TLK

I think Les Miz is going to drop hard once the holidays are over.

I think Nicole Kidman will get the fifth slot over Samantha Barks. Universal is seriously campaigning for Hathaway which will diminish Barks' chance and Kidman has already scored SAG/GG nominations for The Paperboy.

Based on boxoffice.com numbers, "A haunted House" is averaging 200k trailer views per day for the past couple of days.#1 on Twitter, Website comments for the last two days.It is literally taking off on Facebook. :Dhttps://www.facebook.com/AHauntedHouse/likesThis is my pick for the first breakout hit of 2013.

I may end up eating crow on this but I think $30 million OW is the absolute floor. We haven't had a comedy break out since Ted/The Campaign and this movie is just perfect escape from all the serious and violent fare on screen these days.

Is someone going to make "A Haunted House" thread ? The movie is going to be huge. I am expecting a $30 million+ opening weekend. Bigger than PA4.

Jupiter Ascending is a Wachowski movie and they take forever to shoot movies. Transcendance may very well be ready but they haven't even started pre-production and/or most of the casting.

I don't think either of those movies will be ready by summer 2014. Any July 2014 bockbuster should be in post-production by December 2013 because that's when WB will start its ad campaigns.

I don't think delaying TABA will go down too well either. July 2014 is prime real estate for Warners so I don't see why WB will move a potential $300m/$1 b movie from that date.

Every year we have debates about the timing of movie releases but the truth is that movies like TBEMH and Moonrise would've been likely nominees if they were October/November releases. The timing matters.

LoP is more likely than Django but I agree that Marigold has a decent chance of getting in.

What the hell happened to Uma Thurman? I haven't seen her in anything since Kill Bill.

This is free money for KStew and Hems. Make as much as you can while your career is red hot If they can make the movie for around $100 million then it may even be profitable with a December 2014 date.

My issue with Tarantino is that he hasn't made a really great movie since Pulp Fiction. Most of his movies since then have made a lot of money ,have opened to great hype but none of them have demonstrated any staying power. Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction were highly influential movies. Everything since then has been pretty weak if you are not a Tarantino fan.

Harvey did an amazing job with SLP. It was tracking like shit and a full release would've meant a weak opening. It would've stabilized because of good WOM and right when the WOM was kicking in it would've lost half of its theaters to Christmas movies. There is a reason Harvey is who he is and SLP will be in 2000 theaters when awrds season begins in earnest in mid-January.

Impressive drops for the two openers but TH1 will likely be #1 tomorrow and for the weekend.

All three movies received A- Cinemascore according to Nikki and Amy Kaufman Amy Kaufman ‏@AmyKinLA "Les Mis" and "Django Unchained" both get A- CinemaScores. OK, duh, but: So does "Parental Guidance." ??????? #America #Christmas #BoxOffice

There is definitely a rush factor to Les Mis. There is no other explanation for huge presales as every such movie is frontloaded.

Nikki's early numbers for holdovers are always off. She had ROTG making 12-15 million last weekend.

Nikki has updated her numbershttp://www.deadline.com/2012/12/first-box-office-1-%E2%80%98les-miserables%E2%80%99-2-django-opening-huge-on-christmas-day/Les Mis now more like $17.5MDjango now looks more like $13M

Django is 84% at FlixsterLes Miz is at 83%.Both seem okay.

Latest BP odds from the British bookies. http://www.easyodds.com/sports-betting/tv-and-awards-betting/awards/oscars/outright/best-picture.htmlNo surprises as Lincoln is #1 with almost even odds. The only mild surprise for me is that Les Miz is beating ZDT for #2.

Huff Post's Oscar discussion. Very interesting comments about ZDT. Click on the link for extended discussion about Oscars. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-hogan/zero-dark-thirty-torture_b_2359240.html So that's all fun. The "Zero Dark Thirty" controversy, not so much. As someone who once edited this exposé on the atrocities committed in our name by CIA interrogators, I take the criticisms of director Kathryn Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal seriously. As the filmmaker Alex Gibney pointed out in this excellent blog for The Huffington Post, saying "it's just a movie" doesn't hold water when the movie in question is being sold as a quasi-journalistic narrative about very recent history. Watching the film, I chose to interpret it this way: it's being told through the eyes of one obsessive, damaged Agency investigator who would have waterboarded her own mother if it would have led to bin Laden. To her, the prohibition on "enhanced interrogation techniques" ("EIT" if you're nasty) probably did seem onerous, unjust and weaselly. And whereas Mark Strong's supervisor character comes off as a jerk, I thought he made a very valid point: Enough of this kinky shit with the detainees; find some targets and let's kill some terrorists! (Cue angry liberal reaction to the drone program, but war is, after all, hell.) But this isn't an art film; it's a major Hollywood production that is going to be seen by a LOT of Americans, and as such Bigelow and Boal probably had a responsibility to frame the debate better and at least acknowledge that a lot of people in the CIA and FBI felt these tactics were counterproductive and frankly disgraceful. Since they didn't do it, others are moving in to fill the void. And no, I don't think Oscar voters back a film that's being attacked from the left for being soft on torture. Especially when, as you mention, John McCain and the director of the CIA himself are joining the chorus. The deafening silence of those at Langley who presumably fed Boal all this information and think he got it right also raises an interesting question: Are they bound by their obligations as secret agents to stay in the shadows? Or did they sell Boal a bill of goods that they would never willingly defend in public? Or both? A number of articles have pointed out that the most disturbing thing about "Zero Dark Thirty" is the way the government and the military were able to use the film to broadcast a story they wanted told without worrying about all those journalistic hassles like accuracy and accountability. The fact that no one who helped Boal is coming forward speaks volumes; I'm just not quite sure what it says.

ZDT hasn't even screened for critics outside the US so expect a drop in RT ratings when it does.I am waiting for Les Miz to make a comeback beginning this Tuesday.

I think the whole splitting into three has complicated issues. The budget for the project was apparently around $500 million (two movies) but now that they have split it into three it comes down to $170 million per movie. The kicker is that the budget is still increasing and may reach $600 million for three. So...

These are bad numbers across the board. What the hell happened?