BoxOfficeFangrl

Oh, you're saying there was almost like a..."lost generation" of Titanic obsessives who would have been hooked early and watching and rewatching, but the sellouts in the first month—in some locations—kept the turnaways from ever being repeat viewers, or soured them just enough so that they didn't see it as much as they might have in ideal circumstances? Interesting, thanks for the perspective!

IDK, Titanic was #1 for 15 straight weekends and spent 26 weeks in the Top 10, I feel like the bulk of people who couldn't see it at first but wanted to, somehow got around to it before it left theaters, rather than giving up and settling for the VHS release nine months after it opened. I know, it's really funny now to look back on those old recaps, all, "oh, it might even make back its budget and become profitable on the home market!" So cute. But it was delayed and over budget and "dangerous" and even the crew getting drugged on the set once, it had all the hallmarks of every bloated blockbuster flop in movie history, the writers had their Cleopatra meets Waterworld comparisons ready to go.

Lol, no wonder Jon Hamm signed on for those H&R block ads, it's probably put him in front of the most eyeballs since...The Town? I guess it was too much to expect both stars of iconic AMC shows of the aughts to make it in movies.

There was some filming in France, when that Bastille Day attack happened, the studio released a statement that the cast/crew hadn't been harmed. Not sure if it was for this movie or the next one or both. More updated budget info will be released when the movie comes out this week.

I doubt it was a grand plan, it took a while for them to pick a screenwriter who would placate EL James (her husband) and a director who read about her on-set antics during the first movie yet still wanted to sign up. I bet they didn't want to write/film all three at once in order to gauge audience response but it left them in a bind when everyone behind the scenes just couldn't nicely play together for another year or two.

CinemaScore just measures the audience that actually came out and paid to see something. Everyone who thought The Fault In Our Mars looked like crap and stayed home/saw something else isn't there to give it a grade, so the score shows kind of a fanboy/fangirl effect. Bad CinemaScores happen when people feel let down by a movie, because it wasn't what they expected or the trailers were misleading about the kind of movie it was (the bait and switch), or with horror, people hated the ending.

Men do have it easier but if you build your image on being a likable sweetheart, then you're stuck walking the walk if you want to hold onto that career. Also, adorable doesn't really age well, regardless of your personal life. No one cares if Cate Blanchett has an affair, some of her fans probably want her to, there are some Carol obsessives that ship her with Rooney lol. 1998 Vanity Fair piece on the making of Cleopatra that's as long as the movie, a majorly detailed account of all the different dramas and excesses during development and production. Crazy anecdotes about how Liz wouldn't film during her period ( ‘Look, if I’m playing the most beautiful woman in the world, I want to look my best.’ ) and had multiple incidents of "food poisoning", aka too many sedatives but not enough to be lethal, right as Burton ended their affair, also after he was indiscreet about the other affair he was having at the time, that also disrupted filming. Lots of poor planning and people realizing that it was easy to take advantage of a chaotic production: "If you wanted to buy some new dinnerware or a set of glasses for your house, it was the easiest thing to put it on the budget of Cleopatra."

Elizabeth Taylor was a huge movie star then but it didn't start out with such a high budget. The costs just kind of...mushroomed: Seriously, though, after filming began: Major roles recast No finished script Fired directors Star nearly dies, has lengthy recovery Massive sets fall apart and get rebuilt in an entirely different country Married leads have affair and get condemned by the Vatican Six hour original cut If there had been social media and forums like this back then...

Go Hidden Figures!

The difference in Brie's reaction from the GGs to the SAGs was so obvious (and glorious ): Was it just me or was the room really pumped for Denzel's win? Casey was so awkward on stage introducing the Manchester clips earlier in the night. At least he had a reason to avoid the press room this time! And IDK if people vote for SAG Awards considering whether or not it is a person's time to win the SAG, the Oscar, definitely, they just don't have the same history/importance, maybe Denzel won because guild voters have split with the critics?

Why assume TMZ had to have had the video for months? Sure it happened a while ago, but on a movie set, not some sidewalk where the paps hang out. Maybe the on-set person who had access to the footage figured he/she would do the most damage to the film (and make the most money selling it) by waiting until 1-2 weeks before the movie was released. And not to endorse this line of thinking, but, if someone had leaked this footage a day or week after it happened, just maybe the PR debacle leads the studio to cut their losses and shut down production prematurely, for good. All those crew members out of work, well ahead of schedule and maybe nothing lined up to replace that income...or, just go to work and bide your time and end up with an even bigger payday...

True, that's like how daytime soap operas themselves have mostly died out in America but the weekly dramas and reality shows feature a lot of serial storytelling. Focus, and there's also a movie coming up where Idris Elba and Kate Winslet play a pair who end up stranded in the wilderness after a plane crash, so here's the survival story element and not just some "food blogger meets TV anchor" glossy rom-com set up.

Who doesn't love non-stop Christmas movies on two channels, from Halloween to New Year's Day? Though if your business model works why not run it into the ground, that seems to be the Hollywood way.

With About Time, some people have a problem with Just explaining what the criticisms are, don't shoot the messenger, etc. It will be interesting to see the response, the usual suspects will try it, but BatB is an old story so it has a major advantage on Passengers, a new story judged solely by 2016 values. The latest BatB will be coming out in 2017 but it's also got a history and the fandom also attached to this story for decades, that can override whatever "problematic" elements there are, at least for some people. Nostalgia can be very powerful and if the audience is charmed enough by a story, they can overlook the uncomfortable elements. Take The Parent Trap, even in 1961, that was not really good parenting, by 1998 standards, it is pretty terrible parenting but Lindsay Lohan was so charming as the twins and it help up pretty nicely compared to the old version. Whereas if the idea of The Parent Trap had never been a story before and it was just this new 2017 movie where divorced parents split up identical twins as babies, each took a child and went their separate ways for 10+ years, everyone would be horrified, want to call Child Services and think the parents were too awful to deserve a happily ever after.

Yes, I like them both and think they'd be well matched in terms of charisma and he's only about 3-4 years older, which would be a nice change of pace for a JLaw love interest. Not that it would ever happen in a pure rom-com from a major studio, it would probably have to have some sort of action/thriller/heist angle to distract all the bigots from being so outraged. Like others have stated the decline of the mid-budget movie has hit rom-coms especially hard. Still, I think there's a place for them, studios just have to keep the budgets down like they would for original comedies, and get with the times in terms of storytelling. Sure these are love stories, but let the leads act like rational adults the audience wouldn't mind knowing IRL. Also, people who aren't white or straight like romances too so some diversity with the casting and storytelling would be nice. In the meantime while studios chase animation and franchises, The Hallmark Channel cranks out new whitebread, PG romances week after week. Here's this Saturday's offering: And the week after: Lots of romantic comedy movies get made now, just not for theatrical release so much, though some would say La La Land is a rom-com...

La La Land the Musical would add more songs, to make it more stage-friendly and also to offer something new for the movie fans. After that, they can do a Live! version for TV!

When the whole drama about the Passengers plot twist unfolded I saw some people try arguing, "Why weren't people criticizing About Time, it was just as problematic!" Because one was a big budget spectacle with JLaw/Pratt, while the other cost ten times less and starred Bill Weasley? I kid, I kid, not only was he in four movies in 2015 but they were all nominated for Oscars, it's all right if he let someone else have a turn. Thrilled for Hidden Figures, already a success, I hope Best Picture happens but it's a bonus at this point. Not thrilled for Sing heading for that never #1 record, now I have to stan for La La Land to really break out, but not too much on any given weekend, so Sing's reign will be short lived!

Isn't there a Hamilton mix tape album now? Pffft, canceled series are for loser award shows! Seriously how do you get renewed then un-renewed after one season, embarrassing!

Why is that Glaaaaaaaadiator moment from Liz Taylor coming to mind, to watch Goldie on stage now? #mess

#OscarsSoWhite just happened for the past two years, it's asking a lot for them to remember the titles of two black movies so they smush it into one? /KIDDING

Its studio gave gifts to the HPFA votes, it was a minor scandal last month: No surprise Nocturnal Animals overperformed with the GG nominations!

I think Chicago also had some weekdays at #1 but never topped the weekends, either. I wonder how many others on the never #1 list were on top at least one day of the week at some point. Anyway, it will be a sad day for this box office watcher if/when MBFGW loses the never #1 crown, it's a far more interesting run than something that was just blocked by a tentpole or event movie.

Hidden Figures plays around with the timelines of the women's lives, they did face those challenges in their careers but IRL not at the same time as the Mercury launches. If it gets nominated for Best Picture I'm sure someone will try to make it into a ~controversy~ even if a thousand other biopics shift events around like that.

Audience info for Hidden Figures (per Hollywood Reporter): Hidden Figures played to a diverse audience; 43 percent of ticket buyers were Caucasian and 37 percent, African-American. It over-indexed in every part of the country save for the Rocky Mountain states. Like other movies, Hidden Figures was impacted by a major winter storm in the Southeast and Northeast but box-office observers don't believe the damage was too great even with some theater closures on Friday and Saturday. Females made up 64 percent of Hidden Figures' audience, while 56 percent of all ticket buyers were 35 or older.

What is the box office ceiling on depressing movies in general? I guess it depends on how you define depressing? I mean, it isn't like Manchester by the Sea is going to make $150M or anything. Some would say Titanic is depressing but it was also a romance and sweeping historical drama with tons of action to mitigate all that, and it's not like US studios are making movies like that with non-white leads. But the box-office ceiling would probably be lower. I know, I think there's an obvious difference to see something like, "Eh, Hidden Figures was a bit light and broad for me, I read the book and wish they'd focused more on Katherine's life," or "Ugh, Moonlight, why do gay love stories have to be artsy and cold? When's there going to be a gay Titanic?" vs. "Hidden Figures, politically correct BS made to appease the #OscarsSoWhite whiners!" and "Moonlight, effin' Hollywood forcing its liberal homosexual agenda on everyone!" There's debating and reviewing the merits and drawbacks of a particular film vs. throwing out broadsides about agendas, and it's genuinely unfair to assume that anyone who didn't care for a movie about minorities or geared to women, for example, is obviously prejudiced. Just like I think it's really kind of ugly actually to see attitudes like "lol white tears" towards Manchester by the Sea and do not even start me on the La La Land backlash (now "it's a white-savior story that ignores gay people" apparently). Studio movies could stand to catch up to TV with respect to diversity but throwing back an "ugh, straight white people" response to the movies that are out now isn't really going to help matters.