New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Oh, that's a body blow

Kim Hollis: The Golden Compass absorbed another significant setback this week, falling 65% to $9 million. This is your opportunity to console a New Line exec. How would you like to do it?

Shane Jenkins: "Um, those boxes you're using to pack up all your office stuff sure look sturdy! Where ever did you get them?"

My prediction from last week that this would inch over the $100 million mark now looks foolhardy, and I don't think everyone is going to emerge from this with their jobs intact. And I suppose Golden Compass joins Eragon in the cliffhanger-that-will-never-be-resolved sub-genre. At least I can always *imagine* Malkovich riding that evil dragon...

Max Braden: "It could have been worse, you could have been working over at Fox Anim-- Alvin and the Chipmunks made what??! Well, maybe they're hiring."

David Mumpower: "At least you got paid this week, unlike all of those striking writers you hate." If we're keeping score at home, The Golden Compass absorbed its first body blow with opening weekend, its second one with weekday numbers and its final one with a 66% drop from an already lousy debut. This is a wipeout, plain and simple. There is a lesson with this and Stardust. If you are going to spend big money for a fairy tale movie, you damn sure better make certain it does in fact appeal to children. It's hard for me to believe people throwing around this much money could miss something so obvious. I'm told The Golden Compass is a kids' movie, but I'm fuzzy on the why of it.

Kim Hollis: "Will Ferrell is coming in February to smite your enemies. We'll just ignore the rest of your 2008 schedule."

Joel Corcoran: "Atheism is gonna be huge in 2009, so just think about the sequel!"

Reagen Sulewski: "At least you didn't make Battlefield:Earth."

They've got the majority of the Alaska vote

Kim Hollis: Exhibitors showing blockbusters weren't the only ones smiling this weekend. Indie theaters had plenty of good news as well, as Atonement earned $1.85 from 117 venues and Juno pulled in $1.44 million from 40 venues. These are per exhibition averages of $15,835 and $36,018 respectively. Each is scintillating. Which is more impressive to you and why?

Max Braden: I guess Atonement could have gone the way of Love in the Time of Cholera numbers but to me Juno is the more impressive. December is prime Anglophile territory, while Juno has a rookie writer, sophomore director and fairly new cast. Also noteworthy: Across the Universe is the leading limited release of the year so with over $24 million after three months in theaters.

David Mumpower: I agree with Max that while Atonement's numbers are quite impressive, Juno is that much higher on the list of accomplishments. We're talking about a 127% bump over another performance we see as incredible. Juno is showing all of the signs of being a breakout indie hit.

Reagen Sulewski: Yeah, Juno has easily proven it's a potential Little Miss Sunshine. Atonement made its campaign for Oscars firm though, so that's a good thing.

Joel Corcoran: Definitely Juno. Not only for the reasons already mentioned (which I agree with), but also the background. It's a fair comparison to place Atonement alongside Love in the Time of Cholera. Atonement was critically aclaimed when it was published a few years ago, won the National Book Critics Award, and was even short-listed for the Booker prize. It's just the sort of thing that art house denizens would want to see. Juno is more like Little Miss Sunshine. Quirky and experimental, but lacking a literary base to start from.

I'm especially happy with this result 'cause it should give Ellen Page some more exposure and more work.

Continued:       1       2       3       4