The Sweeney Todd Box Office Tracking thread — Page 8

Its up to $21,364,000

---

Well, for what it's worth, I've seen SWEENEY three times, and last night was the only time I was in a sold-out showing. Maybe the new marketing stategy is working.

---

I'm a die hard Sweeney fan and I've yet to go see it. I feel like folks were busier than ever this holiday season and this weekend is the first time many are getting to relax. My office was almost fully staffed on the friday before new years. I think we'll see a lot of people going to the movies over the next dew days. I was also just catching up on my "Pushing Daisies" episodes and counted so many Sweeney commercials trying to lure in those musical /mystery/tim burton effect lovers.

I don't work for the studio either, and I agree the box-office is ultimately irrelevant. This film is stunning. However there are some misconceptions on this board that might be worth correcting:
1. The film's budget was $64 million at the end of production. A friend who works in physical production at Warner Bros. estimates the final cost (after significant visual effects overages) at just under $68 million.
2. The budget only came in that low because both Depp and Burton agreed to a higher than usual formula for first-dollar-gross. In other words, a slice of all the box-office revenue that comes back to the studio (which is only about 45% of the published gross) has to shared with Depp and Burton.
3. People here keep repeating the fallacy that because ST is "only" in 1250 theatres it is actually keeping pace with wider releases like "Charlie Wilson." The fact is, those first 1200 theatres are the best theatres in the best movie-going areas in the country, and they throw off 80% of the box office total. In other words, if ST had added another 1250 runs, the additional theatres would have only bumped the gross by 20%. That's why when the eventual expansion happens, the actual gross either stays flat or goes down a little -- all the extra theatres simply balance out the expected 25% plus drop. (If you live in a big city, open the paper when ST expands on Jan 11. There will be lots of additional theatres, in places like La Canada in LA, which won't add much to the gross, just redistribute it. True, smaller towns will be added, but by definition they gross much less.) So this idea that after the Golden Globes ST will blossom with a substantial gross and higher box-office rank is wrong. Based on this weekend (when ST will experience the greatest drop among the new movies, a sign of not-so-good word of mouth) ST will do anywhere from 4.6 to the upper 5s next weekend, and a little bit LESS when it expands on the 11th. I'd be surprised if it's still in the Top Ten by then. The fact is, it's a rare movie that doesn't follow a typical pattern these days. And ST is not that movie. So the range has become pretty clear. At the lower end, a final box office gross in mid 40s. At the upper end, mid 50s. In other words, somewhere in the Phantom/ Evita/ Moulin Rouge range. (I'm only talking about domestic box-office here.) The difference is that some of that money goes to Depp and Burton, pushing off the studio's recoupment even further. But Warner Bros. (foreign distributor and major player behind this project) has made so much off Depp/Burton that the movie pays for itself by keeping them happy and making more Warner Bros. movies. And we get a wonderful Sweeney Todd.
I know some people here will say the numbers above are bull****, which is fine. But for any of you who care to know the truth, I thought I'd share.

Phantom, check out the chart on the front page of Movie City News. ST's Friday drop is the highest. (Granted, last Friday was inflated by Sweeney-heads.)

Now Jackie's post is down-to-earth and on the money.

Yeah but it could certainly be worse. Look at Walk Hard or Alien Vs Predator. I mean, Juno has EXCELLENT word of mouth. That's the little movie that could. It has performed perfectly.
Now watch it steal the Golden Globe from Sweeney.
And yes, I was surprised about PS I Love You. But I also think it has as much to do with being accessible to the public. Stephen Sondheim vs romantic comedy... the fact that it's even close is thrilling.
In any event, Jackie, you've brought peace and harmony to our thread...

Dreamworks tends to spend like drunken sailors and then penny-pinch in certain areas. (Look at this month's Written By, ads for everything -- even Breach! -- and no ST.) I suspect they also think this category's too crowded. But I agree, as a matter of respect you'd think they'd at least appear to be making an effort...

What a ruckus! But the fact is, folks, that even if it gets no nominations or awards or never grosses another dollar domestic... this Sweeney is a HIT. It will excel in the ancillary markets, and it has yet to open in Europe or Japan, and I betcha it does BETTER box office there than here.

Well, Jackie's point was that you really can't measure word of mouth from what you hear or see... as she said, "it's just too anecdotal."
She was right in that it is dropping more than the other movies. But my opinion is that this may also have to do with the subject matter of the film and so on.
Then again, her prediction of around 5 million for next weekend seems dead on. I doubt it will be pulling in 2 million each day next weekend.

Updated On: 12/29/07 at 10:24 PM

I saw the film at the DGA this evening (followed by There Will Be Blood - a LOT of movie watching for one evening). I have no trouble understanding why it's doing the business it's doing, and why it's not going to ever do the kind of business people wish for it. And it doesn't matter. The studio will take a loss and that's their business and they won't care.

Briefly, how lovely to see a film of today that doesn't hide the fact that it's a musical or somehow try to disguise it (the marketing is something wholly other, however). It feels like a musical, and the pace is excellent as is the look of the film, save for the not so hot CGI at the top of the film. I enjoyed most of it, and thought some of it was truly stellar and magical. I thought Depp was fine, and I enjoyed his take on the role AND his singing. Carter was more difficult for me and for very specific reasons - it's not that I can't accept her very different take on the role, it's that she, like most of todays actors, does the whispering thing and it drives me crazy - it's lazy and sucks the energy out of the film. And, most importantly, where she fails is in the singing, and again for very specific reasons - Mrs. Lovett's songs have musical energy and to have them sung in that teeny-tiny breathless voice doesn't work at all - it's why the only laughs in Pies is from the cockroaches and not the lyrics. Same with the very truncated Priest - I don't blame them for cutting it down - neither Depp nor Carter seem to understand the humor and there was not one laugh in a number that should be all laughs - and the film could have really used it.

I thought Rickman was great, but the genius casting of the film is Toby - what a terrific way to go and the kid REALLY understands how to perform in a musical film - you hear every word and he still is subtle and wonderful. The Anthony was disturbing, what with the pageboy and being prettier than Johanna and more feminine as well. I didn't mind his singing, just his look. Spall was terrific. Interestingly, and I'm probably the only one who'll say it, after reading all the hyperbolic comments on By The Sea, I don't know what I was expecting but I certainly didn't get it. It's a nice number, and I liked the visual concept of it, but it wasn't the showstopper everyone said it was, at least not for me.

The audience at the DGA was a little more than half full. They are a very vocal crowd, but the only laugh in all the film was, as I said, the cockroach in Pies. No applause, not even at the end. The violence was so stylized it didn't bother me at all. Maybe they should have subtitled Sweeney Todd: There Will Be Blood.

That film, BTW, is the critics' darling of the year - compared to Citizen Kane. The acting is certainly excellent, but it wasn't to my liking at all - and it's LONG and unlike Sweeney, which flies by, you feel every single minute of its close to 150 minutes.

Are you a seer? It definitely will not be a loss for the studio? I think even the studio knows at this point it will be a loss - so bloody what? What do you care? Enjoy the film - see if ten more times. Buy the DVD. If there are theater freaks and Sondheads in the audience, the film gets "great" reaction, applause, hooting and hollering. If there aren't, it seems, it is greeted by almost complete silence (as it was last night when I saw it). So what? You can post and you can post and you can post, but the film is going to not make its costs back from box-office, and I think it's doubtful it will make them back from ancillary sales, much as everyone, including the studio, would like that. The film got made, it succeeds in a lot of ways, and is not appealing to the audience that could turn it into a box-office hit, much as people on this board would like us to believe it is.