Weekend Outlook Chat (October 28 - 30)

Scott: Once again, I think you're off base with predictions.

Lee: How so?

Scott: Saw will not do $20 million. And Zorro's gonna be #1. I'm surprised you have it differently.

Lee: And you either have the advantage or the bias of already having seen Saw. Are you basing it on what you saw?

Scott: No. Zorro has substantially more theaters. It's also a sequel to a movie that did a lot more business than Saw. And, to top it off, it's a family film ? whereas Saw II is most definitely not. Prediction: Zorro $16 - 19, Saw $11 - 14.

Lee: Zorro did $93.7, Saw $55.1. I could see $15 for Saw at the least. The booking in Century City is not promising for a $20 opening.

Scott: $15?s unlikely. What's the booking?

Lee: It's being given the same treatment as Land of the Dead. That did $10 in 2,250 theaters.

Scott: Dude it's not gonna make $20. $15 if it's lucky.

Lee: What?s your reasoning? Saw was a big cult flick.

Scott: Exactly...it was a cult movie. That means limited appeal.

Lee: The first one made $18 in 2300.

Scott: Remember the box office slump.

Lee: It's also Halloween. You thought that would help Stay too.

Scott: Negligible. Yeah, but Stay's not even horror. And that's a bigger flop than probably anyone would have guessed. The slump dictates that audience sizes and dollars are limited. There's no room for two high-teens-grossing films in one weekend. So you still say Saw beats Zorro?

Lee: I've been hesitant. Ever since I saw that booking, it screwed over my thinking.

Scott: You make your predictions too early, and without proper info. A horror flick will never outperform a family-friendly offering nowadays. And yes, people will likely be disappointed in Saw.

Lee: This doesn't always mean a lot, but what about the people who cheered Saw at Red Eye, and it was even a small audience.

Scott: So you base your $20 prediction on a few people who applauded the trailer at Red Eye?

Lee: No, but it's one possible sign.

Scott: Saw doesn't have the rabid fan-base that you think it does. And you?re not taking the slump into account. I look forward to proving you wrong again.

Lee: lol ? Yep, just like you did with North Country.

Scott: What was that other movie that came out? You know?the one that DIDN'T gross $27 million?

Lee: Last week one of us was wrong and one of us was "kind of" right. It'll be interesting if that happens again.

Scott: I was off base by a lot with North Country. But this one I'm on target. Zorro takes 1st with high teens, Saw comes in the next bracket down.

Lee: I agree on Zorro.

Scott: Really?

Lee: I agree that it could pull an upset victory.

Scott: So you still think Saw will be #1?

Lee: Based on the Century booking, it is very possible Saw does your range.

Scott: Just remember the theater count, which is something I brought up last week.

Lee: Well Stealth had nearly 3,500 too. I know this is a sequel, but it's a viable comparison in that regard. xXx2 also had roughly 3,500.

Scott: Zorro has almost 600 more theaters than Saw, which virtually guarantees supremacy the way I see it. Yeah well, both Stealth and xXx were major misfires in terms of booking and marketing.

Lee: So you think Saw's not going to have more pull than The Fog.

Scott: Fog had no competition. It just lucked out.

Lee: What competition does Saw have? Doom's gonna be dead this week.

Scott: It's called Zorro, remember?

Lee: That?s kiddy fare.

Scott: Yes but that is what pulls most of the ticket dollars to it.

Lee: Yeah, young adults are gonna flock to a PG Zorro sequel.

Scott: Young adults are a small part of the picture. And yes, they will flock to Zorro.

Lee: Especially when the main plot note is that Banderas and Zeta have a kid, and the whole cute factor of him fighting. Yeah, they'll go crazy for that!

Scott: They'll show up for it because it?s fun and diverting. A lot of these people are kids who may not even be old enough for Saw, and will thus buy a ticket for something else, but sneak into Saw. Remember that the R-rating alone diminishes profits.

Lee: Probably won't work because many theaters have security at the door.

Scott: Okay, so that's even worse for Saw.

Lee: At least they will for something like this. So you think the only reason the first Saw made $18 was because 2004 had no slump?

Scott: That's a big reason, yes. People were more willing to shell out money for movies in general, before '05 battered them down.

