Monday Morning Quarterback Part II
By BOP Staff
November 9, 2011
BoxOfficeProphets.com

Why do you have more helmet decorations than me?

With his hammer, the mighty Meow Meow…

Kim Hollis: We normally don't discuss the second weekend results of films, but Puss in Boots fell only 3% to $33.1 million. Does that change your opinions about anything you said last week (or possibly reinforce them)?

David Mumpower: Last week, I stated my belief that Halloween had behaved as an anti-holiday, a box office concept we discuss here from time to time. The scenario is that a calendar configuration creates issues wherein people who would ordinarily attend a movie wind up going to parties or various family gatherings instead. In examining this weekend's box office depreciation for the titles in the top 12, that is exactly what we witnessed over the pre-Halloween period. Even Paranormal Activity 3, a movie whose appeal should be limited in November, declined only 53%. Six out of ten qualifying titles fell 35% or less. Clearly, Halloween impacted all major titles in release.

Even acknowledging this, Puss in Boots deserves special mention in that most industry observers questioned the placement of the film prior to Halloween. While the virtual duplication of last weekend's box office could be painted as a positive (that would be the same tactic used for pre-Thanksgiving releases such as the Harry Potter franchise has done), the reality is that last weekend's opening was clearly deflated. That's a release date mistake in the purest sense. The good news is that with $75.5 million in the bank, DreamWorks Animation has averted disaster.

Edwin Davies: I stand by pretty much everything I said last week, though I grossly underestimated how good the legs would be when I said that they wouldn't be as good as those for How to Train Your Dragon. (Then again it's unlikely the film will see any holds as good as this in the weeks to come.)

The main thing that it reinforces is, as David said, the manner in which Halloween acted as an anti-holiday, and whilst it may not have hurt the film in the long run as much as it appeared to have this time last week, it certainly hasn't helped the film that all the discussion about its opening was about how disappointing it was. It's fortunate that the word-of-mouth and clear pent-up demand stemming from families being unable to attend last week has helped it to overcome that, but a low opening can harm a film by making people think that it isn't worth their time.

All of this doesn't really matter in the long run, since this weekend's result has made the difference in Puss In Boots' journey from a mild disappointment to an okay-sized hit, but if it had opened this weekend to $50+ million the overall narrative of the film's performance would have been much rosier.

Bruce Hall: What's that they say about DreamWorks films having legs? Puss in Boots dropped what, 3% off last week? It's not really that surprising. Good word-of-mouth is bringing in the skeptics, and a children's title that's a known quantity always has a chance. What else were you gonna take the kids to this weekend? I know, the movie they wanted to see last weekend but you couldn't/didn't go because of Halloween! I'm sticking with what I implied last week, because I think perhaps it's tempting to get carried away with statistics. Nobody was all that excited about a Puss in Boots movie, and it was released at a less than ideal time - but it did okay anyway. It made up some ground this weekend, in part thanks to largely positive reviews and perhaps some left over business from last week. This is the kind of film that's almost sure to have legs anyway and because of this, next week's result becomes even more interesting. Once the worldwide tally is counted, I think DreamWorks will be able to call this movie a success, and it'll probably be hard to argue.

Matthew Huntley: I completely agree with David (and others) that Halloween weekend hurt Puss in Boots' opening, and while its remarkable legs are likely the result of this being its "catch-up" weekend, I think the other factor is that it may just be a good movie receiving incredible word-of-mouth. I know people in their 20s and 30s who are saying how funny and entertaining it is, so I think its strong hold is not just the result of it being a family movie, but it being all around enjoyable for people of any age. It's been a while since a movie has been universally appealing; Puss in Boots may be the latest one.

Kim Hollis: I think it's important to bear in mind that most CGI/3D movies tend to fall at least 30-40% in their second weekend, so even with Halloween, I think the 3% drop might be pretty excellent. Next weekend will tell us a little more about what's happening here, but I do think DreamWorks ought to be a lot more optimistic than they were. I would definitely call it a lesson learned about releasing a family film on Halloween weekend.

Max Braden: Puss in Boots is the kind of movie that thrives in November and December too, so with Thanksgiving being less than three weeks away I could see it raking in money through Christmas (which is only 47 days away. 47.).

Tim Briody: In a row?

Movies are boring. Let's talk television.

Kim Hollis: Most of the new television series for this year have now debuted, including Once Upon a Time and Grimm. What has impressed you most so far? What has been the biggest surprise?

