Moore Film #1 on Friday Nite 8.2 million (Ugh!)

Box Office Mojo ^ | 6/26 | BoxOfficeMojo

[jimbo123]

see link.

[CaptainK]

The term "feature" film implies there is a script prior to shooting

By your definition Robert Altman never released a feature film.

[GROOVY]

the per theatre statistic is pretty meaningless. The reason it is doing well per theatre is because so few theatres wanted to show it, which concentrated the loonies to pack the few theatres showing it.

[Maceman]

The film will continue to be big, just like "West Wing" is a big winner on TV.

They both have the same audience -- reality-challenged Democrats who never got over the 2000 election. And there are a lot of them.

[dr_who_2]

Very likely.

[AntiGuv]

I never suggested what you claim I suggested. Quite to the contrary, had I said anything about the topic I would have certainly said that the film's success was due to all the hype (d'uhh) and that liberals and liberal areas were the overwhelming viewers (omfg!) Therefore, there is absolutely nothing for me to get "caught" about and no statistics whatsoever that I need more than what I've posted, which is nothing but box office estimates.

You are really sounding more divorced from reality than usual, Dane. It's quite a silly spectacle if you ask me.

[Rome2000]

This dog will be lucky if it breaks 12 million over the weekend.

It will gross somewhere around the whopping 21 million total "Bowling for Columbine" did.

"Biodome" grossed more.

[Dane]

You are a democrat. Have you seen the film yet? ;)

Now the little puppy chimes in, yapping away.

I have told you probably a 100 times before, that I am registered democrat since in my area that I live the competitve primary is the demo. I vote for the best demo in the primary and then usually vote for the Pubbie(who is usually not challenged in the Pubbie primary) in the general election.

But what the hey, puppy, I get to improve my typing skills every time you bring out that non-sequiter and to prove to lurkers what a lame debater you and antiguv are.

Keep digging yourself a deeper hole puppy, you are never going to find that bone you are looking for.

[AntiGuv]

The per theatre statistic will determine how many screens it expands into next week and the week after. That's typically how it works. It'll also determine how much media buzz it's going to get next week which is the other reason I'm noting it.

[AUH2OY2K]

At least we know where the welfare dollars are being spent.

[Dane]

I never suggested what you claim I suggested. Quite to the contrary, had I said anything about the topic I would have certainly said that the film's success was due to all the hype (d'uhh) and that liberals and liberal areas were the overwhelming viewers (omfg!) Therefore, there is absolutely nothing for me to get "caught" about and no statistics whatsoever that I need more than what I've posted, which is nothing but box office estimates

Uh, you suggested extrapoliated statistics earlier on this thread. You were caught and now doing your best in Clintonian parsing.

Go ahead with your Clintonian parsing, just shows to people on FR, your model in life, IMO.

[Harpo Speaks]

"Per screen" means diddley in the proper context. Spiderman II and F9/11 could have exactly the same "per screen" average on their opening weekends --- but Spiderman II opens on 3,500 screens (in that ballpark, anyway) while f9/11 opens on only around 800 (a fact.) So even though they have the same "per screen average" 5 times as many people want to see Spiderman II. "Per screen" is just something for studio execs and publicity flacks to wave around.

[AntiGuv]

Awwww, poor baby, your self-esteem has been bruised.

No, Dane. I am laughing at you. You honestly sound quite ridiculous. In fact, as low as my opinion already was of your rationality you've actually managed to reduce it quite significantly in this very thread. If it gives you the warm fuzzies that I think you're certifiable then more power to ya!

[CaptainK]

Only joking.

[Gman_2424]

I agree with you that per screen is irrelevant if you are using "per screen" average to try and make a lower grossing film look better vs. a higher grossing one.

However, if Fahrenheit manages to outgross (in total) "White Chicks" in spite of being in 1/3 as many theaters, then I think it means something.

[Huck]

This too shall pass.

[Lightfinger]

The estimate per screen is misleading.

1) All the liberals who want to see the movie are seeing it this weekend. Will there be return business? With Spider-Man opening next weekend? I sincerely doubt it. The only return business is MoveOn folks.

2) Because there is a small amount of theaters, they are more packed than normal theaters. Thus the amount per screen will be larger with the same number of people divided by the smaller number of screens.

3) 'White Chicks' is a stupid comedy, which will flop anyways...almost every gender-bender/race-bender movie has flopped when it is the major premise. 'The Terminal' is a feel good kinda movie, which has sustaining power, but will have its audience grow with word of mouth like 'Cold Mountain' did last year. But neither equals Spider-Man 2. NOTHING will compare to the opening that movie gets...expect the record held by Titanic to be broken finally.

[AntiGuv]

Whatever, Dane. There's nothing more that need be said between us about this. I am MORE than content with the conclusions sane people will draw from our little discussion. If they think I've been "caught" at something or that I'm "parsing" anything then, hey, whatever!