Ando918

Of course Streep is a living legend. But tell that to Daniel Day-Lewis and the box office total of "Nine." I would have had the movie posters include the faces of both Streep and Kendrick 50/50.

I find it difficult to believe that Gambler has a budget of only 800,000. Marky Mark's ego is too big to accept such a small salary. I would have guessed a budget of 5-10 million.

Into the Woods will come in below expectations because there is too much kids/family fare competing against it (Museum, Annie, Big Hero 6). I would go with a 4 day total in the upper 30s. What is interesting about ITW is that the trailers/marketing have focused on Streep instead of Kendrick. Streep isn't a box office draw. Kendrick would appeal more to girls b/c of the Pitch Perfect fanbase (DVD sales of Pitch Perfect are very high). The Giver flopped.

The Gambler is going to bomb. I don't know what its actual production budget is, so maybe it won't actually lose any money. But it will come in below expectations. Flixster score is bad and I don't see how Marky Mark's fanbase would care to see him as an English professor.

BO.com is saying 34/35 for Unbroken Thursday-Sunday. I'd go with 25 million instead.

No name actors for Unbroken. A 50% score on RT is not gonna cut it for an adult drama. Adult drama is the one genre where critics reviews really affect the box office total. Audiences for silly comedies will show up no matter what the reviews are, but not for dramas. A week before The Judge was released, BoxOffice.com had it projected to make 78 million domestic. It ended up with only 47. Same thing will apply here. BO.com is projecting 120 domestic for Unbroken, but it will finish in the 80s.

Wasn't "Wild" a huge bestselling book? But nobody thinks that will make 100 domestic. Isn't The Mortal Instruments a bestselling book series?

BoxOffice.com's 4 day projection for Unbroken is too high. Can't believe they honestly think it will make 33-35 million over its 4 days. That's outrageous. They must be thinking this will interest religious crowds like The Passion of The Christ did.

Good Tuesday # for Wild.

Good Monday # for Wild. 100,000 more than I expected it to be.

Glad to see that Kirk Cameron's movie is over and done with and lost money doing so. It had a production budget of 6 million and will finish at only 2.8 million.

Fair points. But I don't see how a 3-4 inch smartphone screen is anything like the experience of watching a movie on a 12 foot tall screen in a theater. Not really worried about the tiny screens. A bigger problem might be the 40-50 inch flat screen TVs in people's homes nowadays. They can just wait until they see it at home on their own big screen. 12 years ago the typical TV in a person's home was a 22 inch with a 4:3 aspect ratio.

Maybe the lesson for the industry is....try to actually make better movies in December? Maybe don't be so lazy with constant re-makes and sequels.

Wild is jumping over a lot of movies this weekend....keep an eye on it over the next 10 days. The female audience over 30 years old is very under-served at the multiplex.

Into The Woods, yes. That is where the audience for Annie will go when they hear the bad WOM and reviews for it. Unbroken - ehhh, not so much. No Golden Globe nods, no name actors. Only 75 domestic for that.

Just saw "Wild." Impressed by how quiet and restrained the movie is. No really loud noises, not much music. Just a quiet look at human behavior. And a young boy singing to her for about a minute at the end is very touching. I was one of 2 males in the theater. 2 males, 6 females, and all of the females looked at least 35 years old.

The thing is, the horror is not the least bit frightening or dark. When Depp gashes someone's neck, Burton makes sure to let the audience know that there is a tube of ketchup glued to the neck and makes it squirt everywhere in an unrealistic way. It makes it outrageously entertaining.

Tim Burton's Sweeney Todd was a bad-ass musical. Still not sure why it "only" made 50 million at the domestic box office. Maybe the "R" rating hurt it?

Wild is going to do well this weekend in its expansion to 800 theaters. Looks like indie favorites Birdman and Theory of Everything will both finish their runs at about 30 domestic, but I can see Wild finishing at about 50 domestic.

My thoughts on the first 2 movies in the LOTR trilogy are similar to what Roger Ebert's were. He gave Fellowship and Two Towers 3 stars out of 4. I would give them each 2.5 stars out of 4.

The original trilogy takes 9 hours to have dwarves walk, and walk, and walk, and walk some more to drop a magical ring into some kind of volcano/firepit. On the way there they encounter dangerous creatures and treacherous weather. It has very little substance or psychological depth beyond a 6th grade level. I will admit that the series has good acting - especially from Ian McKellan, Christopher Lee, Viggo Mortensen, and Andy Serkis. They give effort 100% in their roles. But the good acting can only take you so far. Dwarves walking and walking forever and then arguing with each other repeatedly is not interesting after about 90 minutes.

Sing along everybody! 10 year anniversary!

I don't think Divergent is a good movie. They filmed 15 miles away from where I live so I took a bunch of photos of them filming. Too lazy to change the member ID image.

Can someone who is a fan of The Hobbit or LOTR movie series and no longer a teenager explain to me what it is about these movies that is compelling or interesting for you? I am not trying to be rude - just curious what you find compelling about these movies. To me, they have about as much depth as a He-Man vs. Skeletor cartoon. Seems just fine for kids or teens, but I don't understand how so many 20-somethings/30-somethings/40-somethings find this stuff interesting.

Wild is expected to expand to 800 theaters this weekend (was in only 115 last weekend). Look for it to have a massive jump and beat out movies this weekend like Theory of Everything, DADT, HB2.....and probably finish in line with whatever Interstellar makes.