Max Braden: I knew 2 Broke Girls wasn't going to be the creme of the crop, but I still expected to be watching it. It was too trashy even for me to put that aside and watch just for Kat Dennings, so I deleted the season pass from my DVR so I wouldn't have to delete the recordings I'd never get around to watching. On the other hand, I 1) wanted to see Zoey Deschanel on TV, 2) expected to be annoyed by her excessive cuteness after one episode, but 3) have found the tight editing and string of quotable jokes from each episode (mostly from her costars) to be up there with any other comedy on TV right now, so I keep watching. With Revenge, I'm very impressed by Emily Van Camp, but an insane number of shows in that time slot, I've gone with Psych and American Horror Story - which is too insane not to watch. After the first episode of Person of Interest I thought I'd lose interest in its procedural formula and Caviezel's Batman-esque whispering, but I keep coming back to it; I liked Human Target for its lightness but I like Person of Interest because of its darkness. That's a positive, too, I'm hearing about Grimm even though I haven't watched it yet. I like the modern day elements of Once Upon a Time but the fairy tale scenes put me off. But I do like history, and since Hell on Wheels looks like a TV version of Red Dead Redemption, twist my arm, yeah I'll watch that.

Jim Van Nest: I'm with Max on Person of Interest. I think the whole premise of the show is weak, but as long as Michael Emerson keeps being weird and Jim Caviezel keeps kicking ass, I'll keep watching. An American Horror Story is up there on my list. Weird and creepy, I can't stop watching. Homeland (on Showtime) and Boss (on Starz) are very well done shows, but they are some serious drama and I find myself having to get worked up to watch them. Even though I really like them when I do, I have to be in the mood for them. And I don't care what anyone says, my favorite guilty pleasure new show has to be Terra Nova. It's like the dinosaurs created Homo Sapien Park. I love it.

Kim Hollis: The last time we had this discussion, I think I mentioned that Revenge is the only new show I'm really up for on a continued basis. I'm DVR-ing some others, but never get around to watching them. I really dig the campy fun on Revenge, though, and Emily Van Camp is terrific. Since then, Once Upon a Time and Grimm have debuted, and for the near future, I'll continue to be excited about both of them. I like Once Upon a Time significantly more. I love fairy tales, and the combination of story world and real world works really well for me. It's also got a super cast. As far as Grimm, it's pretty much another version of Supernatural, one of my favorite shows of the last decade. It feels like a rehash, but it's a really well done rehash. The fairy tale aspect is really minimal in that one, but the blutbad (aka big bad wolf) portrayed by Silas Weir Mitchell is a heck of a fun character.

I'm also really happy to have Beavis and Butthead back on my TV, and am anxiously awaiting the return of Cornholio. You know it will happen. With regard to other returning shows, I continue to love love love Modern Family. Last week's episode killed (Cameron picking up a woman).

David Mumpower: Long time readers of the site are aware of BOP's fondness for Fables, the Bill Willingham comic book that ABC optioned at the end of 2008. Almost exactly two years later, the network acknowledged that they had abandoned plans for the adaptation. With the release of Once Upon a Time, I now understand why. They have effectively paid Willingham for his (brilliant) idea then used it as the basis for a similarly themed show that has wider appeal.

While I am openly horrified by such a predatory business practice, I too am thoroughly enjoying the show thus far. The decision to create Lost-style flashbacks to the Happily Ever After before the current living arrangement is sage. I particularly enjoyed the highwayman reveal in the most recent episode, which is a nice touch. Once Upon a Time is extraordinarily well cast and has a big future as long as the ratings are good. If they are not, this is going to be yet another show I fall in love with that is far too expensive to produce and thereby gets cancelled too quickly.

I am also enjoying Grimm, which is probably a formulaic show long term. In the early episodes, however, it's building a mystery quite well. In addition, Hollywood blueblood Kate Burton (google her) has been brilliant as the previous slayer. Given her heritage and her acting ability, I'm surprised that she has never had a higher profile in the industry. Hopefully, she makes a lot of future appearances on the show, because I love what she has done with her character thus far.

Finally, I finally caught up to The Good Wife. I had resisted the show for the past couple of seasons, but the Sports Night reunion of Dan Rydell and Bonnie Bernstein was too tempting. In point of fact, The Good Wife has been begging me to watch for a while now, using their casting department to set the bait. Titus Welliver? Scott Porter? Michael Ealy? Matt Czuchry? Gary Cole? Jill Flint kissing girls? How are they reading my mind? I can only say no so many times. Humorously, the moment I finally gave in and started watching, they had a guest appearance by Worst Actress in the World Parker Posey, which makes the entire situation feel like a bad relationship. I was wooed and wooed and then when I finally gave in to temptation and allowed myself to be seduced, The Good Wife immediately started sabotaging our relationship.

What I particularly enjoy about the series is that a rotating set of judges and lawyers has been introduced. The moment each one appears, the viewer realizes what the tone of the entire lawsuit will be. I admire that sort of background character development. And that goes double since they have occasionally returned Michael J. Fox to television, which was long overdue. I don't know what the trigger was that convinced Fox this was the right time to work, but I treasure every appearance he makes.

The Good Wife is serial television that I had expected to be in the vein of Desperate Housewives. I am surprised to discover that it is closer to The Practice with the occasional injection of Boston Legal humor. I'm a huge fan of the first two seasons. Also, Kalinda is already one of my favorite television characters ever.