep, we're not lazy, ever. But boy, can we bitch when we don't get our favourite form of procrastination.

Posted by: ScienceGeek at September 7, 2009 10:18 PM

australia, huh? i've heard of it. i know your word for "beer".

Posted by: gp at September 7, 2009 10:18 PM

Beer? Ew.
I can bitch and whine in any situation, it's a talent.

Posted by: Chugga at September 7, 2009 10:20 PM

It's on the damned PPV gp.

Posted by: Cindy at September 7, 2009 10:28 PM

Holy shit, $17? I was about to complain about my $12.50 for Inglourious Basterds. I won't anymore. I want to, though.

Has anyone ever analyzed the distribution of movie-watching in terms of ticket prices? I'm talking about if a #1 movie had a proportionally greater number of people watching in Manhattan, and the #2 had more discounted tickets or something. Theoretically, the box office take could inaccurately reflect the number of tickets sold, not just across decades, but within the same weekend, right?

Posted by: SaBrina at September 7, 2009 10:34 PM

ha! cindy, such language! this ain't the weekend diversion thread.

Posted by: gp at September 7, 2009 10:37 PM

I paid $17 for the latest Harry Potter, and it may have been the worst $17 I ever spent.
Can't wait for that Blu-Ray player I'm getting with my next pay day. Between that and the new HD plasma, I'll be giving less of my money to greedy cinema chains and spending more nights in.

SaBrina-
John August has a blog entry about how box office takings can be fairly inaccurate, touching on some points you mention.
http://johnaugust.com/archives/2009/per-screen-average

Posted by: Daniel Hall at September 7, 2009 10:50 PM

The way you can tell in which thread you are, is your drunkenness factor (not your foul-mouthedness). While I am currently enjoying an Ichiban, I'm not nearly far enough gone for that hot mess.

Posted by: Cindy at September 7, 2009 10:54 PM

Cool, thanks Daniel.

Posted by: SaBrina at September 7, 2009 11:03 PM

c'mon Cindy, i've seen you, wait, we've ALL seen you in threads that ordinary people, good Christian people even, wouldn't even know existed!

need i remind you of the trade news thread of aprill 22, 09 titled "how statham is like the kevin smith of action movies" and you said, i quote, "If it's cheering up we need, start posting the shirtless men pics," end quote.

do you deny?!

you are NOT too good for a hijack thread, little miss, the alleyways you've sauntered down...

Posted by: gp at September 7, 2009 11:34 PM

I have several Weekend Diversion posts in the can, and one of them is going to ask you all to bitch to your heart's content about movie prices, popcorn prices and the like. So don't burn out on that topic here, please, cause then I'd have to come up with another idea.

And it's Labour Day (shout-out, Canada and UK!), and I don't want to do any more work than I absolutely have to. Come to think of it, that goes for the other 364 days too.

Posted by: , (TCFKAB) at September 7, 2009 11:37 PM

I read that movie ticket gouging is due to the way cinemas pay for the movies that they show. From what I read something like 90% of the box office take on the opening weekend goes back to the studio, and 10% less for each subsequent weekend. I don't know whether it's true, but it would certainly explain why candy bar prices are so high.

Posted by: Chugga at September 8, 2009 2:44 AM

esme - there are always trade-offs. after all, he DIDN'T get to see the movie for $6.50, or at any price. 8)

Posted by: trippdup at September 8, 2009 3:10 AM

What I don't understand is how films are judged to have done better than previous films, based on box office takings. The piece mentions that the latest Tarantino film is probably going to make more money than Pulp Fiction. Well, yeah, because ticket prices have gone up in the last 14 years.
Why not count actual number of tickets sold ?

Posted by: Ponytail at September 8, 2009 5:26 AM

Labour day, huh?

No wonder I was bored at work yesterday - no Pajiba to play with.

We need to coordinate these holidays across the world...

Posted by: missh at September 8, 2009 5:50 AM

I cannot deny, dear gp. However, it's clear this thread is dead and not worth the hijack.

Posted by: Cindy at September 8, 2009 7:37 AM

Could somebody please give Pajiba a shake. WAKE UP!
I'm bored. Meh.

Posted by: missh at September 8, 2009 7:53 AM

Fuck Labour Day. Entertain me, wenches.

Posted by: Sarz at September 8, 2009 9:31 AM

I'd be happy to adopt Labor Day in the UK - though we'd have to change the spelling, of course! We have far too few public holidays, in my opinion.

Posted by: Tarn at September 8, 2009 9:54 AM

K, I saw "Inglourious Basterds" yesterday, and it was entertaining as shit. If Tarantino turns you off, you might want to watch this anyway, because it seems like his least Tarantinoesque movie, not that I dislike Tarantino. It's almost like an old-fashioned war movie, only with F-bombs (BTW, I paid 9.50 to see it, and I feel it may have even been worth it). $17, though? That's ridiculous.

Saw "District 9" last week, enjoyed that as well. I feel like my recent movie dollars have been well-spent.

Posted by: Slash at September 8, 2009 5:25 PM





Post a comment

 (required)

 (required)


Preview of your comment: