Dantes, thanks for posting the opening weekend box office numbers for the recent movie musicals.
Did "Rent" take in $10 on it's opening weekend? That's pretty good.
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/16/07
That's because all the fans went to see it its first week. It barely made anything in the following weeks.
Weinsteins pull NINE from Oscar race and will cut back on half its theaters this weekend
That is NOT a good sign. At all.
I almost saw it last night (saw IT'S COMPLICATED instead...which was really cute. I liked it more than I thought I would. And laughed a lot more than I thought I would.) but all I've been hearing from people who have seen it are VERY negative things.
Updated On: 12/30/09 at 02:03 PM
Fail.
This will definitely kill any risky musical film projects. No question. Even with stellar casts or star directors.
Not that ALL musical films (or all films) aren't risky projects, but unless the musical has some sort of built-in wide awareness other than its stars, forget it.
It better be a subject matter that everyone is familiar with. Not just film buffs or Broadway aficionados. It's not enough.
Still very possible not to get canned and actually get made:
Les Miz
Jersey Boys (although with one too many retro music "bio pics" out there, it won't be made anytime soon)
Wicked - no doubt about it
Rock of Ages (would have similar appeal as Mamma Mia)
Forget it:
Ragtime
Grey Gardens
Anything Sondheim including Follies.
Maybe:
Big River - (can be done relatively cheaply, and it's Huck Finn, an American icon)
I also think that In the Heights will tank. Nobody in the general movie-going audience knows what it is. It will have zero appeal to mid-America, too.
FOLLIES has apparently been in development for a couple of years now. Will be interesting to see if anything happens.
I doubt it, ljay. Not after this.
EDIT: And it's definitely been in development for years now. A friend of mine was working on it.
Thanks a lot, Nine! Thanks!
Updated On: 12/30/09 at 02:10 PM
I'm a bit confused as to why they're cutting back on the theaters. Are they just trying to cut their losses and shutter the movie quickly?
At least if they expanded they could make some more money. If they continue to cut back, the movie will be lucky to gross $15 million at this rate. For a previously highly-anticipated movie with a budget of approximately $80 million and a cast full of Oscar-winners that's a big problem.
Wonder if it'll still get a Best Picture nomination. I wouldn't be surprised if something like DISTRICT 9 or STAR TREK stole NINE's nod.
Just to be clear, too, it's not the big stars that killed it. They were only paid a fraction of what they normally would get for a movie. Just like the stars of Dreamgirls.
The 80 million is pretty much "average" budget now for a big-screen musical, even if you pay your stars scale (or not much above it).
Nobody is going to risk 80 million on Follies or Into the Woods now.
Although, Into the Woods stands a slightly better chance, because of the recognizable fairy tale characters. That, and a bunch of stars, would be the only reason it would get a green light.
All it will take is one musical to be a hit and presto! it'll be raining movie musicals again.
Despite its stars, Nine was just not a fun movie with a catchy score.
Mamma Mia, Hairspray, even Chicago were a lot more audience friendly.
I bet ROA will be a hit. Follies would flop disastrously.
None of this reflects my opinion of the source shows however. Nine is in my all time top 5, and of course Follies is legendary. They're just not movie material, no matter who stars.
I think the failure of the movie might spell more trouble for Rob Marshall than for risky musical projects. The fact that it's both a critical and a commercial failure reflects poorly on him. There's a chance that the movie could have been more of a success had it been better executed.
Agreed.
He ruined the movie in so many ways. From it's very inception of recycling the "all in the character's head" conceit to butchering the score it was ill conceived from square 1.
"I'm a bit confused as to why they're cutting back on the theaters. Are they just trying to cut their losses and shutter the movie quickly?"
Yep. Weinstein isn't just about NINE. He's running a business with more films. He can cut his losses here and focus on other movies that might gain him more gold statues (and more profit as a result). It's a cut-throat game.
"All it will take is one musical to be a hit and presto! it'll be raining movie musicals again."
Not just one musical. One risky one ... like Chicago. It opened the possibilities to anything. Even flops that won next to no Tonys when they first ran on Broadway were suddenly being looked at as potential film material. Not any more.
"They're just not movie material, no matter who stars."
A movie based on a movie about a man who makes movies isn't movie material? Sure it is. This particular adaptation just didn't translate well or appeal to movie audiences. Even "art house" audiences.
It could still win Best Musical at The Golden Globes coming up in a few weeks.
I think we should all be thankful that Laurents canned Marshall's GYPSY idea.
I've said it before, but can you imagine SOME PEOPLE being performed on an empty soundstage?
ljay---Some People probably would have been cut. Along with any other song that didn't already take place on a stage or in a rehearsal.
Ugh.
And of course, Rose's Turn would have totally been in her mind, with a full live audience in the theatre watching her do it.
So true! This is one of the few reasons to be thankful for Arthur Laurents. lol.
"
Thanks a lot, Nine! Thanks!"
I just LOLed out loud in my office. Thanks for that, ljay.
I do think that NINE has a much bigger awareness than it did before (which isn't saying all that much). You'll probably see the stage musical being produced more frequently around the country. The "average joes" will have at least heard of it now. Even if they didn't see it.
"Look, Marge! Anson Williams is starring in that NINE show at the dinner theatre next month. It's that movie with Nicole Kidman and Kate Hudson. Let's go see that!"
Not just one musical. One risky one ... like Chicago. It opened the possibilities to anything. Even flops that won next to no Tonys when they first ran on Broadway were suddenly being looked at as potential film material. Not any more.
Agreed, but I must say that not every musical should be translated to the silver screen.
Some of my favorites for example:
Grey Gardens
Follies
Sunday In The Park
I don't think any of them would make money. They are uniquely designed for live theater and are written (brilliantly) to move and thrill patrons of live theater.
"Grey Gardens" would make a wonderful movie musical. Remember all the talk earlier this year when all the nay-sayers on the board were predicting doom for the Drew Barrymore & Jessica Lange HBO movie. And, of course, we all know that it was a huge Emmy award winning hit.
You just never know what's going to be a hit and what's not. It's all a gamble.
I think Sunday in the Park could make a brilliant film, but it would almost have to be produced on the scale of AVATAR to make it work. With Seurat walking around in his paintings (ala "What Dreams May Come)." The visuals could pull people into the theatre.
But it has no potential hit songs or even remixes ... so forget it.
Although a slow groove, hip-hop version of Dot's opening "Sunday in the Park With Georges" would be killer.
LOL
Let Baz Luhrmann and Fat Boy Slim at it!
EDIT: Of course, I'm joking here at the funeral of the movie NINE. I'm just as depressed and upset as Guido was through the entire film.
Broadway Star Joined: 3/5/04
I will wait to see Nine on DVD....the original broadway production wss one of the most beautiful and imaginatively staged muusicals ever....from what I have seen of the clips, all the women in the production numbers look alike- trashy-on stage, and in 8 1/2, they came in all shapes and sizes and were interesting to watch. Every time I saw the show, the scene at the end with young Guido singing Getting Tall just had me in tears...I assume it is cut in the film. Marshall is very committed to his art- but he did strike out on "Geisha"- which I don't think any director could have made work on screen. And he did steal from Fosse in "Chicago", which I enjoyed.... maybe he should have included "Germans at the Spa". The movie may do well overseas, but will be considered a floperoooo. I cannot imagine it getting any Oscar nods-but the idiots at Golden Globes will probably give it a few just to kiss Weinstein's ass. And that Kate Hudson song is HORRENDOUS! On to Follies!
Videos