Lee: Going to the Mann Criterion in Santa Monica is also not a great sign either. Solid-opening horror movies usually go to the AMC.

Scott: And Saw could just be a lucky phenomenon, word of mouth and so forth...or just lack of competition, like The Fog.

Lee: The first Saw went to the AMC; the Mann got Cabin Fever and Anacondas, which did $7 and $12. And I think they got Land of the Dead. But they also got the first Resident Evil.

Scott: Remember that Saw II's budget is $4 million; they'd be happy to get $15 for the entire run probably.

Lee: If Saw really does do low $10's, it's going to make the message board folk crazy on Sat.

Scott: Maybe...but who cares?

Lee: Just noting. It could be one of those movies in which someone will say, "I knew everyone was over-predicting it." Most predictors are at $20+.

Scott: Yeah right. Well all these people are being sunshiney because they wanna be optimistic. They don't want to admit that there's a record slump at the box office. Saw II has no stars, excessive violence, and the reputation of being a cash-in quickie sequel.

Lee: It did come immediately, at the uttermost definition of "immediately? ? to the point of being scary. When I found out it was coming out this year, I was like, you've gotta be kidding me.

Scott: Yeah, the original script wasn't even "Saw.? They made it into Saw after the initial project idea fell through.

Lee: All right, what about Weatherman and Prime?

Scott: Oh God, wow. Of course, both negligible. Weatherman probably $5 or 6 million, Prime $2 - 3.

Lee: Prime because of the theater count (1,831), or other reasoning?

Scott: Well I didn't even know the count, but it doesn't surprise me at all ? yeah, just other reasoning. Although, I've seen more promos for Prime than Weather.

Lee: Weatherman's only got 1,510. Weatherman has the same booking as The Cave at Century, which did $6.

Scott: But Weatherman having Cage and more theaters, I think it will beat out Uma and Meryl.

Lee: Something about Prime reminds me of View from the Top.

Scott: Yeah The Cave comparison sounds about right. View from the Top did what?

Lee: $7 in 2,508. Of course, that had Paltrow, along with a pretty good ensemble for its audience.

Scott: So this will do half that.

Lee: So you think Prime is about in gear with The Man in terms of appeal.

Scott: Yes.

Lee: The whole chick flick element might help it, though. Music of the Heart did $3.7 in 1,349, which works in your favor. But I think the cutesy element and the basic romantic comedy genre might help it.

Scott: Maybe, but with the other things coming out, and the extremely low theater count, it just spells nothingness. Uma?s not a draw. Even Nicolas Cage isn't a draw, which was proven by Lord of War?s box office. Prime won?t make a dent. If it does over $4 mil I'll be shocked. There will be enough cutesiness in Zorro to go around.

Lee: The thing with Weatherman, and I've heard other people say this, is that it has Cage and it's the Pirates of the Caribbean director, but by the ads you don't even know what it's about other than Cage is a weatherman, people throw eggs at him, and he then wears a bow-and-arrow around NY.

Scott: It has had an atrocious marketing campaign.

Lee: I mean you watch the ads and go, WTF.

Scott: The studio obviously has zero faith in the film's prospects. This should be a pretty big movie, but, until they tell me that the box office slump is over, I'm taking it into account for every flick that comes out.

Lee: Back-tracking a little bit, Saw's not even getting Westwood either. The original got the Bruin, which is where I saw it.

Scott: It's not playing on ANY of the screens?

Lee: Not getting Westwood is something that happened to Elektra too.

Scott: And you know how that went.

Lee: That opened to $13.

Scott: That ain't bad for such an obviously sub-par film.

Lee: And Elektra also played at the Mann in Santa Monica. I always make these parallels; they can work. So your prediction has been gradually making more and more sense.

Scott: From everything you've mentioned, I seem to be on the mark.

Lee: I do kind of agree now that a cult movie not by Tarantino may not have the greatest prospects to do $20+, so you've made an impact on me ? way to go.

Scott: Yes, thank you. The Kill Bills are a perfect example too ? each one only making $60 or so, with unbelievable hype, and one of the five biggest names in movies behind them. There's the 2-part thing, which might have put some folks off, and there's also the R-rated issue; the lack of family-friendliness.

Lee: Regardless, I?m still going to stay at $20. We?ll see how this turns out.